longdog
What is it you can't face?
ANOTHER FREEMAN VICTORY!!
ANOTHER FREEMAN VICTORY!!
ANOTHER FREEMAN VICTORY!!
how manys acts and statutes are there active altogether?
- Thread starter bopalot
- Start date
ANOTHER FREEMAN VICTORY!!
ANOTHER FREEMAN VICTORY!!
ANOTHER FREEMAN VICTORY!!
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Although the OP is clearly an idiot and a conspiraloon, it gives me no pleasure to say that after watching that video all the way through I am convinced he's bound for a holiday at her majesty's pleasure. He's openly admitted to cultivating the plants and even said he was doing so with the intention of selling them.
This is why you should always get a solicitor bopalot
This is why you should always get a solicitor bopalot
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
yeah I'm afraid chokey becons more than likely. Its not just admitting you grew with intent to supply, its also trying to get out of it using a load of cobblers.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
With these situations I always wish I could go back in time to just before the hearing and ask these people what they think is gonna happen. Do they really expect a magistrate to say, 'well, had you stood up when I walked in I'd have had the authority to pass judgement but as you didn't I have no choice but to dismiss the case.'
It must be nice to live in that world. At least until the real world comes along to remind you that sorry, you don't.
It must be nice to live in that world. At least until the real world comes along to remind you that sorry, you don't.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
OK now I get it. For a minute there I thought these people were just making everything up as they went along.
Is 'joinder' actually a word? Is it like a straight version of Grindr or something?
longdog
What is it you can't face?
Joinder is a word it just doesn't mean what the FMOTLers think it does.
Large swathes of the footler woo depend on their defining words to mean something they don't mean or their insistence that a word carries one meaning in law when quite clearly it is a different meaning which applies.
I have seen these idiots attempting to argue that the meaning of the word "Traffic" in "The Road Traffic Act" is "to deal in something" (or words to that effect) which means of course that it only applies to people acting 'in commerce' and as long as you are acting in a private capacity the act doesn't apply to you. Obviously the word "Traffic" means "Vehicles moving on a highway" but that doesn't give you an excuse to avoid paying for a licence, insurance, MOT or tax... You don't even have to display a registration plate. Of course The Road Traffic Act could be called The Sticky Buns And Lashings And Lashings Of Ginger Beer Act for all the difference it would make to the provisions of the act itself but that's a concept far too complex for a freeman to grasp.
There are countless examples of pointless and ridiculous word-games amongst the footlers...
Driving a car? No... that would mean a licence, registration, MOT, insurance and tax... I'm travelling in a private conveyance.
Any law that says "any person who does X is guilty of an offence" giving you a problem? Don't panic... If you look in the dictionary you'll see that the word 'person' includes legal fictions like corporations having legal personhood. The word 'includes' doesn't mean what you think it does... Well it does but under the secret legal definition they will use in court 'includes' means 'is only'. Needless to say this has never worked.
Large swathes of the footler woo depend on their defining words to mean something they don't mean or their insistence that a word carries one meaning in law when quite clearly it is a different meaning which applies.
I have seen these idiots attempting to argue that the meaning of the word "Traffic" in "The Road Traffic Act" is "to deal in something" (or words to that effect) which means of course that it only applies to people acting 'in commerce' and as long as you are acting in a private capacity the act doesn't apply to you. Obviously the word "Traffic" means "Vehicles moving on a highway" but that doesn't give you an excuse to avoid paying for a licence, insurance, MOT or tax... You don't even have to display a registration plate. Of course The Road Traffic Act could be called The Sticky Buns And Lashings And Lashings Of Ginger Beer Act for all the difference it would make to the provisions of the act itself but that's a concept far too complex for a freeman to grasp.
There are countless examples of pointless and ridiculous word-games amongst the footlers...
Driving a car? No... that would mean a licence, registration, MOT, insurance and tax... I'm travelling in a private conveyance.
Any law that says "any person who does X is guilty of an offence" giving you a problem? Don't panic... If you look in the dictionary you'll see that the word 'person' includes legal fictions like corporations having legal personhood. The word 'includes' doesn't mean what you think it does... Well it does but under the secret legal definition they will use in court 'includes' means 'is only'. Needless to say this has never worked.
Last edited:
8ball
Decolonise colons!
ANOTHER FREEMAN VICTORY!!
ANOTHER FREEMAN VICTORY!!
ANOTHER FREEMAN VICTORY!!
Fuck, yeah.
Corax
Luke 5:16
I fucking enjoyed that. Utter idiocy, but fab entertainment.
ETA: I saw mention of "court videos" later in the thread - are there more?
Last edited:
longdog
What is it you can't face?
longdog
What is it you can't face?
This is gratuitously stolen from a fellow 'sceptic' on YouTube discussing Dave of the family Murphy and his disastrous attempts to employ the freeman woo...
. . . and yet time and time and time and time again you see it in videos, some idiot who bought a Black's Law Dictionary and watched a couple of dozen Youtube videos while stoned / drunk arrives at the idea that they are a keen and insightful legal mind who has uncovered a dark plot at the heart of our society - and when, quite reasonably, challenged for reversing up the pavement at 30mph in their car outside JD Sports, in the high-street, they employ this newly acquired and devastatingly powerful 'insight' to 'own' the legal system by stringing together a few dozen legal buzz words into a kind of fantasy legal word-salad.
Officer: "I couldn't help notice you were doing around 30mph as you reversed up the pavement"
Dave: "Are you acting in accordance with your 'oats' today officer"
Officer: "My oats"
Dave: "Yeah, that's what it said on the Youtube video, it said to ask them if they were acting in accordance with their oats"
Officer: "Ok, yeah, so, could you switch the motor of your car off please"
Dave: "What do you mean 'your car', who says it is my car, who say it is even a 'car'"
Officer: [quietly to himself] 'oh, fuck, not one of these knobs, why me'
Dave: "Do you have proof I have such a thing as a car, this is a "conveyance perambulator"
Officer: "Sorry, but what the fuck are you on about"
Dave: "Have you not read Sir Henry Dickson's Victorian legal dictionary of 1896 ?"
Officer: "No, can you turn off the motor and get out of the car please".
Dave: "But you haven't asked me my name . . . . "
Officer: "WTF ?"
Dave: "But you haven't asked me my name, I've got a whole routine where I 'educate' you about the 'truth' that names are an illegitimate imposition forced on the masses by secret cabal of evil lawyers"
Officer: "oh, for fuck's sake . . . ok, what's your name ?"
Dave: "What makes you think I have such a thing as a 'name' "
Officer: "Ok, just get out of the fucking car"
Dave: "You mean 'conveyance perambulator'"
Officer: "Oh for fuck's sake, yes, just get out of the 'conveyance perambulator'"
Dave: "What makes you think I have such a thing as a 'conveyance perambulator' "
Officer: "Oh, Christ give me strength"
Dave: "If I get out I will charge you £10,000 an hour under my schedule of fees"
Officer: "yeah, whatever"
Dave: "Are you agreeing to my schedule of fees, I am recording this on video you know".
Officer: "yeah, yeah, whatever"
. . . . . . . 5 months later . . .
Judge: "So you were doing 30mph on a public pavement, where people were clearly walking"
Dave: "But the Road Traffic Act is just an act, it needs my consent and I don't consent to it so it doesn't apply to me and you owe me £18,000 for my time under the terms of my schedule of fees and my name isn't Dave, well actually it is Dave, but it's not mine, it's owned by the Queen or something like that"
Judge: "6 months, sentence starting immediately"
Dave: "But what about my £18,000?"
Judge (moves on the next case), Dave is dragged away shouting "another Freeman victory ! another Freeman victory !"
. . . and yet time and time and time and time again you see it in videos, some idiot who bought a Black's Law Dictionary and watched a couple of dozen Youtube videos while stoned / drunk arrives at the idea that they are a keen and insightful legal mind who has uncovered a dark plot at the heart of our society - and when, quite reasonably, challenged for reversing up the pavement at 30mph in their car outside JD Sports, in the high-street, they employ this newly acquired and devastatingly powerful 'insight' to 'own' the legal system by stringing together a few dozen legal buzz words into a kind of fantasy legal word-salad.
Officer: "I couldn't help notice you were doing around 30mph as you reversed up the pavement"
Dave: "Are you acting in accordance with your 'oats' today officer"
Officer: "My oats"
Dave: "Yeah, that's what it said on the Youtube video, it said to ask them if they were acting in accordance with their oats"
Officer: "Ok, yeah, so, could you switch the motor of your car off please"
Dave: "What do you mean 'your car', who says it is my car, who say it is even a 'car'"
Officer: [quietly to himself] 'oh, fuck, not one of these knobs, why me'
Dave: "Do you have proof I have such a thing as a car, this is a "conveyance perambulator"
Officer: "Sorry, but what the fuck are you on about"
Dave: "Have you not read Sir Henry Dickson's Victorian legal dictionary of 1896 ?"
Officer: "No, can you turn off the motor and get out of the car please".
Dave: "But you haven't asked me my name . . . . "
Officer: "WTF ?"
Dave: "But you haven't asked me my name, I've got a whole routine where I 'educate' you about the 'truth' that names are an illegitimate imposition forced on the masses by secret cabal of evil lawyers"
Officer: "oh, for fuck's sake . . . ok, what's your name ?"
Dave: "What makes you think I have such a thing as a 'name' "
Officer: "Ok, just get out of the fucking car"
Dave: "You mean 'conveyance perambulator'"
Officer: "Oh for fuck's sake, yes, just get out of the 'conveyance perambulator'"
Dave: "What makes you think I have such a thing as a 'conveyance perambulator' "
Officer: "Oh, Christ give me strength"
Dave: "If I get out I will charge you £10,000 an hour under my schedule of fees"
Officer: "yeah, whatever"
Dave: "Are you agreeing to my schedule of fees, I am recording this on video you know".
Officer: "yeah, yeah, whatever"
. . . . . . . 5 months later . . .
Judge: "So you were doing 30mph on a public pavement, where people were clearly walking"
Dave: "But the Road Traffic Act is just an act, it needs my consent and I don't consent to it so it doesn't apply to me and you owe me £18,000 for my time under the terms of my schedule of fees and my name isn't Dave, well actually it is Dave, but it's not mine, it's owned by the Queen or something like that"
Judge: "6 months, sentence starting immediately"
Dave: "But what about my £18,000?"
Judge (moves on the next case), Dave is dragged away shouting "another Freeman victory ! another Freeman victory !"
free spirit
more tea vicar?
The other angle on this being, if any of this was even vaguely true, then you can be damn sure that some extremely expensive lawyer would have discovered the angle and be using it successfully to get their high paying clients off the hook.
The fact that this isn't happening pretty much proves that it's a load of bollocks, as these lawyers will use every trick in the book to keep their clients out of jail, and their clients would switch lawyers at the merest sniff of a possibility that they were missing a trick like this.
The fact that this isn't happening pretty much proves that it's a load of bollocks, as these lawyers will use every trick in the book to keep their clients out of jail, and their clients would switch lawyers at the merest sniff of a possibility that they were missing a trick like this.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
My favourite is the one from the US where the loon tries to enter the court and gets tasered by the security guard. A harsh but succint lesson.
N_igma
Epistemic nuisance
I notice the Thomas the Tank Engine photo in the background is pulling a 'WTF???' face.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
A freeman has been sent down for secretly filming court cases. If anything I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often, what with their habit of smugly posting 'secret' footage of their jurisprudential exploits on the net for all to see.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...acking-campaigner-steven-peers-jailed-9193286
Amazingly, the defendant was unable to quibble his way out of the charge. This bloke Steven Peers showed up greater manchester plod last year when he was arrested for drink driving despite being sober and not having access to a car, and then arrested again for impersonating a police officer because he was wearing a pig mask. Looks like they've got their revenge now.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...acking-campaigner-steven-peers-jailed-9193286
Amazingly, the defendant was unable to quibble his way out of the charge. This bloke Steven Peers showed up greater manchester plod last year when he was arrested for drink driving despite being sober and not having access to a car, and then arrested again for impersonating a police officer because he was wearing a pig mask. Looks like they've got their revenge now.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
