First is the conviction of Cyril John Vibert in the Jersey Magistrate’s Court Appeal on a number of traffic parking offences. He apparently refuses to buy parking tickets. This case is from the UK channel island of Jersey. Prior to identifying this case I was unaware that both Jersey and Guernsey each maintains a full and separate court apparatus – one would think they’d be willing to share - but apparently not!
The final appeal case in the series is:
- Vibert-v-AG, [2013] UR 030: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2013/030.html
- Vibert-v-AG, [2012] UR 237: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2012/237.html
(Technical question of mixed appeals.)
Vibert-v-AG, [2012] UR 181: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2012/181.html
(Appeal of conviction for parking tickets, Vibert argues against jurisdiction of the state as it is a corporation, he is not employed by that corporation (para. 11), and the magistrate was biased as being appointed and paid by the state (para. 38.)
There are a number of appeal grounds, most of which are quickly dismissed. For example:
- a criminal offence does not need a victim (para. 20);
the judicial conflict of interest argument was rejected as a basis for bias, citing UK appellate authority (para. 26);
that the Magistrate could not enter a plea of not guilty because Cyril refused to consent to take that step (para. 34); and
that statute only applies if you consent to it:
The only real appeal issue of substance, and what clued me into this line of cases, was the question of whether Cyril had been treated unfairly when the trial Magistrate referred to Cyril as a “Freeman-on-the-Land”, when Cyril had not self-identified as that (paras. 41-44). This led the Jersey court to refer to the Canadian Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 case as providing characteristics and arguments of related groups of vexatious litigants who adopt a common set of pseudolegal arguments and incorrect beliefs. Whatever Cyril called himself, he had advanced OPCA-type schemes. Ergo, the trial Magistrate was not incorrect to lump him in with other like-minded individuals.39. In his oral submissions to us, the appellant asserted that a statute only applies to those who consent to it. He did not consent and therefore legislation passed by the States did not bind him. He developed this by saying that members of the States were servants of the public and that a servant cannot bind his master.
40. This submission is of course completely nonsensical in law. In Jersey, as in the United Kingdom, law comes from two sources. First there is the customary law developed over the years by the courts; and secondly there is legislation passed by the States. Both types of law are binding upon everyone without exception. Indeed, legislation is in one sense a higher form of law because the States may by legislation amend the customary law whereas the customary law may not amend legislation. A statute passed by the States is binding upon everyone, including the appellant; questions of consent simply do not arise.
The appeal court closes with this discretely worded warning at para. 47:
With a bit of poking around I found out more about Cyril and his cohorts. Cyril is surprisingly calm in this interview that appears to have been filmed prior to the final appeal decision. We have the usual admiralty law vs common-law concepts, the alleged lack of state jurisdiction, and that an offence must involve harm to be legitimate:Turning to sentence, the Assistant Magistrate was entitled to take into account the appellant’s previous conduct as described in this judgment. We have no doubt that the sentence of seven days imprisonment for each count was entirely reasonable; indeed it could have been longer without risk of being overturned on appeal. We therefore also dismiss the appeal against sentence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBR58YFmqdA
While Cyril seems rather restrained, that can’t be said for one of his fellow travelers, an Ian Evans. In his blog he describes himself this way:
The blog, entitled “The Right of Reply”, has extensive and … um? … unique? reporting on Cyril’s activities? Suffice to say, Mr. Evans really likes photoshopping foreign faces on to other bodies, human or otherwise. Really. Really a lot.I am a carpet fitter who came to Jersey in 1988. I have been persecuted incessantly by the police and judiciary since my arrival. reason being I am big, ugly, speak my mind and my face does not fit as I will not be controlled, by anyone. It is hard to imagine a place like this outside of Zimbabwee, but here we are, the good old Channel Islands. A haven for inbred child abuser's and corrupt thieves. So we fight against this vile regime with all our might, and we will overcome, as Jersey's leaders will eventually drown in, and choke on, their own filth. No Retreat, No Surrender!!!................................. "If a man lives, it is of certainty he will die. Therefore, it is foolish to think of death as if he were a foe to be vanquished. He will come when he will come."
http://therightofreply.blogspot.com/201 ... straw.html [This one includes a recording of one of Cyril’s in-court appearances - we have the usual Freemanish motifs on display, such as he does “not understand” (ie. “stand under the court”), he wants to bill the court, etc.]
http://therightofreply.blogspot.com/201 ... rt-to.html
http://therightofreply.blogspot.com/201 ... s-are.html
http://therightofreply.blogspot.com/201 ... legal.html
http://therightofreply.blogspot.com/201 ... itive.html
http://therightofreply.blogspot.com/201 ... cyril.html
Ian’s blog is chock full of interesting stuff, including tales of his ‘interactions’ with authorities. Some 'interactions' involve alcohol.
Jersey politics and society seem quite unique. And here I thought the only reason to visit were the coastal fortifications. Gosh I love those observation towers.
SMS Möwe