Freeman Megamerge

derry · 16-09-2011 10:04pm

bath handle wrote: »

A judge has no power to direct treatment of anyone in custody. Treatment in custody is a matter for the executive, not the judiciary. When is the High Court case?

Yes correct but there is nothing to stop a judge speaking this kinda crap if he wants .
Juges can spout all sorts of non legal crap there is nobody out there to
pull them up.
So often they wing it invent law on the fly and often invent absolute rubbish law but if the people are not there to point it out and record the event and get them questioned on the ruling they get away with this type of skull duggery .

Also I dont think this type case can go to the high court unless there is some new legal system issue to address.

This guy didnt do the correct things the majority freeman movement advised him to do so this Judge was easily able to eat him for breakfast

However there are freeman movemnets in Eire that if he follows thier solutions he can probaly exit the jail in few days or probaly at worst a few weeks

But thats up to him he has to decide to contact them

Derry

derry · 16-09-2011 10:18pm

Scealta_saol wrote: »

Judge Zaidan is a legend! He has an excellent no nonsense approach and has no time for time wasters like this...

What exactly did Mr Sutton mean by "Mr. Sutton said he referred to Article 41 of the Irish Constitution, but the Gaelic version of it, not the blue book “masquerading” as the “true text” in all outlets.The document described the fixed penalty system as a “money exchanging facility” and questioned under which authority the District Court was operating, asking if it was under “maritime admiralty” or “common law” jurisdiction."

Is this another part of the Freeman thing? That the english version of the constitution doesn't count or something? Were there no Irish speakers in the court? Surely the document doesn't say that it's a money exchanging facility? Or if it does, not in the context of a "money making scheme"?

The English Freeman movement attempt this type of question“maritime admiralty” or “common law” jurisdiction."and the legal system for the UK it can be very effective
In the UK there as there is the magna charter to refer back to for legal issues

However in the case of Ireland most freeman movements would not suggest this approch as the system in Eire tends to operate under a mix of “BAR (British Accredited Registery )legal counsil bye laws first with some maritime admiralty and common law” mixxed into the mix .

This means the Irish Judges can operate all three legal systems together at the same time and switch in and out of any of these at any time .
The result is its irrelant which reply the Judge gives gives .

If the judge says common law juristriction the judge can lie and can a few seconds later change to maritime admiralty law without to telling you .

Many Irish freeman movements would probably not suggest to use these English solutions as the local Irish legal Bye Laws systems dont need to respond to that type of English Freeman Logic and as this case shows as they predicted before hand that it probaly wouldnt work so well in the local version of British run legal system we have in EIRE

Derry

derry · 16-09-2011 10:38pm

Victor wrote: »

It seems that there are some discrepancies between the two, with the Irish version being more flowery and the English version more legalistic.

Here is small example of the difference between english and Irish versions taken from front page of the www.tnsradio.ning.com home page

ARTICLE 41.1.1

THE FAMILY

LITERAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION

The State acknowledges that the Family is the basic primary group-unit of/for society according to nature, aARTICLE 41.1.1

THE FAMILY

LITERAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION

The State acknowledges that the Family is the basic primary group-unit of/for society according to nature, and that it is a moral institution which has inalienable invincible rights which are more ancient and higher than any human statute.

ENGLISH TEXT

The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.

ENGLISH TEXT

The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.

In the literal english version which takes precedence of the english version the difference is enormous

The Irish version says that nothing not the government Garda or anything exceeds the rights of the family unit so for example taking children into care against the family wishes in Ireland is nearly impossible in theory .
The line " and that it is a moral institution which has inalienable invincible rights which are more ancient and higher than any human statute." means the so called laws statute (commercail laws) cannot and do not apply to humans and the human family

The english version allows the Governemnt to claim they are higher using the statute laws (commersial laws ) than the family unit and they use this english version often in history and presently to destroy and break up Irish families using the birth certifiate a commercail registry ownership of the Irish people humans chattel.
This use of the english version is also so as to allow peodofile rings who often run the children care system have better accesss to unprotected children both in the past and presently

So the Irish State does everthing possible in its power to hide the Irish versions of the constitution as the people are higher than the state and they hate that with a vengence as it limits the government back to what it should be servants of the people.

The most of the Irish Judges also hate the Irish versions of the Irish constitution as it effectivly means they cant use the abuse of the power they use in the past and presently today to wing it and make up crazy ruling and laws on the fly so to speak

Derry

TylerIE · 16-09-2011 10:50pm

derry wrote: »

If a Garda saytodo you understand me and you say yes i understand you then your banjaxed
What he has said under legalese lingo is do you agree to stand under me .
If you say yes I understand you you efffetivily agree you will stand under him
This means because you are the people the highest in the system and the Garda are the servants civil servant s and are under you and have to serve you if you agree to stand under your servant the garda you agree that he or she is now higher than you and they now have full control oveer you destiny eg they can now command you to go to jail.If you dont go tthey can now drag you there legealy as you gave away your rights to object
SEE SIMPLE THEY TRICKED YOU to give away your rights

There is more but you probably wouldnt get it its over your head you trust your servants not to shaft you in the darker parts with thier double speak dont you

Derry

Derry,

I dont UNDER-STAND you or your ideology (or idiotiology), and thankfully very few people do believe in such codology.

Then again its just over my head, living in the real world and all that.

At least we are privileged to have such expertise in our midst...

--
oh wait [without prejudice / subject to the terms of the Idiots Guide to legalese/ changing daily strawman practice/beliefs/whatever suits me today/ way to pick and choose laws and benefits]

source · 17-09-2011 12:37am

derry wrote: »

Finnbar01 wrote: »

Finally, they've mentioned that if a garda asks you to sign something, underneath where you signature goes, sign 'under duress'???

It's strange altogether.

If you sign the form a garda gives you you basiucally can be interpeted to admit quit even if your not guilty or worse your happy with your stay in thier hotel services commonly known a s the jail.
They Garda usualy trick you with sign this form to to get your material back such as wallet car keys etc thyey take off you before they lock you up.
If you were arrested wronly and you sign that form yopu effecdtivly have signed a form to say that your were happy with the copetate servicews the Garda supplied including the escorting with shackels to a jail soyou cant sue them for hurting you breaking your arms etc
If the Garda bends parts that shouldnt bend and force you to sign then put under durress and that makes the contract null and void

Simple really the corperate services of the Garda like to cover thier rear ends and trick you intyo signing away your rights

If a Garda saytodo you understand me and you say yes i understand you then your banjaxed
What he has said under legalese lingo is do you agree to stand under me .
If you say yes I understand you you efffetivily agree you will stand under him
This means because you are the people the highest in the system and the Garda are the servants civil servant s and are under you and have to serve you if you agree to stand under your servant the garda you agree that he or she is now higher than you and they now have full control oveer you destiny eg they can now command you to go to jail.If you dont go tthey can now drag you there legealy as you gave away your rights to object
SEE SIMPLE THEY TRICKED YOU to give away your rights

There is more but you probably wouldnt get it its over your head you trust your servants not to shaft you in the darker parts with thier double speak dont you

Derry

Dude, seriously, seek help. You need to see a psychiatrist about these paranoid delusions you're having.

That is the only logical explaination i can come to, to explain these paranoid babblings.

Contra Proferentem · 17-09-2011 2:05am

Classic.

They are quiet a scary bunch, and to those who have said that they don't think they are dangerous, you should look at how far they've taken their false theories in the United States, with at least three well known incidents involving their hardcore believers ending in violence against law enforcement.

I'm actually shocked that it seems to be gaining a foothold in this country mainly among young people who don't see any hope at present and don't/won't take the time to understand the justice system. Granted some of them are looking for a way to get away with crimes such as driving without tax, insurance or NCT, and using illegal drugs but some of them seem to be genuinely disconnected from society.

not even wrong · 17-09-2011 12:27pm

derry wrote: »

Juges can spout all sorts of non legal crap there is nobody out there to
pull them up.
So often they wing it invent law on the fly and often invent absolute rubbish law

oh the irony.

Grolschevik · 19-09-2011 2:33pm

Contra Proferentem wrote: »

violence against law enforcement.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/ideology/sovereign-citizens-movement

Thanks for posting the link to the Southern Poverty Law Center. It's an excellent summary of the origins/bases of these beliefs.

derry · 20-09-2011 9:12pm

Grolschevik wrote: »

Thanks for posting the link to the Southern Poverty Law Center. It's an excellent summary of the origins/bases of these beliefs.

You seriously need to stop drinking so much of the Governments cool aid to think SPLC is a source for any truth
SPLC purpose is to distort any event be it kids in the playgrounds joking each other to news events in to race hate events and try to bring court cases for minor of the cuff remarks which might have some vague race hate issue.
SPLC trys hard to say Tea party people are terrorist and the new AL Qaeda (AL-CIA-DA)
You should check its sponsors straight out of the list of NEOCONS

Here is one example of how they slant the media

http://www.prisonplanet.com/splc-report-heavy-on-smear-thin-on-facts.html

Derry

derry · 20-09-2011 9:28pm

not even wrong wrote: »

oh the irony.

Well in one recent court case we had one of freemen ask correctly civil or criminal to the Judge when questioned on his specific issue

The reply came back from the judge hybrid

Now we know we have the Irish (British gombeen men ) justice system on the run when they know full well that isn't a legal reply of any sort

Derry

Paulw · 20-09-2011 9:41pm

derry wrote: »

Now we know we have the Irish (British gombeen men ) justice system on the run when they know full well that isn't a legal reply of any sort

Yeah, I can see the whole Irish justice system quaking in it's boots now. :rolleyes:

In any direct ruling, has a freeman ever actually won a case?? Would you have a link to such a case, or is it all still just fantasy and hope?

jblack · 21-09-2011 12:00am

derry wrote: »

Well in one recent court case we had one of freemen ask correctly civil or criminal to the Judge when questioned on his specific issue

The reply came back from the judge hybrid

Now we know we have the Irish (British gombeen men ) justice system on the run when they know full well that isn't a legal reply of any sort

Derry

I have tried hard to and without instance prejudice to see some sort of rationale or intelligence or at least something to make me stroke my chin in the freeman slant. I cannot.

Is there anyone representing the freeman position who can put across a coherent and logical representation of what they actually stand for (without being guilty of gross hypocrisy)?

From what I have read so far it is utter nonsense and while the justice system most certainly does have its failings the freeman argument only reinforces the need for it.

Derry you do realise that not one of those sentences quoted above makes any sense?

ResearchWill · 21-09-2011 12:53am

derry wrote: »

Well in one recent court case we had one of freemen ask correctly civil or criminal to the Judge when questioned on his specific issue

The reply came back from the judge hybrid

Now we know we have the Irish (British gombeen men ) justice system on the run when they know full well that isn't a legal reply of any sort

Derry

I think what you are saying but please correct me if I am wrong, that a free man asked the judge was the jurisdiction civil or criminal, to which the judge replied hybrid.

Well there are some matters, which I believe could be called hybrid, for example a baring order granted in a civil family case, may lead to a criminal case where breach of same leads to prison.

A committal order granted in a court for the non payment of an instalment while civil in nature may lead to a custodial sentence and allows for legal aid, so could be also considered criminal.

With out the facts it seems to me maybe the judge was trying to explain a concept.

Also why was a freeman asking civil or criminal, I thought they believed the courts only operated a sort of admiralty law.

derry · 21-09-2011 9:25pm

ResearchWill wrote: »

I think what you are saying but please correct me if I am wrong, that a free man asked the judge was the jurisdiction civil or criminal, to which the judge replied hybrid.

Well there are some matters, which I believe could be called hybrid, for example a baring order granted in a civil family case, may lead to a criminal case where breach of same leads to prison.

A committal order granted in a court for the non payment of an instalment while civil in nature may lead to a custodial sentence and allows for legal aid, so could be also considered criminal.

With out the facts it seems to me maybe the judge was trying to explain a concept.

Also why was a freeman asking civil or criminal, I thought they believed the courts only operated a sort of admiralty law.

If your in front of judge in Ireland he only becomes a judge for commercial courts when there is two commercial entities who have a dispute for which they need a judge to sort out the problem.Until tit is established there is two commercial entities or they trick you to become a commercial entity the case cannot procceed

If a case is common law eg murder ,injury ,theft,damage to property the Judge is the judge automatically and all he has to do is reply criminal.

So it is the right of a victim in front of a court to request the judge clarify which it is civil or criminal the court he is in
If the judge says criminal then the case must be common law and not commercail law
If the judge says civil then the human isnt sopposed to be in that court unless he makes himself with the contract system a commesial entity so the judge is not his judge until the Judge can make him a commersial entity
Freemen will then often chose methods so as to not to be allowed to be converted into a person and then into a commesail entity

The Judges will try every trick possible not to say civil
Sorry the Hybrid trick wont wash is my info and shows hows desperate the Judges in ireland running a British legal system are to keep the curtian closed on the magic man behind the curtian in the yellow brick road

Admiralty law is clearly the major theme in the British law which Ireland follows .The victim is in the DOCK which isbehind the rails which is where the ships rails are and the judge is captian of that ship .The victim has been dragged of the high seas (from his house usualy ) and as wayward ship who did something wrong like park on double yellow lines ( he is kept in the dock ) until the restitution is delivered (eg he pays the fine or the time in prision ) The time in prision is classed as the safest place for salvage (the victim is merely salvage from the high seas ) and the cell (battery cell ) extracts energy from the victim( the energy is classed as haviing value in luie of inabilty to pay the fines or replacement of damage the Judge believes has been done )

The original laws were common law and for the high seas Admiralty law.Then they said well ships dont just use docks on the coast they use docks inland using canals . Admiralty law got spread inland along these routes .Then they said the docks in the city were with warehouses all over the city so the city must be Admiralty law.Eventulay all in the land roads houses the lot became Admiralty law.
However the judges can start cases in ireland under local BAR(British accredited Registery ) bye laws if they want and they often do .At any time they can switch to Admiralty law if the case is commercail or to common law if the case is criminal
The abuse of BAR Bye laws allow Judges to steer a way where they can make the case say its criminal be judged under Admiralty law civil laws rules where they can deliver weird and wonderful results they cant so easily do if the case is common law .
Under Admiralty law the victim is essentialy quity until he proves himself not guilty .Under common law the victim is innocent until proved guilty .The judges tend to prefer Admiralty law as they have the victim over a barrel . So judges can at any time swich between the Admiralty law BAR bye laws and common law without saying they have and change the goal posts whoile the game is in progress so to speak .They donmt call the Brits devious for nmothing and ensuring Ireland kept the British legal ssytem meant we are still effectivly part of England except we just fly a different flag but the Irish Judges are only awnserable to the BAR or the QUEEN of England

Ralf

blueythebear · 21-09-2011 9:46pm

derry wrote: »

If your in front of judge in Ireland he only becomes a judge for commercial courts when there is two commercial entities who have a dispute for which they need a judge to sort out the problem.Until tit is established there is two commercial enmtitites or they trick you to become a commercial entity the case cannot procceed

If a case is common law eg murder ,injury ,theft,damage to property the Judge is the judge automatically .

So it is the right of a victim in front of a court to request the judge clarifywhich it is civil or criminal
If the judge says criminal then the case must be common law and not commercail law
If the judge says civil then the human isnt sopposed to be in that court unless he makes himself with the contract system a commesial entity so the judge is not his judge until the Judge can make him a commersial entity
Freemen will then often chose methods so as to not to be allowed to be converted into a person and then into a commesail entity

The Judges will try every trick possible not to say civil
Sorry the Hybrid trick wont wash is my info and shows hows desperate the Judges in ireland running a British legal system are to keep the curtian closed on the magic man behind the curtian in the yellow brick road

Ralf

I have a few questions on your post:

You stress a delineation between common law and commercial law. Can you please define both as you understand the terms?

You state it is the right of a victim to ask if a case is civil or criminal. Can you please define "victim"? The victim of a crime has no place in a criminal trial other than to give evidence as to the events surrounding the alleged crime. Why would a victim be asking the judge about jurisdiction?

If you say that you cannot contract until you transform from the person to a commercial entity, then how do you form a contract to buy a bar of chocolate in a shop? How can you enter such a contract without becoming a commercial entity? In that scenario, how do you let the shopkeep know that you are entering the contract?

Who is this magic man behind the curtain that you refer to?

I'll reiterate the question posed previously also.....

Can you point to ANY example of where a Freeman SUCCESSFULLY challenged ANY charge in an Irish court? Frustrating the court so that the matter is put back to another date is not a successful outcome.

Finnbar01 · 21-09-2011 9:56pm

blueythebear wrote: »

Can you point to ANY example of where a Freeman SUCCESSFULLY challenged ANY charge in an Irish court? Frustrating the court so that the matter is put back to another date is not a successful outcome.

When a freeman goes to court regardless of the outcome, he will see it as a victory. If he gets locked up for instance, he will convince himself that he was right all along and the authorities had to lock him up to silence him.

It's bizzare. Also, as I said in a previous post, evidence provided by the freeman gurus is very thin on the ground.

jblack · 21-09-2011 11:07pm

derry wrote: »

If a case is common law eg murder ,injury ,theft,damage to property the Judge is the judge automatically and all he has to do is reply criminal.

Ralf

Your example of what common law is illustrates a complete lack of understanding.

johnnyskeleton · 21-09-2011 11:39pm

derry wrote: »

If your in front of judge in Ireland he only becomes a judge for commercial courts when there is two commercial entities who have a dispute for which they need a judge to sort out the problem.Until tit is established there is two commercial entities or they trick you to become a commercial entity the case cannot procceed

Are you saying that a human person cannot enter into a commercial agreement? For example, if I agree to sell you my shoes for €5 is that not, on a basic level a commercial agreement?

Or is it that I can be the human jonathon of the clan skeleton, but I can also be a commercial entity also known as johnnyskeleton at the same time depending on the circumstances? If the latter, how do you know which I am at any given time? Can I offer you my shoes and you accept thinking it is jonathon of the clan skeleton selling his shoes, but when you hand over the money I say "Ha, fooled you, I did not accept commercial jurisdiction, if you want some shoes for your fiver take it up with johnnyskeleton who, by the way, doesn't exist and if he ever did he is bankrupt"?

Alternatively, if I do say that, can you claim your fiver back from the phsycial person, with force if needs be? After all, if jonathon of the clan skeleton did not enter the commercial agreement then he has effectively stolen your €5 (which in your philosophy is a common law offence, see below)?

Alternatively, do you just shrug your shoulders and say "aw shucks, I lost my fiver, but I guess that is justice according to my philosophy"?

Genuinely would like to know the answer to this.

derry wrote: »

If a case is common law eg murder ,injury ,theft,damage to property the Judge is the judge automatically and all he has to do is reply criminal.

Interesting. And by what rules does he proceed to try you? In the district court, for example, does the judge have unlimited jurisdiction to try murders and the most serious of thefts? If not, how can he accept the criminal jurisdiction?

Also, what about common law contract law? Much older than the rule of positive law and even criminal law (i.e. the state punishing a person for a wrong such as murder), the common law of contracts existed? They is evidence to suggest that contract law existed long before criminal law, see e.g. archiological discoveries of trading vessels that predate any known state.

derry wrote: »

So it is the right of a victim in front of a court to request the judge clarify which it is civil or criminal the court he is in
If the judge says criminal then the case must be common law and not commercail law
If the judge says civil then the human isnt sopposed to be in that court unless he makes himself with the contract system a commesial entity so the judge is not his judge until the Judge can make him a commersial entity
Freemen will then often chose methods so as to not to be allowed to be converted into a person and then into a commesail entity

The Judges will try every trick possible not to say civil
Sorry the Hybrid trick wont wash is my info and shows hows desperate the Judges in ireland running a British legal system are to keep the curtian closed on the magic man behind the curtian in the yellow brick road

What is the source of this legal code? If you think about it, why would there be a legal system created where the persons who deal with that system are forced to trick people into it? It would be like inventing a game where the only rule is that there are no rules. The referee then has to trick people into accepting that a foul was committed, otherwise the player is free to ignore the referee's ruling? That is the type of game a child might come up with.

derry wrote: »

Admiralty law is clearly the major theme in the British law which Ireland follows .The victim is in the DOCK which isbehind the rails which is where the ships rails are and the judge is captian of that ship .

Well there is no DOCK in Irish law, so you can rest assured that Irish courts are not using Admiralty law. There is an admiral of the four courts who is permitted to birch unsuspecting English tourists who visit Dublin from time to time, but that more because of a misguided sense of nationalism than any retention of British Admiralty law.

derry wrote: »

The victim has been dragged of the high seas (from his house usualy ) and as wayward ship who did something wrong like park on double yellow lines ( he is kept in the dock ) until the restitution is delivered (eg he pays the fine or the time in prision ) The time in prision is classed as the safest place for salvage (the victim is merely salvage from the high seas ) and the cell (battery cell ) extracts energy from the victim( the energy is classed as haviing value in luie of inabilty to pay the fines or replacement of damage the Judge believes has been done )

Now you're contradicting yourself. If the "victim" (i.e. the accused) is salvage, then they become a commercial tradeable good rather than a commercial entity and they are subject to the civil jurisdiction of the courts. If we did use Admiralty law, fremen would be just as subject to it as "salvage" as they would as a "commerical entity". Either way, the human person is subject to the laws, no?

derry wrote: »

The original laws were common law and for the high seas Admiralty law.Then they said well ships dont just use docks on the coast they use docks inland using canals . Admiralty law got spread inland along these routes .Then they said the docks in the city were with warehouses all over the city so the city must be Admiralty law.Eventulay all in the land roads houses the lot became Admiralty law.

Actually no. The original laws were the dictates of the ruler (king, lord etc) and these were much more like our statute laws than common law. Common law is a modern invention to ameliorate the harshness of the law imposed from above. But both are binding and the hierarchy is common law, statute, constitutional law.

derry wrote: »

Under Admiralty law the victim is essentialy quity until he proves himself not guilty .

I would hate to be quity before proving myself not guilty. I'd probably just give up and plead.

Jo King · 21-09-2011 11:42pm

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Well there is no DOCK in Irish law, so you can rest assured that Irish courts are not using Admiralty law. There is an admiral of the four courts who is permitted to birch unsuspecting English tourists who visit Dublin from time to time, but that more because of a misguided sense of nationalism than any retention of British Admiralty law.

There is no Admiral of the Four Courts. The position was abolished when the last one retired about three years ago.

Athlone_Bhoy · 22-09-2011 12:07am

Seanbeag1 wrote: »

About time they stamped on this freeman bull****

Maybe I'm missing something but isn't he free?

He was however in contempt of court given his back answering to the judge

Civil or criminal?

johnnyskeleton · 22-09-2011 1:49am

Jo King wrote: »

johnnyskeleton wrote:

Well there is no DOCK in Irish law, so you can rest assured that Irish courts are not using Admiralty law. There is an admiral of the four courts who is permitted to birch unsuspecting English tourists who visit Dublin from time to time, but that more because of a misguided sense of nationalism than any retention of British Admiralty law.

There is no Admiral of the Four Courts. The position was abolished when the last one retired about three years ago.

That's the only thing you find objectionable in that quote

Reloc8 · 22-09-2011 2:08am

Jaysus people.

When you argue with an idiot an innocent bystander gets confused as to who is who.

Step away from the bull****.

jd · 22-09-2011 9:46am

bath handle wrote: »

A judge has no power to direct treatment of anyone in custody. Treatment in custody is a matter for the executive, not the judiciary. When is the High Court case?

The direction was to Sutton, not the Prison Service.

Milk & Honey · 22-09-2011 9:51am

jd wrote: »

The direction was to Sutton, not the Prison Service.

Only the Prison service can provide the treatment. How can he have given a direction to Sutton?

shaneybaby · 22-09-2011 11:05am

Milk & Honey wrote: »

Only the Prison service can provide the treatment. How can he have given a direction to Sutton?

That he (sutton) should go seek it?

jd · 22-09-2011 11:13am

Milk & Honey wrote: »

Only the Prison service can provide the treatment. How can he have given a direction to Sutton?

I'm just going by what was reported in the newspaper

In handing down sentence, Judge Zaidan said he would direct Mr Sutton to get “psychiatric treatment as appropriate” while in prison.

Milk & Honey · 22-09-2011 11:15am

shaneybaby wrote: »

That he (sutton) should go seek it?

The order was that Sutton receive treatment , not that he seek it. The committal order is addressed to the governor of the prison, not the accused. Once the accused is in the hands of the Governor any treatment he gets is a matter for the Governor. The only thing a judge can do is note that he thinks a person has a condition and recommend that they receive treatment.

Grolschevik · 22-09-2011 11:24am

derry wrote: »

Admiralty law is clearly the major theme in the British law which Ireland follows .The victim is in the DOCK which isbehind the rails which is where the ships rails are and the judge is captian of that ship .The victim has been dragged of the high seas (from his house usualy ) and as wayward ship who did something wrong like park on double yellow lines ( he is kept in the dock ) until the restitution is delivered (eg he pays the fine or the time in prision ) The time in prision is classed as the safest place for salvage (the victim is merely salvage from the high seas ) and the cell (battery cell ) extracts energy from the victim( the energy is classed as haviing value in luie of inabilty to pay the fines or replacement of damage the Judge believes has been done )

I love this bit!

derry wrote: »

However the judges can start cases in ireland under local BAR(British accredited Registery ) ... They donmt call the Brits devious for nmothing and ensuring Ireland kept the British legal ssytem meant we are still effectivly part of England except we just fly a different flag but the Irish Judges are only awnserable to the BAR or the QUEEN of England

And this bit!

Milk & Honey · 22-09-2011 11:45am

jd wrote: »

I'm just going by what was reported in the newspaper

Never a wise thing to do.
There are almost inevitably inaccuracies in any newspaper account of court proceedings. Most are trivial and most reports give a good account of what happened but some of the finer detail gets lost. The reporters in court sometimes don't hear fully, and often don't understand fully, what is going on. After the report is typed it is often edited by a sub-editor to fit it into a page.

ResearchWill · 22-09-2011 12:43pm

derry wrote: »

If your in front of judge in Ireland he only becomes a judge for commercial courts when there is two commercial entities who have a dispute for which they need a judge to sort out the problem.Until tit is established there is two commercial entities or they trick you to become a commercial entity the case cannot procceed

If a case is common law eg murder ,injury ,theft,damage to property the Judge is the judge automatically and all he has to do is reply criminal.

So it is the right of a victim in front of a court to request the judge clarify which it is civil or criminal the court he is in
If the judge says criminal then the case must be common law and not commercail law
If the judge says civil then the human isnt sopposed to be in that court unless he makes himself with the contract system a commesial entity so the judge is not his judge until the Judge can make him a commersial entity
Freemen will then often chose methods so as to not to be allowed to be converted into a person and then into a commesail entity

The Judges will try every trick possible not to say civil
Sorry the Hybrid trick wont wash is my info and shows hows desperate the Judges in ireland running a British legal system are to keep the curtian closed on the magic man behind the curtian in the yellow brick road

Admiralty law is clearly the major theme in the British law which Ireland follows .The victim is in the DOCK which isbehind the rails which is where the ships rails are and the judge is captian of that ship .The victim has been dragged of the high seas (from his house usualy ) and as wayward ship who did something wrong like park on double yellow lines ( he is kept in the dock ) until the restitution is delivered (eg he pays the fine or the time in prision ) The time in prision is classed as the safest place for salvage (the victim is merely salvage from the high seas ) and the cell (battery cell ) extracts energy from the victim( the energy is classed as haviing value in luie of inabilty to pay the fines or replacement of damage the Judge believes has been done )

The original laws were common law and for the high seas Admiralty law.Then they said well ships dont just use docks on the coast they use docks inland using canals . Admiralty law got spread inland along these routes .Then they said the docks in the city were with warehouses all over the city so the city must be Admiralty law.Eventulay all in the land roads houses the lot became Admiralty law.
However the judges can start cases in ireland under local BAR(British accredited Registery ) bye laws if they want and they often do .At any time they can switch to Admiralty law if the case is commercail or to common law if the case is criminal
The abuse of BAR Bye laws allow Judges to steer a way where they can make the case say its criminal be judged under Admiralty law civil laws rules where they can deliver weird and wonderful results they cant so easily do if the case is common law .
Under Admiralty law the victim is essentialy quity until he proves himself not guilty .Under common law the victim is innocent until proved guilty .The judges tend to prefer Admiralty law as they have the victim over a barrel . So judges can at any time swich between the Admiralty law BAR bye laws and common law without saying they have and change the goal posts whoile the game is in progress so to speak .They donmt call the Brits devious for nmothing and ensuring Ireland kept the British legal ssytem meant we are still effectivly part of England except we just fly a different flag but the Irish Judges are only awnserable to the BAR or the QUEEN of England

Ralf

Even a slim understanding of History and Language, would show up the above as being just wrong.

The Bar comes from the fact in times past the judge sat behind a rail, something like the rail in front of an altar. Lots of the trappings of court come from the time that church courts where as powerful as lay courts. So when a persons wanted his case heard he was called to the bar to address the judge. Over time lawyers began to act for persons hence the term called to the bar.

The training of Barristers in Ireland and the UK are done in Inns, the reason for this is that an older barrister in the past offered his wisdom to younger men who wished to practice law, in guess where an inn. Over time as the profession grew the tradition was kept in the names, and customs.

The word Dock, it is believed comes from the Dutch word Dok, which means cage, as the accused would have been in custody when he was in the dock.

The constant use of the term admiralty law, shows a total lack of any knowledge of the facts. In the 1870's with the passing of the Judicature Acts, which fused the disparate legal systems, including Admiralty in to one single legal system, while for example Equity and Admiralty remained in the legal principles in practice there was only one unified legal system.

The biggest problem with the Freeman stuff is that their historical view of the law is factually incorrect.

Freeman Megamerge

Comments