• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

What happened in this court room video?

Samopal

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
66
Location
Northville, MI
Can someone explain to me what I just watched? The audio was a bit hard to understand, the description makes little sense, and comments have been disabled. For all I know the judge just got sick of this guy's **** (whatever **** it may have been) and left.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Can someone explain to me what I just watched? The audio was a bit hard to understand, the description makes little sense, and comments have been disabled. For all I know the judge just got sick of this guy's **** (whatever **** it may have been) and left.

I don't know either. I got the distinct impression that someone who has no respect for the law thinks that he used it to his advantage. We do not see what happened afterward. The judge may have realized that continuing a formal court proceeding at that moment may have been useless. He did indicate that he was coming back. If he did, and the man who also left did not return, a summary judgment may have been entered. Possibly a new warrant was issued. Any of a thousand things could have happened that the man in the video will choose not to share with us or doesn't even know happened.

He thinks he bested the system and posted a video. In a word that the Canadians invented, "meh."
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Plenty of these Soverign Citizen/person videos on youtube.

Google search " SOVERIGN CITIZEN/ SOVERIGN PERSON. "

CCJ
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
I got the distinct impression that someone who has no respect for the law thinks that he used it to his advantage.

:rolleyes:

Of course you do.

I don't think these "sovereign citizen" guys have ever actually accomplished anything in a courtroom, but that's not the same thing as having "no respect".

Apparently, to have "respect" for the law a person must submit to its whims without question. To me, that isn't "respect", its bootlicking.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
:rolleyes:

Of course you do.

I don't think these "sovereign citizen" guys have ever actually accomplished anything in a courtroom, but that's not the same thing as having "no respect".

Apparently, to have "respect" for the law a person must submit to its whims without question. To me, that isn't "respect", its bootlicking.

I have argued lack of jurisdiction and standing before ... been successful too. Its not disrespect ... its mandating that the gov't show that it has legal authority to hear the case.

Happens all the time in courthouses all over the USA.
 

georg jetson

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
2,416
Location
Slidell, Louisiana
Gee... "Freeman" crap is spreading to Canada. Hmmm. Maybe they've left the country with all of their "maritime law, redemption, UCC, contract" crap.

I don't know the law in Canada but, I'm sure there is a way to challenge jurisdiction for the usual due process issues. I bet this pony-tailed guy hasn't read any of the procedure rules for doing such. Well... make it up as you go along. Works all the time. :)
 

georg jetson

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
2,416
Location
Slidell, Louisiana
I have argued lack of jurisdiction and standing before ... been successful too. Its not disrespect ... its mandating that the gov't show that it has legal authority to hear the case.

Happens all the time in courthouses all over the USA.

Yes... and the criminal/civil rules detail how to make such arguments. It is disrespectful to the court if a motion must be made in writing and the one motioning the court decides to just shout it out.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Yes... and the criminal/civil rules detail how to make such arguments. It is disrespectful to the court if a motion must be made in writing and the one motioning the court decides to just shout it out.

I have no issue with oral motions ... the opposing party can always ask the court to have it made into a written motion.
 

georg jetson

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
2,416
Location
Slidell, Louisiana
I have no issue with oral motions ... the opposing party can always ask the court to have it made into a written motion.

It doesn't matter if you have no issue. In a criminal case the motion can be denied solely because it was not made according to the rules... and it's not the judges job to explain this.

Learn the law relevant to your case.
 

georg jetson

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
2,416
Location
Slidell, Louisiana
Evidentiary rules? OK, sure.

Procedural rules? Pfft. They only exist to provide lawyers with a reason for being.

"Procedural rules" covers quite a bit of teritory. Which procedural rules do you refer? Perhaps the ones covering proper process? Maybe the ones dealing with ex parte communications? I know you're not suggesting justice could be facilitated with no organized process.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
"Procedural rules" covers quite a bit of teritory. Which procedural rules do you refer? Perhaps the ones covering proper process? Maybe the ones dealing with ex parte communications? I know you're not suggesting justice could be facilitated with no organized process.

I'm referring to the same sorts of procedural rules you are – arbitrary BS like whether a motion has to be delivered orally or in writing. I already allowed for the validity of some courtroom rules so I'm not going to play semantics with you. Use your imagination.
 

georg jetson

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
2,416
Location
Slidell, Louisiana
I'm referring to the same sorts of procedural rules you are – arbitrary BS like whether a motion has to be delivered orally or in writing. I already allowed for the validity of some courtroom rules so I'm not going to play semantics with you. Use your imagination.

I disagree that a rule regarding the form of a particular motion is arbitrary bs in general. There are plenty of good reasons to require motions in writing. They can be considered and ruled on before a hearing. They save the court and the interested parties time as well as giving time for the opposing party to file any rebuttal. There are many more reasons.
 
Top