PLD Get's It's Ass Handed To It At Alberta's Queen's Bench

[Burnaby49]

Yes, early March. But if things keep progressing as they are in Britain she may not be able to find a flight then. I believe the Canadian government must take her back since she's a citizen but that's only if she shows up at the border. I can't see the government making much of an effort to get her transport.

[notorial dissent]

I would say from the sounds of things, Mz Phoenix may well have an extended stay in the UK, will she or nil she. Her main issue may be in how to get back, since there is no train between home and the UK, and flights may be problematic for a while.

[mikethrow]

Maybe she can put the airplanes on notice???

[Burnaby49]

My wife, who knows absolutely nothing about sovereigns or any of the other idiots I post about asked me if I'd heard of a woman called Jacquie Phoenix. Turned out that article was also in the Vancouver Sun, a paper I've subscribed to for over forty years. They still deliver, it's on the doorstep every morning before we get up. Sadly no photo of Jacquie.

[JamesVincent]

Sadly no photo of Jacquie.

Wouldn't that be a good thing?

[friendofafriend]

Update - the UK Human Rights blog has posted a follow-up note on the decision by Justice Graesser in MHVB and Jacqueline Robinson II by Canadian lawyer Richard Warman here: https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2020/12/2 ... -responds/.

Rosalind English of the UK Human Rights blog had previously posted a solid evaluation of MHVB and Jacqueline Robinson I here: https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2020/12/0 ... -the-land/

Little do the Brits know that in exchange for starting the Article 61 Magna Carta nonsense, they've got Jacquie Phoenix as a boomerang gift. Imagine the Hogmanay hangover.

[Burnaby49]

Keep in mind that Richard Warman has a burning personal interest in all this. Jacquie's got him square in her sights and when Judge Graesser finally faces true common law PLD justice and is up on the gibbet Richard will be at the foot waiting his turn. You challenge the invincible immortal power of Article 61 at your peril! Remember, it can never be repealed even if it already was about 800 years ago.

[notorial dissent]

I forget, do they hang you or burn you at the stake for high treason up in Canada, since I suspect drawing and quartering would be a bit messy and work intensive for most of your sovereinidjit types?

[Burnaby49]

Let's not get too bloodthirsty here, leave that to Jacquie once she's in power. Canada isn't really all that big on treason as a rule. We do have it in the Criminal Code;

High treason

46 (1) Every one commits high treason who, in Canada,

(a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty, or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her;

(b) levies war against Canada or does any act preparatory thereto; or

(c) assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.

(2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,

(a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;

(b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;

(c) conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);

(d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or

(e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.

(3) Notwithstanding subsection (1) or (2), a Canadian citizen or a person who owes allegiance to Her Majesty in right of Canada,

(a) commits high treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in subsection (1); or

(b) commits treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in subsection (2).

(4) Where it is treason to conspire with any person, the act of conspiring is an overt act of treason.

but I'm not aware that it has ever been applied here. Jacquie wants to change that and start the gallows humming again but her Article 61 obsession is really reverting back to British law although they no longer have the death penalty either.

The last one the brits gave the drop to was William Joyce, who you might recognize by his mocking nickname Lord Haw-Haw. He was hung for treason in 1946 but in my opinion that was just a legalized lynching. You can only commit treason against your own country but he was never a British citizen, He was a naturalized American born in the Republic of Ireland. But since the British wanted him dead they pretended he was a citizen anyhow. As wikipedia puts it;

Joyce was captured by British forces in northern Germany just as the war ended,[22] tried, and eventually hanged for treason on 3 January 1946.[23] Joyce's defence team, appointed by the court, argued that, as an American citizen and naturalised German, Joyce could not be convicted of treason against the British Crown. However, the prosecution successfully argued that, since he had lied about his nationality to obtain a British passport and voted in Britain, Joyce owed allegiance to the king.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Haw-Haw

So, since they couldn't hang him for treason against the Crown as a British citizen, he was hung for the apparent capital offense of lying on his passport application.

Interestingly enough, to bring the topic back to Canada, Britain could have quite legally executed Joyce for treason had he been born in Canada, never set foot in Britain, or had any connection to it whatever. Legally he wouldn't have been a Canadian citizen because nobody in Canada was a Canadian citizen, we were all British. There were no Canadian citizens until 1947, just two years before I was born. Up until then we were legally only British subjects even though we were theoretically an independent nation. Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King (he insisted on using his full name) had the Canadian Citizenship Act, 1946, legislated effective January 1, 1947.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_ ... _Act,_1946

Only then did Canadian citizenship exist. King had two goals, to be the longest-serving prime minister of any Commonwealth country and to be Canada's first citizen and he stayed prime minister until he'd attained both.

So Joyce, had he been born here, would have been a British subject and fallen foursquare into their treason laws. But since the Americans, his actual nationality, weren't interested in prosecuting him, the Brits decided to string him up anyhow.

[notorial dissent]

Silly me, but I just have a hard time putting "treason" and "committed by a Canadian" in the same sentence. Just one of those things.

Of course, on the other hand sovcits/PLD'ers have their own definition(s) of what constitutes "treason" so further dilemma.

[eric]

Being charged for treason is so rare in Canada that it is understandable that many people don't think the offence exists. In fact since 1885 the charge has only been used once.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanao_Inouye
A pretty nasty piece of work. He beat his war criminal charges because he was a Canadian citizen at the time. The only other charge that was of sufficient gravity and allowed the death penalty was treason so treason it was.

[JamesVincent]

Treason, to many Sovs, could mean driving on the wrong side of the road (I'm looking at you England). Well, that may be an exaggeration but still. It's treason to take away a sovs kids, treason to stop him/her from driving with no tags, treason to require a driver's license, treason to charge him/her with a crime they have committed and so on so just because you haven't heard of a Canadian being charged with it doesn't mean they haven't done it.

[noblepa]

Treason, to many Sovs, could mean driving on the wrong side of the road (I'm looking at you England). Well, that may be an exaggeration but still. It's treason to take away a sovs kids, treason to stop him/her from driving with no tags, treason to require a driver's license, treason to charge him/her with a crime they have committed and so on so just because you haven't heard of a Canadian being charged with it doesn't mean they haven't done it.

Treason is anything a sovcit doesn't like. Everyone knows that.

I think that, in most sane societies, treason, if the crime even exists, is extremely rarely charged and extremely difficult to prove.

In the US, I believe that there have only been something like 13 convictions for treason in the entire history of the republic. I looked it up once, but I lost the reference. IIRC, most of those occurred early in the nineteenth century.

Even the famous case of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, in the fifties, was not a treason case. They were charged with espionage, not treason. They were accused of passing secrets about the US nuclear weapons program to the Soviet Union. Some people believe they were completely innocent, but the point is that the government didn't even try for a treason conviction.

A lot of people are throwing the term around now, with the election lawsuits, but, even if their accusations were true, the so-called "election fraud" would not constitute treason.

Treason is the only crime that is defined in the US Constitution. I think that is because the framers knew that, in Europe, it was a favorite tactic to charge one's political opponents with treason for the simple act of disagreeing with the sovereign.

[eric]

Kanao Inouye, who I mentioned above, could have been charged with various other offences, including murder, that carried the death penalty. However Canada wanted to make an example of him so they picked treason since they couldn't make "crimes against humanity" charges stick because he was technically a Canadian citizen in the employ of a foreign belligerent.
edit to add: Inouye was a very nasty character and if you ever saw the results of his work you would understand the rationale for the charges. Some witnesses were unable to testify because they were considered mentally unfit.

[grixit]

Treason is anything a sovcit doesn't like. Everyone knows that.

I think that, in most sane societies, treason, if the crime even exists, is extremely rarely charged and extremely difficult to prove.

In the US, I believe that there have only been something like 13 convictions for treason in the entire history of the republic. I looked it up once, but I lost the reference. IIRC, most of those occurred early in the nineteenth century.

The US was, after all, founded on an act of treason. That makes it kind of hypocritical to be throwing the term about.

[notorial dissent]

I have to go with noblepa on this, that pretty well fits the sovcit vocabulary. They seem to have latched on to that and pedophile when they can't come up with anything else to claim about an individual of act, where it used to be socialist or communist, which I do see pop up every now and again.

[noblepa]

Treason is anything a sovcit doesn't like. Everyone knows that.

I think that, in most sane societies, treason, if the crime even exists, is extremely rarely charged and extremely difficult to prove.

In the US, I believe that there have only been something like 13 convictions for treason in the entire history of the republic. I looked it up once, but I lost the reference. IIRC, most of those occurred early in the nineteenth century.

The US was, after all, founded on an act of treason. That makes it kind of hypocritical to be throwing the term about.

Of course, you are right. The American Revolution was absolutely a case of treason.

But, as the old saying goes, the winners get to write the history.

And, I also realize that the Americans didn't actually defeat the most powerful nation (at the time) on earth. From what I have read, the war became increasingly unpopular at home, and too expensive. Had they really wanted to, the British could have absolutely crushed George Washington's army.

They did give it another try in 1812. For that, we must thank our British friends. It is that war that gave us our national anthem, "The Star Spangled Banner".

[Pottapaug1938]

Here, in New England, the War of 1812 was so unpopular that a convention was convened, in Hartford in 1814, to consider secession. President Madison ordered loyal militias to stand by, on New York's eastern border.

My favorite story, from that war, has to do with Calais, Massachusetts (it didn't become Maine until 1820 -- and it's pronounced CAL-lus). One Fourth of July, it was short of gunpowder, without which the holiday could not be properly celebrated. "No problem," said the people of St. Stephen, New Brunswick -- enemy territory, if you want to be picky about it. "We'll lend you some gunpowder." The gunpowder was duly lent, and duly repaid when new supplies became available.

[Burnaby49]

Jacquie hasn't been posting much on either her own FB page or the various Practical Lawful Dissent pages however yesterday she posted this on her personal page;

I do NOT consent to unlawful laws imposed by an unlawful government. I Must be Allowed to Travel Freely Without Hinderance (sic).

Is she getting a bit concerned about being allowed back into Canada because of recent Covid developments?

[Pottapaug1938]

Jacquie hasn't been posting much on either her own FB page or the various Practical Lawful Dissent pages however yesterday she posted this on her personal page;

I do NOT consent to unlawful laws imposed by an unlawful government. I Must be Allowed to Travel Freely Without Hinderance (sic).

Is she getting a bit concerned about being allowed back into Canada because of recent Covid developments?

As Judge Judy might say, "you ate the steak, Jacquie; so you have to pay for it. You ate the steak in the restaurant; so you consented to the rules under which the restaurant operates."