Case Dismissed! Sovereign Citizen Makes Judge Walk (UPDATE 10/1/2010)

[Ares]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EzJsUExEDE

Police know ID of man in recorded court case

Greg Layson
glayson@guelphmercury.com
GUELPH — Guelph Police are aware that a case heard Sept. 1 in provincial offences court in Guelph was videotaped and posted to YouTube the same day.

Deputy police chief Brent Eden said he received a copy of the four-minute, 53-second video Friday and at that time was told an investigation was already underway.

“I know the investigating officers have talked to people who were in the courtroom,” Eden said.

Eden said evidence gathering “is partially done.”

“As always, there are reasons during the course of an investigation to pursue or not to pursue charges,” Eden said. “We’re at the stage of making that determination.”

Under the Courts of Justice Act, “no person shall take or attempt to take a photograph, motion picture, audio recording or other record capable of producing visual or aural representations by electronic means or otherwise at a court hearing.”

A person charged and found guilty of recording a court proceeding is subject to a fine of not more than $25,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than six months, or to both.

The man in the video, who identifies himself as “just Keith” is Keith Thompson, a locally known musician. According to the video’s description, Thompson is there contesting a ticket he received for parking a car on his lawn.

The video in question was posted by YouTube user keiththompsonmusic. It’s been viewed almost 20,000 times.

It shows Thompson at provincial offences court. He refuses to identify himself as anything but “just Keith; nothing more, nothing less,” despite the justice of the peace asking him if he’s Wilfred Keith Thompson. The justice eventually asks for the man to be removed and calls a recess.

Eden said police have confirmed the identity of the man. He said he believes investigating officers also know the name of the man filming, but couldn’t confirm it.

At one point in the video, a woman notifies at least two Guelph Police special constables and the justice of the peace that a man is filming the proceedings. But none of the three react.

“I wouldn’t fault the special constables,” Eden said. “Things got out of control. I don’t think there’s any wrongdoing by them.”

Toward the end of the video, several people are filmed leaving the courthouse. Eden said the majority, if not all, are associated with the man who identified himself as Keith.

Eden likened the situation to a protest.

“You don’t walk into a situation when you’re outnumbered,” Eden said.

http://news.guelphmercury.com/News/article/686034

[bonaparte]

I bet this guy is in jail right now.

[Ares]

I bet this guy is in jail right now.



I doubt it, the court couldn't prove jurisdiction. Did you notice the judge bow to him before he left? Also the judge said recess and hit the gavel, but didn't give a time duration for the recess. He abandoned the court.

[philo beddoe]

That is amazing. I put it on full screen the second time and it was without a doubt a bow. On another note, I 'haven't' got a camera ticket mailed to me four times now. No process serving, no ticket.... ha ha ha

[Libertytree]

That is amazing. I put it on full screen the second time and it was without a doubt a bow. On another note, I 'haven't' got a camera ticket mailed to me four times now. No process serving, no ticket.... ha ha ha


This brings something up a customer was telling me a couple weeks ago. He claims that if you get one of those mail in tickets to pay it for 10 cents over the amount, they'll then mail you a check for the 10 cent difference. If you just sit on the 10 cent check your check will just sit in limbo, something about it screwing with their accounting and the ticket never going through the system.

It might be just BS but the old dude said it's worked for him.

[Cebu_4_2]

Excellent find, love this type of stuff.

[iOWNme]

Good post!

Anyone know what the original charges were?

[undgrd]

Marking to watch later

[Ares]

Good post!

Anyone know what the original charges were?



He didn't go much into detail about the charges on his youtube link. I just know that it took place in Canada. Not sure if it would fly in the U.S. granted we use the same legal system, but U.S. is more jack boot thuggish than Canada it seems.

[DMac]

That is amazing. I put it on full screen the second time and it was without a doubt a bow. On another note, I 'haven't' got a camera ticket mailed to me four times now. No process serving, no ticket.... ha ha ha


Reading the comments on youtube KT says it is standard procedure in Canada for the judge to bow as a sign of closing the court. Coupling the announcement of recess with no time limit and the bow as the judge exited was the signal that KT "won" his case. It was dismissed and the judge admitted defeat by leaving the court in the manner he did.

[Glass]

Does anyone know what paper work he submitted prior to the court. I have been researching for nearly 4 years and there is nothing to explain what they are doing.

I have read all the redemption/setoff stuff from shrout and turner but I don't think this guy did that at all. He did something else. Does anyone have a single piece of any information that explains what it is? I'd love to know but I can't find it for the life of me.

Our courts are completely different. They are open venues with no clearly defined bar or anything. So there is no way I can see to be on the other side of the bar like he is.

Any single morsel of information would be appreciated. Just the tiny little detail that is missing from all of the bucket loads of information on this stuff that is out there which makes this possible would be appreciated.

[philo beddoe]

Does anyone know what paper work he submitted prior to the court. I have been researching for nearly 4 years and there is nothing to explain what they are doing.

I have read all the redemption/setoff stuff from shrout and turner but I don't think this guy did that at all. He did something else. Does anyone have a single piece of any information that explains what it is? I'd love to know but I can't find it for the life of me.

Our courts are completely different. They are open venues with no clearly defined bar or anything. So there is no way I can see to be on the other side of the bar like he is.

Any single morsel of information would be appreciated. Just the tiny little detail that is missing from all of the bucket loads of information on this stuff that is out there which makes this possible would be appreciated.
I do know that filing your own paperwork in court makes an individual pro per, effectively an officer of the court.

[Serpo]

The straw man that broke the judges back.......hahaha

[koala]

[quote=Sui Juris ]
Good post!

Anyone know what the original charges were?



"was in "court" because I parked mine or my wife's conveyance on my Sovereign land (i.e.) lawn"

[Glass]

Apparently he has more information to post about this and hopefully help us all comprehend what happened.
As this only happened on Wednesday last it might be a little while before he can do this.

[Ares]

bump for the update.

[Awoke]

That is amazing. I put it on full screen the second time and it was without a doubt a bow. On another note, I 'haven't' got a camera ticket mailed to me four times now. No process serving, no ticket.... ha ha ha


This brings something up a customer was telling me a couple weeks ago. He claims that if you get one of those mail in tickets to pay it for 10 cents over the amount, they'll then mail you a check for the 10 cent difference. If you just sit on the 10 cent check your check will just sit in limbo, something about it screwing with their accounting and the ticket never going through the system.

It might be just BS but the old dude said it's worked for him.


I've heard this works too!

[chad]

i actually tried the traffic ticket thing, and i got a stern letter from the clerk of court to knock it off. i never cashed the refund check for $5, but it all went through, including notices to my insurance company. :boohoo

[kregener]

He refused to answer to his "slave name" and enter into an unspoken "contract" with the financial court.

[Phoenix]

The "bow" is a Commonwealth tradition in some countries for the closure of a court session.

The "judge" didn't surrender to this fool. It actually shows that the Canadian "judge" has more decency than nearly all American "judges." He merely took a break rather than beat him down...literally.

In the United States, the fool would have been Tased and manhandled, and then locked up for "contempt of court" for a period.

This is the type of imbecility that "sovereign citizens" provide as "proof" their schemes work?! ::)

[Phoenix]

$20 to the first American to go into an American court and do the exact same thing, on camera, and NOT get Tased, beaten, and/or arrested.

Up for that challenge?

[Phoenix]

That is amazing. I put it on full screen the second time and it was without a doubt a bow. On another note, I 'haven't' got a camera ticket mailed to me four times now. No process serving, no ticket.... ha ha ha


This brings something up a customer was telling me a couple weeks ago. He claims that if you get one of those mail in tickets to pay it for 10 cents over the amount, they'll then mail you a check for the 10 cent difference. If you just sit on the 10 cent check your check will just sit in limbo, something about it screwing with their accounting and the ticket never going through the system.

It might be just BS but the old dude said it's worked for him.


I've heard this works too!


It doesn't. Checks written to government agencies are always promptly cashed. If a refund is due, good luck getting it within 30 days. In any case, paying more than due is never going to stop a "court" from doing what it thinks it can get away with.

[Joe King]

This is the type of imbecility that "sovereign citizens" provide as "proof" their schemes work?! ::)
All the stuff in this thread aside, I just want to know is it possible for a non-sovereign to have sovereign Rights?

Or is everything a privilege now {like I always hear "driving" referred to} and/or civil Rights? {Rights granted by gov decree}

[Ares]

The "judge" didn't surrender to this fool. It actually shows that the Canadian "judge" has more decency than nearly all American "judges." He merely took a break rather than beat him down...literally.

Like it or not the "judge" abandoned the court. You can not call a recess without stating a duration. The "judge" didn't state a recess duration when he was asked by the defendant, and the court recorder they both got no response from the "judge".

Court was abandoned.

You are correct though, that the "judge" in Canada has more class than an American "judge". I doubt an American "judge" would of abandoned his court in the way that this "judge" did.

[gunDriller]

unless my brain cells have completely melted, i think i heard about this on a DBS interview.

http://iamthewitness.com/

one of his recent interviews. maybe the interview with the guy named "1215", they talk about the same thing, the judge bowing.

sounds like the real deal.

is there a Cliff Notes version ? a "Sovereign Law" (or whatever it's called) for Dummies type book ?

[Phoenix]

All the stuff in this thread aside, I just want to know is it possible for a non-sovereign to have sovereign Rights?

Or is everything a privilege now {like I always hear "driving" referred to} and/or civil Rights? {Rights granted by gov decree}


God grants "God-given" rights to human beings at birth. These rights exist with or without the consent of government. Of course, nearly all governments attempt to circumvent or supersede God, and implement measures of varying degrees to curtail or outright abolish such rights at gunpoint.

[Phoenix]

The "judge" didn't surrender to this fool. It actually shows that the Canadian "judge" has more decency than nearly all American "judges." He merely took a break rather than beat him down...literally.

Like it or not the "judge" abandoned the court. You can not call a recess without stating a duration. The "judge" didn't state a recess duration when he was asked by the defendant, and the court recorder they both got no response from the "judge".

Court was abandoned.


Can you cite the Canadian court rules that state this, or is this your wishful thinking?

In "superior court" here in California, I've seen many recesses without much formality.




You are correct though, that the "judge" in Canada has more class than an American "judge". I doubt an American "judge" would of abandoned his court in the way that this "judge" did.


The "judge" would have just ordered the bailiff and deputies to remove the "offender" with all necessary force.

[Hatha Sunahara]

Phoenix, I'm trying to decide whether you are a realist or a cynic. You're not helping much. I've always avoided as much as I could, any governmental function involved in dispensing justice. They dispense punishment, not justice, to all--the innocent and guilty alike. For me it's like a hot stove. Real careful and on your guard when it's close to you. I hope the people who run these systems get their comeuppance real soon.


Hatha

[Bullion_Bob]

$20 to the first American to go into an American court and do the exact same thing, on camera, and NOT get Tased, beaten, and/or arrested.

Up for that challenge?


$20?!? I would debate picking you up McDonald's and delivering it for $20.

My understanding is ships rules came to land, which is why ships are birthed at shore/port into a host county's laws, and humans are also birthed into their host country's laws....labeled, registered etc...

If you come into the court as a sovereign entity, as an administrator of your registered birthed name with god given rights, no other man has control over you because you didn't play their game.

Lawyers are already servants of the court so by hiring one you're immediately SOL. Also I believe you cannot cross the line into the court arena, which is why his buddy had to hand the paperwork to the bailiff.

This was organized, and it worked out amazingly well. Very inspirational bit of video.

[TheNocturnalEgyptian]

The judge orders him removed from the room. "Just Keith" states that if they touch him, they will be guilty of several crimes (unappeased malfeasance, was that it?). Both bailiffs back off.


Are you lost at sea?

[SHTF2010]

whenever i get around to it, gonna sign up here
supposed to have some good " sovereign " discussions

http://www.suijurisclub.net/index.php

.

[Phoenix]

$20 to the first American to go into an American court and do the exact same thing, on camera, and NOT get Tased, beaten, and/or arrested.

Up for that challenge?


$20?!? I would debate picking you up McDonald's and delivering it for $20.


Considering all the "sovereign citizen" idiocy posted, one would think it would be an EASY $20 to do this.

Or maybe it does not work, as I allege?




My understanding is ships rules came to land, which is why ships are birthed at shore/port into a host county's laws, and humans are also birthed into their host country's laws....labeled, registered etc...

If you come into the court as a sovereign entity, as an administrator of your registered birthed name with god given rights, no other man has control over you because you didn't play their game.

[...]Also I believe you cannot cross the line into the court arena, which is why his buddy had to hand the paperwork to the bailiff.

This was organized, and it worked out amazingly well. Very inspirational bit of video.


This is all nonsense. You know that.

Government plays by ONE rule: "we have more firepower than you do."

[SHTF2010]

Government plays by ONE rule: "we have more firepower than you do."


TPTB are passing all these " control " laws/legistlation because they know most people are law-abiding citizens

it's up to us to use old laws against TPTB

[TheNocturnalEgyptian]

$20 to the first American to go into an American court and do the exact same thing, on camera, and NOT get Tased, beaten, and/or arrested.

Up for that challenge?


$20?!? I would debate picking you up McDonald's and delivering it for $20.


Considering all the "sovereign citizen" idiocy posted, one would think it would be an EASY $20 to do this.

Or maybe it does not work, as I allege?




My understanding is ships rules came to land, which is why ships are birthed at shore/port into a host county's laws, and humans are also birthed into their host country's laws....labeled, registered etc...

If you come into the court as a sovereign entity, as an administrator of your registered birthed name with god given rights, no other man has control over you because you didn't play their game.

[...]Also I believe you cannot cross the line into the court arena, which is why his buddy had to hand the paperwork to the bailiff.

This was organized, and it worked out amazingly well. Very inspirational bit of video.


This is all nonsense. You know that.

Government plays by ONE rule: "we have more firepower than you do."



So what happened in the video we saw? Where did their firepower go? Why did the bailiffs not remove the man from the room when they were ordered to do so by the judge?

[Ares]

So what happened in the video we saw? Where did their firepower go? Why did the bailiffs not remove the man from the room when they were ordered to do so by the judge?

According to Phoenix it'll be because he was in Canada and not in the states. To a point he may be correct. But I haven't seen any evidence in the states of someone getting a notarized copy of them being an officer of the court and a peace officer. That might of been the key of not having his ass thrown out of court. (only speculation on my part.)

Canadian law (admiralty / administrative / equity etc.) mirror exactly American law. (admiralty / Administrative / equity etc.)

It isn't "Magic words" that he's using it's based in law and procedure, you can't proclaim a recess without a duration.
So infinite recess? That's grounds for an appeal right there if the judge tries to render judgment. How are you supposed to know when to return to court if you're not given a time to return? I.E. 5 minutes, 2 hours, 1 day recess etc. etc. The court was ABANDONED!!!!

[Phoenix]

So what happened in the video we saw? Where did their firepower go? Why did the bailiffs not remove the man from the room when they were ordered to do so by the judge?


Too many witnesses? I don't know.

FACT: this video is "proof" of NOTHING, other than they went to court to make a video.

I challenge again: post a video by yourself - anyone who believes this bullshit works - right here at GS-US. Hold up a sign at the beginning or end with "Hi GS-US" or something.

NOT ONE of you has the balls to try it, because you know the outcome.

[Phoenix]

So what happened in the video we saw? Where did their firepower go? Why did the bailiffs not remove the man from the room when they were ordered to do so by the judge?

According to Phoenix it'll be because he was in Canada and not in the states. To a point he may be correct. But I haven't seen any evidence in the states of someone getting a notarized copy of them being an officer of the court and a peace officer. That might of been the key of not having his ass thrown out of court. (only speculation on my part.)

Canadian law (admiralty / administrative / equity etc.) mirror exactly American law. (admiralty / Administrative / equity etc.)

It isn't "Magic words" that he's using it's based in law and procedure, you can't proclaim a recess without a duration.
So infinite recess? That's grounds for an appeal right there if the judge tries to render judgment. How are you supposed to know when to return to court if you're not given a time to return? I.E. 5 minutes, 2 hours, 1 day recess etc. etc. The court was ABANDONED!!!!


I really am troubled that people here at GS-US, whom I thought would represent the best and brightest of our society, would fall for such crap as these "sovereign citizen" schemes and unbelievably idiotic esoteric "law" sophistry.

[7th trump]

So what happened in the video we saw? Where did their firepower go? Why did the bailiffs not remove the man from the room when they were ordered to do so by the judge?

According to Phoenix it'll be because he was in Canada and not in the states. To a point he may be correct. But I haven't seen any evidence in the states of someone getting a notarized copy of them being an officer of the court and a peace officer. That might of been the key of not having his ass thrown out of court. (only speculation on my part.)

Canadian law (admiralty / administrative / equity etc.) mirror exactly American law. (admiralty / Administrative / equity etc.)

It isn't "Magic words" that he's using it's based in law and procedure, you can't proclaim a recess without a duration.
So infinite recess? That's grounds for an appeal right there if the judge tries to render judgment. How are you supposed to know when to return to court if you're not given a time to return? I.E. 5 minutes, 2 hours, 1 day recess etc. etc. The court was ABANDONED!!!!


I really am troubled that people here at GS-US, whom I thought would represent the best and brightest of our society, would fall for such crap as these "sovereign citizen" schemes and unbelievably idiotic esoteric "law" sophistry.

Because there are people here on this forum that dont believe you and are far beyond your understanding and knowledge.
Heres a challenge to you phoenix.
Refute these case cites.

"On the other hand, there is a significant historical fact in all of this. Clearly, one of the purposes of the 13th and 14th Amendments and of the 1866 act and of section 1982 was to give the Negro citizenship. . ."
Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. (1967), 379 F.2d 33, 43.

"The object of the 14th Amendment, as is well known, was to confer upon the colored race the right of citizenship."
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 692.

“We have in our political system a government of the United States and a government of each of the several States. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of it’s own...”
United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)

“...he was not a citizen of the United States, he was a citizen and voter of the State,...” “One may be a citizen of a State an yet not a citizen of the United States”.
McDonel v. The State, 90 Ind. 320 (1883)

“That there is a citizenship of the United States and citizenship of a state,...”
Tashiro v. Jordan, 201 Cal. 236 (1927)

"A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government ..."
Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383

“The governments of the United States and of each state of the several states are distinct from one another. The rights of a citizen under one may be quite different from those which he has under the other”.
Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404; 56 S.Ct. 252 (1935)

“There is a difference between privileges and immunities belonging to the citizens of the United States as such, and those belonging to the citizens of each state as such”.
Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41 (1900)

“The rights and privileges, and immunities which the fourteenth constitutional amendment and Rev. St. section 1979 , for its enforcement, were designated to protect, are such as belonging to citizens of the United States as such, and not as citizens of a state”.
Wadleigh v. Newhall 136 F. 941 (1905)

“...rights of national citizenship as distinct from the fundamental or natural rights inherent in state citizenship”.
Madden v. Kentucky, 309 U.S. 83: 84 L.Ed. 590 (1940)

It will be admitted on all hands that with the exception of the powers granted to the states and the federal government, through the Constitutions, the people of the several states are unconditionally sovereign within their respective states."
Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. v. Debolt, 16 How. 416, 14 L.Ed. 997. [emphasis added]

[u]SUI JURIS. One who has all the rights to which a freemen is entitled; one who is not under the power of another, as a slave, a minor, and the like.
2. To make a valid contract, a person must, in general, be sui juris. Every one of full age is presumed to be sui juris. Story on Ag. p. 10.
Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856

[Phoenix]

Because there are people here on this forum that dont believe you and are far beyond your understanding and knowledge.


Post VIDEO of these tactics working.

You CAN'T, because they DON'T WORK.

[7th trump]

Because there are people here on this forum that dont believe you and are far beyond your understanding and knowledge.


Post VIDEO of these tactics working.

You CAN'T, because they DON'T WORK.

There isnt going to be any court action from the government when you operate in that capacity phoenix. Thats why I posted those court cites you refuse to refute.
What you are asking is to see the government do something it cannot do and the government will not.
Try going to 1215.org and speak with Bill Thornton. The Bill Thornton of 1215.org doesnt pay taxes on his labor and nor does he have a ssn because the law says nobody is required to have a ssn. If you had an incline of knowledge over paying taxes on your labor you'd know SS is the cause of paying taxes from making wages.
Even the Social Security Act itself doesnt have mandatory participation clause in it..........thats why it takes your consent to apply for a ssn.
Heres another hurdle to over come Phoenix.
Explain to this forum the difference between an act of Congress and a ratification of the Constitution if you can.
Oh never mind phoenix it quite obvious you didnt read one cite to fully comprehend what the court is saying.......continue on with your quest to prove absolutely nothing.

[TheNocturnalEgyptian]

So what happened in the video we saw? Where did their firepower go? Why did the bailiffs not remove the man from the room when they were ordered to do so by the judge?


Too many witnesses? I don't know.

FACT: this video is "proof" of NOTHING, other than they went to court to make a video.

I challenge again: post a video by yourself - anyone who believes this bullsh*t works - right here at GS-US. Hold up a sign at the beginning or end with "Hi GS-US" or something.

NOT ONE of you has the balls to try it, because you know the outcome.


I dunno, man. Seems to me they were more scared of the man with the ponytail than they were of disobeying the judges clear orders. Wonder why?

[Joe King]

He was polite?

All he did was to ask that they please back up.
...and they did.

Although I did find it odd that they didn't let him back into the Court room once he left.


It'd be nice to know the complete details about the case and those involved.

[TheNocturnalEgyptian]

He was polite?

All he did was to ask that they please back up.
...and they did.

Although I did find it odd that they didn't let him back into the Court room once he left.


It'd be nice to know the complete details about the case and those involved.





Before he asks them to back up, and after the judge says, "Remove this man from the court!" the sovereign man says, "Touch me, and you will be charged with unappeased *****" Someone coughs as he says the last word, it's hard to hear. Then he looks right at the one who is most likely to lay hands on him and says, "Do you want to dishonor a court official?" and that's what does it.



SOMETHING is going on here.

[DMac]

Robert Menard has been successfully defeating Canadian courts for years now and also helps others in Canada learn the LAW.

The US and Canada DO NOT have the same legal/lawful structure, if I am remembering correctly.

Phoenix, as 7th Trump alludes, your request is an impossible one to fulfill. I don't think your intentions are genuine here, simply because you continue to parrot the SPLC "Sovereign Citizen" title. Those words are opposites of each other.

Can you show me a proof of a "Squared Circle"? Of course not.

[Glass]

Robert Menard has been successfully defeating Canadian courts for years now and also helps others in Canada learn the LAW.

The US and Canada DO NOT have the same legal/lawful structure, if I am remembering correctly.

Phoenix, as 7th Trump alludes, your request is an impossible one to fulfill. I don't think your intentions are genuine here, simply because you continue to parrot the SPLC "Sovereign Citizen" title. Those words are opposites of each other.

Can you show me a proof of a "Squared Circle"? Of course not.


Menard uses a Claim of Right or CoR to establish a new contract with the Government. It is basically taking advantage of a Statutory right that exists in most commonwealth country statutes combined with a negative averment. The ideal outcome is for those parties noticed to fail to respond resulting in aquiesence. This forms the basis of his position. As he goes through a recorded process of noticing the other parties he can demonstrate non response or contractural default. In other words he gets no counterclaim (non response) then the other party has defaulted. The ideal situation following this process would be to put it to a court for Default Judgement although it may not be necessary.

I believe NZ claim of right laws are closer to Canadian ones than Australian ones are. Australia has a Claim of Right inclusion in the Crimes Act 1913 which is a Federal statute however the onus of proof of this claim is on the claimant to prove. At least that is what the law says. I have seen lawful right or claim of right used many times here in Oz. Most often it is used in self defence situations involving home invasion and a shooting. Most people do not know that is what it is but the police abide by it fairly strictly, all the while not giving any clues to the people. They will not consider charges where it is clear lawful self defence occured.

There are a lot of situations where it is clear the law is based on contracts under the colour of law now and not on actual law itself. A case occured here in Perth just 2 weeks ago where is was confirmed in a court action that infringements issued by Government, including police are nothing more than contracts.

[Book]

http://dalje.com/slike/slike_3/r1/g2008/m09/y181177951480179.jpg

I. OW! AM. OW! SOVEREIGN. OW! OW! OW! OW!

[Ares]

http://dalje.com/slike/slike_3/r1/g2008/m09/y181177951480179.jpg

I. OW! AM. OW! SOVEREIGN. OW! OW! OW! OW!


Book, your pointless pictures with your ignorance of law knows no bounds. If that individual was sovereign he would sue the officer INDIVIDUALLY for assault. Not his police department. People get greedy and go after the department, sue them individually and see how it will change if they can't get the department to write the check.

But of course posting stupid pictures with idiotic sayings is your hallmark. So by all means please continue.

[Ares]

September 30, 2010
Thana Dharmarajah, Mercury staff

GUELPH — A city man whose initial court proceedings were videotaped and uploaded on YouTube has 15 days to pay a $260 fine.

Keith Thompson failed to show in Guelph’s provincial offences court Thursday but his trial proceeded in his absence. The court found him guilty of two offences of illegally parking a car outside a driveway or a legal off-street parking area.

On each offence, Thompson was fined $130.

On Sept. 1, he appeared in court after he received a summons for leaving a car parked on his front lawn.

When the justice of the peace took a recess, during Thompson’s matter on Sept. 1, Thompson considered the case closed. However, the court later reconvened and adjourned his matter to Sept. 30.

One of his supporters filmed the proceedings and uploaded the video to YouTube, where it has received more than 41,240 hits.

Under the Courts of Justice Act, anyone taking photographs or making electronic recordings at a court hearing can face up to a $25,000 fine or up to six months in jail.

City police are continuing to investigate the videotaping incident.

Court heard Thursday that on May 11, a provincial offences officer saw a car parked on the front lawn of a house on Dalebrook Place.

“At the time, the driveway had enough room, so the vehicle could have been parked there legally,” officer Bruce Aubrey said in his testimony.

Aubrey said he issued a warning and left it on the car, notifying the owner that it was illegally parked on the front lawn. When he returned on Aug. 14 to issue a summons for the previous violation, he noticed a vehicle on the front lawn.

Aubrey said he served a summons to a man who only identified himself as “Keith,” who he believed was the owner of the home.

City prosecutor Cora Pacheco presented the court with a document from the land registry’s office which listed Wilfred Keith Thompson as the homeowner.

Justice of the peace Avis Rodney said the only issue was whether the individual listed on the document was the same person that the officer spoke with. However, based on the officer’s evidence, Rodney said she was convinced it was the same person.

Rodney found Thompson guilty of both offences of illegally parking the vehicles.

Thompson declined comment on Thursday. However, in a previous interview, he has said that as a “freeman on the land” laws don’t apply to him.

A freeman on the land is someone who lawfully refuses giving consent to be governed and believes no statute or act of government applies.

A failure to pay court fines can result in collection efforts, which include wage garnishments, bank garnishments, seizure and sale of property and interception of assets.

http://news.guelphmercury.com/News/article/696416

[po boy]

7th trump, even though there's is nothing saying one has to have a ssn, after one has been marked is there a way to revoke one's consent?

If so how and what would be the benefit to doing so.

I have read material about this subject but I am not so sure the De-facto authorities would respect that position.

Thanks for any replies by you or anybody else.

[ShortJohnSilver]

When the justice of the peace took a recess, during Thompson’s matter on Sept. 1, Thompson considered the case closed. However, the court later reconvened and adjourned his matter to Sept. 30.

Interesting ... wonder what the laws are regarding notice to be given in such cases.

[Ares]

When the justice of the peace took a recess, during Thompson’s matter on Sept. 1, Thompson considered the case closed. However, the court later reconvened and adjourned his matter to Sept. 30.

Interesting ... wonder what the laws are regarding notice to be given in such cases.


What I thought too, considering there was no time duration announced for the recess.