http://m.spokesman.com/stories/2012/aug ... am-stando/Two men part of a growing “sovereign” movement that questions government authority were arrested in Otis Orchards today after a SWAT team standoff.
The men had pulled over at North Starr Road and East Kildea Road for deputies investigating invalid license plates on their truck but refused to exit the vehicle, said Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich.
The truck was covered in sovereign citizen signs, including one that said it was a “noncommercial private vehicle” and “no trespassing.”
Sov v SWAT
Moderators: Prof, Judge Roy Bean
-
- Grand Exalted Keeper of Esoterica
- Posts: 5773
- Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:11 pm
Sov v SWAT
Demo.
-
- A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
- Posts: 13806
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm
Re: Sov v SWAT
Kind of a not gonna win situation for the reality challenged. Kind of gives the taking a butter knife to a gunfight thing a whole new meaning.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
-
- Cannoneer
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:39 pm
- Location: I was turned loose somewhere in the middle of Montana
Re: Sov v SWAT
This isn't all that far from where I am. This part of the U.S. has lots of disaffected individuals, and that's the kindest way I can put it, who aren't much different from these two. They can be dangerous, but most are all talk. It's hard to tell which is which sometimes. Looks like these two were the talker types and that's good for everyone else involved.
-
- Grand Exalted Keeper of Esoterica
- Posts: 5773
- Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:11 pm
Re: Sov v SWAT
http://www.kxly.com/news/spokane-news/S ... index.html
Michael Hicks, who was not compliant, will be held on $10,000 bond and will be sent to Eastern State Hospital to be evaluated to determine if he's mentally fit to answer questions in court.
Hicks also refused a public defender, saying no one understands the "common law" he follows; the judge appointed him one anyway.
Hicks' wife and son said after the court hearing that they agree with him. As for David Galland, who complied in court, they said he did not follow Hicks' advice of not complying.
Galland, who the family identified as a sovereign citizen as well, receives $700 a month in state assistance.
Demo.
-
- Conde de Quatloo
- Posts: 5631
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:08 am
- Location: Der Dachshundbünker
Re: Sov v SWAT
Now just a damn minute. I'm almost positive that to get these benefits he had to go to some government agency and fill out some paperwork. How could he do that while at the same time not recognizing the government?Galland, who the family identified as a sovereign citizen as well, receives $700 a month in state assistance.
Although I think it's sweet irony that the one who didn't "follow his advice"in court got released on OR bond, the one "standing up for his rights" got sent to a mental ward.
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
-
- Warder of the Quatloosian Gibbet
- Posts: 1206
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:43 pm
Re: Sov v SWAT
I guess he recognized his desire for free money.