tm169 - Up the Congo and into the Heart of Dumbness

[tm169]

Thanks Möwe

Still in early days yet and a bit rough round the edges. Hope to expand it over the next few weeks and tidy up some of the posts.

Trying to get an English point of view as slightly less represented. Any suggestions for future posts are heartily welcomed.

[gtm]

I tried doing this on the David Icke forum a number of years ago. It's now moribund but in those days such FMOTL luminaries as Robert Menard & the late Mary Gye were regular posters. Needless to day my efforts were pretty pointless although a few of them sent me PM's asking for 'real' legal assistance.

I think tm169 should be commended for his efforts. There's a slim chance someone might think twice before commiting legal Sepukku.

[gtm]

Thanks Möwe

Trying to get an English point of view as slightly less represented. Any suggestions for future posts are heartily welcomed.

You might want to profile some of the UK based gurus - John Harris, Ray St Clair, Veronica Chapman, Roger Hayes & the British Constitution Group etc.

[tm169]

Thanks gtm.

I know it is something of a waste of time but I enjoy it one some perverse level and I know for a fact I've saved a couple people from making huge and expensive mistakes.

Legal seppuku is an apt description although perhaps gives a undeserved sense of nobility!

I find it difficult to describe the sensation I experience daily on goodf when seeing someone is genuine hardship and / or with a bona fide defence throw it all away by naively following some nonsense theory.

[grixit]

Yeah, jumping in front of a freight train is not considered an elegant or respectable form of suicide.

[notorial dissent]

True, but it has the value of almost always being thorough and final, unless you are just totally inept that is.

[tm169]

Just a quick update from the crazy world of Getoutofdebtfree.org

The new flavour of the month is a mustachioed North American guru called Karl Lentz who essentially advocates "accessing" the Queens Bench Common law courts (apparently different to the QBD of the High Court). Lots of "I am a man" type stuff and "it's all in my paperwork" and magic sentences which win the case. Predictably he also sells a set of DVD lectures for £50. This represents a shift in goodf tone from the quasi-legal to the full pseudo-legal.

Anyway so far so goodf. There is however a difference between this and the other goodf gurus they jump on board for a couple of months.

Unlike other prior gurus this is fully endorsed by de facto head of goodf Mark "Ceylon" Haining as well as other "leading members". It's early days yet but I detect a potential schism in goodf dogma.

All members of goodf on some level are starting to have private doubts as to whether the "3 letter system" works in court. However the reaction to this varies.

On the one hand are the slightly more grounded members who have gradually moved away from goodf philosophy towards using more conventional statute law (albeit often incorrectly).

On the other are the members (including Ceylon himself) who disgruntled with the success of Ceylon's methods have lurched more towards the crazy. Increasing they advocate returning / ignoring court papers, using "thou" rather than "you", red thumb prints etc..

Goodf has always been (at least on the surface) one of the least crazy of the freeman sites. This move towards a more traditional brand of OPCA is surely in time going to put off many of goodf's traditional customer base: the naïve, distressed debtor who just wants a template letter to make the phone calls stop.

Ultimately I think this represents a shift in tone to a more radical North American style freeman movement.

[notorial dissent]

tm169, quite interesting, but I'm afraid you are going to have to provide some translation for those of us who only speak the King's English circa 1776.

I find the currentest cuckoo quite interesting, but am not familiar with some of the terms involved.

[rumpelstilzchen]

who essentially advocates "accessing" the Queens Bench Common law courts (apparently different to the QBD of the High Court).

Yes, I had a conversation with an English freeman about this. From what I could make out, although he would not be specific when pressed, is that the Queens Bench Common Law court is one of those courts that the freemen set up themselves. Is that your understanding too?

[tm169]

From what I could make out, although he would not be specific when pressed, is that the Queens Bench Common Law court is one of those courts that the freemen set up themselves. Is that your understanding too?

Well it depends who you ask. Some of the more radical goodf members are certainly in the mindset of "creating your own court in the paperwork" where the "plaintiff decrees the law" etc etc.

Karl Lentz and his followers seem to have a strange hybrid where he suggests the Queens Bench Court is "hidden in plain sight" within the actual building of the High Court in the Rcj in London.

In a recent interview (as transcribed by goodf) he confusing said the following:

Courts will not move your case to QB upon request. You must go to the Royal Courts of Justice YOURSELF and ask reception to see the Queen's Bench clerk from whom you should request a "treasure map". Clerk will know what you are talking about but will mock you. He/will initially respond with something like "Queens Bench Division is down the corridor on the left...". Say "No, Queen's Bench please" and you should be provided with instructions.

[tm169]

tm169, quite interesting, but I'm afraid you are going to have to provide some translation for those of us who only speak the King's English circa 1776.

I find the currentest cuckoo quite interesting, but am not familiar with some of the terms involved.

Umm happy to translate if required.

[grixit]

Hmm. According to the old rules, you say "you" to a single person in all formal situations. Except with God, but i think that's because he's everyone's friend. You say "thou" to close friends, family, small children (unless they have high ranking parents) and your social inferiors. To thou a judge, bailiff, lawyer, or clerk during a court session is a deliberate put down. However it is the proper form for a sovereign addressing a servant, albeit, that's only for actual reigning sovereigns, not sovs on the land.

However, since even courts that still use wigs have dropped the thou/you distinction, it only makes the user sound sillier.

[The Observer]

Karl Lentz and his followers seem to have a strange hybrid where he suggests the Queens Bench Court is "hidden in plain sight" within the actual building of the High Court in the Rcj in London.

This is starting to sound like those old legends of Prester John. Christians in the Middle Ages and Renaissance longed for a safe haven in the East where they could be safe from Islamic persecution, and thus the myth sprung up about the kingdom of Prester John, an Asian Christian king, who defended the Faith and followers of Christ. Of course there was no direct knowledge or location of where this place could exist, so any searching for it was a waste of time and resources.

Instead , this is a mythical court hidden within the "evil" court system, awaiting to do true justice, if only worthy and knowledgeable sovruns can complete the search for the Holy Grail of common law and approach the bench with the correct magical incantation.

[tm169]

Instead , this is a mythical court hidden within the "evil" court system, awaiting to do true justice, if only worthy and knowledgeable sovruns can complete the search for the Holy Grail of common law and approach the bench with the correct magical incantation.

Exactly. Also the closer it becomes to magic the harder it becomes to disprove. When goodf rely on statutes you can point to the wording of the statute to show they are wrong. When it comes to magic words it's well into the realms of being unfalsifiable. I guess that's why gurus like it. Any failure can be explained with "Ahh you must have used the wrong password when speaking to the clerk and you used red ink when you should have used burgundy. Buy my second set of DVDs to show you the true way to do it" Etc etc.

[Fmotlgroupie]

Courts will not move your case to QB upon request. You must go to the Royal Courts of Justice YOURSELF and ask reception to see the Queen's Bench clerk from whom you should request a "treasure map". Clerk will know what you are talking about but will mock you. He/will initially respond with something like "Queens Bench Division is down the corridor on the left...". Say "No, Queen's Bench please" and you should be provided with instructions.

Ok, this really really sounds like a prankster setting these guys up for a hilarious encounter with the clerk. "Just keep hitting your head against the wall until the matrix opens up." I just hope the poor clerks think its funny.

[grixit]

Don't forget to put the green paisley boxer shorts on your head before you go in.

[rumpelstilzchen]

In a recent interview (as transcribed by goodf) he confusing said the following:

Courts will not move your case to QB upon request. You must go to the Royal Courts of Justice YOURSELF and ask reception to see the Queen's Bench clerk from whom you should request a "treasure map". Clerk will know what you are talking about but will mock you. He/will initially respond with something like "Queens Bench Division is down the corridor on the left...". Say "No, Queen's Bench please" and you should be provided with instructions.

Did he really say that?
Oh my.... a treasure map.
"X" marks the spot and all that. Nice to see a hint of all things nautical.
I don't suppose anybody bothered to ask him how did he come by this super-secret knowledge?
I doubt the idiot has ever been inside the RCJ.

[GlimDropper]

Karl and his oyster shucking walrus mustache describing his own adventures with the Queen's Bench Court.

He has a built in excuse for why no one will ever find his Kommon Law Shangri La. If you show up at the court house today all you can find is the "Queen's Bench Division" but that isn't where Karl's magic works. You need the original "Court of Queen's Bench" which some claim was abolished in 1875. Karl sorta glossed over the entire time travel aspect of his court victory story in the above video. My favorite little twist, Karl's Kourt of Queens Bench does not use an apostrophe, so might be in New York.

The aspect of all of Karl's sales pitch I find almost pathological is how often he pretends to be able to help people get their children returned to them from various protective services. Not only is he abusing the trust and quite likely, pocketbooks of people who are emotionally vulnerable but likely also have underlying problems which lead to their children being removed from them in the first place.

But it's more egregious still because having the state take a child away from him is a pain that he's intimate with. I don't know the facts of the issue so offer only sympathy for the ordeal, but while he himself has never gotten the courts to give him his son back he presumes to charge people for his "lawful" advice in returning theirs.

[gtm]

The RCJ was a regular stamping ground of mine when I was a Trainee Solicitor. I know the place inside out. I even went to the fabled 'Bear Garden' to see a 'Master'. In all my time there I never happened upon the ' Queens Bench Common Law Court'. It sounds like Platform 9 3/4 from the Harry Potter books.

[The Observer]

The RCJ was a regular stamping ground of mine when I was a Trainee Solicitor. I know the place inside out. I even went to the fabled 'Bear Garden' to see a 'Master'. In all my time there I never happened upon the ' Queens Bench Common Law Court'. It sounds like Platform 9 3/4 from the Harry Potter books.

Perhaps we could hire someone to follow Karl around the next time he heads to court to see exactly where he goes to approach the QBCLC.