Freeman Megamerge

snow ghost wrote: »

I'm just waiting for a banned boardsie poster to turn up on the Help Desk Forum arguing that they are a freeman of the internet and that their ivioalable rights to travel on the Web under the magna carta have been breached. They will then no doubt ask an Admin if s/he is under oath and claim that he does not 'stand under' his decision as it is the law of the sea and he is only answerable to common law. :eek:

This Bobby of the family Sludds must be a laughing stock in his local area, imagine the sniggering down the pub when people found out he was sent down.

Since you were looking for cases, the case of Stephen of the family Sutton before Judge Zaiden in the District Court in Kilcock should interest you:

Published on Monday 24 May 2010 12:42

A man who questioned the legal powers of the District Court after he was charged with driving without insurance was jailed for six months at Kilcock District Court last Thursday.


Stephen Sutton, 67 The Walk, Moyglare Hall, Maynooth, who described himself as “Stephen of the family Sutton”, was jailed for six months after the Court found he had driven without insurance in the Moyglare area of Maynooth on 3 December last.

http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local/man_questions_district_court_but_is_jailed_1_1940175

He basically felt that he did not have to comply with the Road Traffic Acts as they were "statute law", and not "common law", with pretty devastating personal consequences I must add.

Judge Zaidan strongly suggested he seek legal advice but Mr. Sutton opted to represent himself and said he would “waive all benefits and privileges.”

At a number of points he interupted Judge Zaidan and was told he could get seven days’ jail for contempt for making a mockery of the Court.

He replied that he would put any interuption “down to nerves”.

He said he had requested that a document of his would be passed to the judge but Judge Zaidan told Mr Sutton he would have to address the issue in public. “I do not deal with private correspondence with you or the Taoiseach,” said Judge Zaidan.

snow ghost wrote: »

Sly of the family Stone.

Post of the day, easily.

That link is from two years back, though, I don't think this stuff is at crisis point yet, or even close. To be honest, I can see there being a major incident, like a forced eviction, that will demonstrate how flimsy these points are.

Of course, the Gardaí, the banks, the courts and the government don't want this. I have a feeling that some of the protesters do, though, and this is why they're geeing people up with this stuff, even if there are plenty of Fremen who will be genuinely surprised to end up in the cells.

***

Corruptable wrote: »

On the whole fraud note, I found an interview with "Kev", who seems to be the founder of the Tir Na Saor/Land of the Free movement on one of their internet radio shows

Missed this above ... confirms what I already thought. Fcking cnuts, duping people - I'm personally in favour of civil disobedience, but let people know what they're getting in to. I also like the LETS system, has the potential to make life much better for people who are cash poor but time rich. Why do they have to be such cute hoors about it?

benway wrote: »

Missed this above ... confirms what I already thought. Fcking cnuts, duping people - I'm personally in favour of civil disobedience, but let people know what they're getting in to. I also like the LETS system, has the potential to make life much better for people who are cash poor but time rich. Why do they have to be such cute hoors about it?

Good point, benway. I'm all in favour of community involvement too, but I don't see why they have to attach their ideology to it and try and claim everything. Their newest one is their claim over Billy Maguire and the "sovereign seal" of Ireland from which the State supposedly derives it's powers, and their claim on the Brehon Laws of Celtic times.

For anyone who is tired of the Inn's or Blackhalls, why not visit the freeman's spinoff - The Brehon Law Society - http://www.thebrehonlawsociety.com/index.html. I'd say the entrance exams are a hell of a lot easier than the FE-1s!

I see that they've hijacked and confused the Anti-Eviction groups now, with the majority believing that Ben Gilroy's interpretation of the Constitution and Common Law is correct and what won out the day.

People seriously need to know that this man is talking raw sewage (outside of the possible fair procedure issue with the Registrar doubling as the Sheriff), and does not stand up to scrutiny and is therefore no substitute for proper, independent legal advice which is available for solicitors, FLAC, and the New Beginnings group who specialise in this area.

I'm not sure this man is a freeman but the garda in the video takes no crap.

Definitely not a freeman, just a protester with an stubborn attitude (i.e.: if I barracade myself inside my car then it will lead to a confrontation which I can record).

I understand the frustration the members felt at this, but it would appear that the force used was somewhat excessive, even with the drivers failure to follow lawful direction. I would hope that he would simply be charged with obstruction, but the use of force plays right into the driver's hands, although he was acting unreasonably.

Has anything ever come out of stacks of complaints the Garda Ombudsman's received from the protesters? As I often predicted that what went on up there will eventually fill the pages of the next Morris Tribunal.

One sided, but an extensive record of events:



What happened to your man, SNIPPED who was the public order expert? Apparently he seems to have resigned from the gardai and gone into private security. I know a lot of complaints were directed at his handling of things.

The first thing I thought with the Mayo video was 'Freemen' due to the driver's phraseology.
That said, if the video can be taken at face value, it would appear that the Garda's use of force was disproportionate

Lockstep wrote: »

This has been circulating around Facebook:



I emailed McCann Fitzgerald who (to their credit) gave me a quick reply:


It annoy me that someone made up this piece of crap. Granted, the flat household charge is rubbish (although the government have said they plan on introducing a progressive charge) but for someone to spread this pseudo-legal rubbish and to attach a law firm's name to it is really suspect. I hope noone took this seriously.

That's actually frightening how someone actually went as far as putting out a reputable firms name on this piece of freeman waffle which has done the round extensively on facebook, in print, and spread orally during public meetings on the various charges.

The reliance of someone on this, acting in good faith that it did in fact come from MF would be a serious issue.

On Grolshevik's note, it's an interesting development which shows how inconsistent their approach is, as if you "contract" with a member of the BAR or Law Society, you're doomed in their belief system. Hence, why they refuse representation in court.

snow ghost wrote: »

It did sound freemanish tbh.

Did anyone see that video on youtube of the freeman guy in England who made the cop sign a contract to pay him 20,000 pounds to exit his car? He might have had a shock if he came up against this Robo-cop from Belmullet and his truncheon, I don't think it'd be 20,000 euro he'd be getting.

I think the cops in the UK are copying unto the freeman crap.

If your man tries to enforce his 'bill', all the cop has to do is say he doesn't consent.

Grolschevik wrote: »

I neither saw nor heard any evidence of window breaking or dragging out.

You can quite clearly hear the window being broken at 2:06 in.

I also hope he was dragged out.

Grolschevik wrote: »

don't go looking for pigs to wrestle.

Passes the time, brother.

MungBean wrote: »

What the hell was he trying to ask ? Where barristers got the authority to operate ?

I don't think he even knows himself. I don't see any mention of solicitors or firemen in the constitution either. Tbh, I think he's just trying to show off owing his superior intelligence. Pity that the last guy indulged him as far as he did.

That McCann Fitzgerald thing is an absolute disgrace as well, they ought to be ashamed for outright lying to people. This will not end well.