- WILLIAMSON -v- HODGSON [2010] WASC 95: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/wa/WASC/2010/95.html
Justice Mazza observed that this is not a basis to establish bias:Bias against me by Mr Malone, refused to accept my defence.
Other grounds were also argued in supporting materials. Harley wanted a trial by jury, when in fact none was available under law: para. 16. The Road Traffic Act is not contrary to “United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”: para. 20. You can’t secede from Australia: para. 39. The police are not a corporation because they have an Australian Business Number – those numbers are necessary for any entity involved in collection of tax: paras. 43-45.With respect to Mr Williamson this ground is misconceived. Judicial bias is not established merely by a refusal to accept a party's submission or defence.
And it seems that the trial magistrate had become a little testy, which Harley said was a basis for bias: paras. 26-36.
But that was rejected.31 His Honour attempted during the making of submissions to understand them and to point out the flaws in those submissions. He did so often in unambiguous language, calling some of Mr Williamson's submissions 'complete nonsense' and 'complete and utter nonsense'. In my opinion his Honour was entitled to indicate his views to Mr Williamson in firm terms.
32 There were a few occasions where the learned magistrate was sarcastic towards Mr Williamson. For example (ts 9), when Mr Williamson sought a trial by jury his Honour asked, 'Where are they, your peers, at the moment? Will you look up the Yellow Pages for your peers?' When Mr Williamson made the submission that he had seceded from Australia, his Honour said, 'You're Prince Leonard of Toodyay'.
33 With respect to his Honour, sarcasm is inconsistent with the judicial obligation to be respectful to litigants and should be avoided. However, I do not think that its use here indicated bias.
34 I accept that at times, but by no means all of the time, his Honour displayed less than perfect courtesy, patience and tolerance. For example, out of exasperation, I suspect, his Honour made the inappropriate comment shortly before sentencing Mr Williamson, 'I feel like giving you life imprisonment'.
A little later on we’ll have some evidence on just to what degree Harley can be an annoying jerk.
The next reported case is:
- MAXWELL (also known as HARLEY ROBERT WILLIAMSON ) -v- BRUSE [2012] WASC 12: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinod ... 12/12.html
At trial the magistrate agreed that Harley had no basis to seize the Toyota and found him guilty of car theft.
On appeal Harley advances a variety of arguments. One is that the theft was by a corporate entity, not him: para. 6. Nope:
His signature is somehow invalid: paras. 26-27. And then there’s a weird allegation that Harley was immune because of his ever mutable name:22 The appellant raised another argument which sought to draw some distinction between the natural person who was before the court and some other legal entity that utilised the name Harley Robert Williamson . He referred to this other entity as a 'corporate being' or an 'admiralty vessel'. These arguments were manifestly absurd and should not be dignified with detailed consideration. The magistrate came to the inevitable conclusion that the appellant was a natural person and was not capable of being a registered corporation. There was simply no basis for suggesting that the appellant was not liable for his acts because he was acting in some other capacity.
Again, nope: “There can be no doubt on the evidence that they are one and the same person.”: para. 21.19 At the commencement of the trial, leave was granted to the prosecution to amend the name on the prosecution notice from Harley Robert Williamson to Tumeke Robbie Maxwell. In support of this change, the prosecution tendered a number of documents which established that the appellant had been born on 18 September 1946 and had been registered with the name Robert Paul Bailey. He changed his name by licence on 30 November 2000 to Tumeke Robbie Maxwell. He subsequently changed his name again on 13 January 2006 to Harley Robert Williamson. A further licence document was produced showing that he changed his name back to Tumeke Robbie Maxwell on 1 May 2007.
And the court did not accept Harley’s argument that he had set up his own nation-state, the “Principality of Pentecost”: para. 24.
Appeal denied.
Harley’s latest adventure is documented in another 2012 decision:
- WILLIAMSON -v- THE BENDIGO ADELAIDE BANK LTD [2012] WASCA 208: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinod ... 2/208.html
No, that didn’t work. At trial Harley had explained his position:1. The Writs Number CIV 2361 that were issued out of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. They were served on the two Corporate Entities known as HARLEY ROBERT WILLIAMSON and TANGIWAI JACQUI MAXWELL Birth Certificate Numbers 4160/1946 and 1956112453 Respectively.
2. The Affiant Almando TORRE completed a sworn affidavit that He served the two Defendants known as Harley-Robert:Williamson© and Tangiwai-Jacqui:Maxwell©.
3. The two living moral,sentient, beings known as Harley-Robert:Williamson© and Tangiwai-Jacqui:Maxwell©. Were not the parties that were served personally.
4. The writs were laid on and served upon the two Birth Certificates. By the process server and were not given to the two Moral, Sentient, Beings aforementioned in Para 3.
….
11. The land was Seceded from the Commonwealth of Australia, by proclamation on the 14th of May 2006. Although not recognised as a Country by the Federal Government. It is however a legal Entity that is recognised by the Government, and having certain rights established in law. Having the same rights as the Hutt River Province.
12. Such as its right to coin its own money, print postage stamps, Promulgate it's own laws and issue Passports, lawfully. These rights have been recognised by the Federal Department of Territories and The Commissioner of Taxation.
13. The Principality of Pentecost as a lawful entity has Secured, as Bailee/Bailor, by filing of UCC1 Financing Statements The land as per Certificate of Title as well as the dwellings on the aforementioned land.
…
28. The Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Ltd is a signatory to American law such as the Patriot Act II. The Uniform Commercial Code is incorporated in the Patriot Act II. The Plaintiff clearly operates under American law and the Uniform Commercial Code in order to be able to trade commercially on an international basis.
75. The Defendants Birth Certificates are Admiralty Contracts which allow the Defendants the benefits allowed them to be paid to them via the Ceste Qui Trust.
...
78. The Secured Party's are Alien and are not members of the public but are Free Man and Woman, who are moral, freewill, sentient beings, of flesh and blood made in the image of God.
Appeal denied. A subsequent procedural decision does not add anything particularly interesting.… he claimed in oral submissions that he had paid moneys due to the respondent because he had 'done everything I possibly could in lawfully issuing money' and that '[j]ust because I use banking principles that not everybody knows about doesn't mean to say that I haven't paid' and that 'I'm entitled to act as a bank' (ts 6 - 7).
So, I had mentioned Harley is a handful. Have a look for yourself!
It seems that while Harley was yelling away one of his cohorts tried to grab a police officer’s pistol, while the other was found carrying a Taser: http://au.news.yahoo.com/queensland/a/- ... -in-court/
Frankly, I'm a little alarmed that court security would not have detected a weapon like that. No reports I could find on charges flowing from this courtroom incident.
Oh, the Principality of Pentecost? It’s a grand place!
Last, it appears Harley had set himself up as a guru: http://theprincipalityofpentecost.yolasite.com/
The Kingdom of the Great Southland! It sounds impressive:
Whether this website is incomplete or mothballed is not obvious; everything but the ‘landing’ page is locked out. A pity, one could just imagine the fine literature and audio-visual entertainment Harley might have provided.Welcome to THE KINGDOM OF THE GREAT SOUTH LAND tm. There are many sites regarding the Great South land. Only this site is the Real Mc Coy. What the others just theorize about this is the REAL Thing. Yes it is a Real Country consisting of Australia, Antarctica and New Zealand. It holds the Australian Constitution Lawfully and is recognized in International Law by the IMF under the Uniform Commercial Code. The name of 'THE GREAT SOUTH LAND' is Trademarked under Australian law and only Southlanders by right have exclusive use of the Name.
SMS Möwe