Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument

[gtm]

@ Mowe.

I'm glad you mentioned O'Collins & UCADIA. He's definitely one of the strangest (& creepiest) OPCA gurus.

Here's a bizarre page from his enormous suite of web sites where he claims to have transformed Heinrich Himmler (amongst others) into a saint.

http://one-evil.org/content/people_20c_himmler.html

O'Collins has little time for poor old William Shakespeare either. He also is one of the most evil men in history!

http://one-evil.org/content/people_16c_shakespeare.html

This is seriously strange stuff but he has managed to attract a modest following & he is sending them into court with his esoteric legal theories. Needless to say O'Collins solicits cash from his deluded bretheren.

http://one-heaven.org/donate/

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

I'm glad you mentioned O'Collins & UCADIA. He's definitely one of the strangest (& creepiest) OPCA gurus.

...

This is seriously strange stuff but he has managed to attract a modest following & he is sending them into court with his esoteric legal theories. Needless to say O'Collins solicits cash from his deluded bretheren. ...

Full agreement that Frank stands out as a total weirdo in a league of total weirdos!

I periodically start to prod at the massive array of UCADIA materials and say to myself ... I really probably should dig into this and make some attempt to understand just what is going on here. Then I become distracted by something shiney and Freemanish, and scamper off to play.

It appears you have taken some time to study this particular oddity. I know I would very much appreciate any digest and review you could offer on the subject - I think Quatloos could benefit from a dedicated UCADIA thread!

It's sort of analogous to any decent botanical garden having specimen of Amorphophallus titanum stuck in a corner, somewhere.

SMS Möwe

[gtm]

I agree. Frank & UCADIA certainly deserve their own thread. A guru of Franks mind boggling ambition & vanity deserves nothing less.

I'll get the ball rolling at some point in the next week or so. In the meantime here's something to whet the appetite.

http://themoralanimal.wordpress.com/201 ... -internet/

A pretty decent overview of UCADIA. However the author doesn't address the OPCA side to Frank & his works.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

... I'll get the ball rolling at some point in the next week or so. In the meantime here's something to whet the appetite.

http://themoralanimal.wordpress.com/201 ... -internet/

A pretty decent overview of UCADIA. However the author doesn't address the OPCA side to Frank & his works.

This is a marvelous little find - thank you gtm. The author 'gets it', on way too many levels. He captures, precisely, the very same sense of awe I experience when I first encounter a packet of hideously baroque and ornamented, but novel, documents 'deposited' by a Freeman / Sovereign.

Except, of course, UCADIA is a wee bit larger...

SMS Möwe

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

A major development in relation to Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571.

On Monday the Quebec Court of Appeal released a decision in which the court refused to hear an appeal and awarded costs against the appellant:

• Minicozzi c. Royal Bank of Canada, 2013 QCCA 1722: http://canlii.ca/t/g0x2f

This is an appeal of a French language decision (Banque Royale du Canada c. Minicozzi, 2013 QCCQ 6566: http://canlii.ca/t/fzlg1) which I think describes an attempt to collect an outstanding credit card debt. Minicozzi demanded the bank produce an original contract, but the court said an electronic alternative was fine: para. 21. The fractional banking sovereign argument also seems to have been deployed, along with an argument that the loan was not a valid bill of exchange / consumer note: paras. 23-24. An argument that debtors could escape via renouncing their "person" was rejected - a human being is also a legal person and that cannot be renounced or waived: para. 28-29.

Justice Breault observed that while Meads v. Meads is not decided in a civil law forum, the decision is a useful resource in Quebec to provide context and help understand OPCA schemes.

Minicozzi appealed. And this is what the Quebec Court of Appeal had to say:

[1] Assuming without deciding that the inscription in appeal has been filed in a timely manner and that there is no irregularity in the bringing of the appeal, the appeal should nevertheless be dismissed as it has no reasonable chance of success (see paragraph 6 of the respondent's motion to dismiss).

[2] The trial judge cited Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 (CanLII), 2012 ABQB 571 in dismissing the debtors' defence as based on a "organized pseudo-legal commercial argument". The judge also explained, in detail, why the absence of an original of the contract was not fatal to the claim, why the formalities of the Bills of Exchange Act are inapplicable in the circumstances and why the appellants' status as "human beings" does not shield them from the jurisdiction of the courts. The appellants have raised no plausible submission in their inscription in appeal to suggest the judge was mistaken. All of the remaining arguments on appeal are without foundation in law.

I believe this indicates that the Quebec Court of Appeal has endorsed the analysis and approach in Meads v. Meads. If so, then that decision is binding authority in all Quebec courts.

Just as a small note, I have tried to survey what is going on in Quebec on the Freeman / Sovereign front and hope to report in more detail in the future. The obstacle is that I'm pretty much unilingual, and the language in question is not French. As a preliminary comment my survey to date seems to indicate zero Freeman-on-the-Land presence in that province, but instead that Quebec PCA litigants have employed U.S.-style Sovereign arguments.

SMS Möwe

[JamesVincent]

In other words, the original judge told you that your arguments had no merit, based on an accepted legal precedent, and we see no reason to revisit that issue. And since you couldn't come up with anything new and original we're just gonna skip the appeal and get straight to the "no" part.

WINNING!

[Chados]

I'm putting Meads to the test in a U.S. state court at some point in the not-too-distant future. I've got the foreman of the local de jure citizens' fake grand jury on the docket and he's already filing the typical OPCA papers, trying to protect what he did. I'm sure we're going to be in some kind of a motion to dismiss the case at some point and when we are I'll trot Meads out among the authorities I'm relying on and let you all know if Rooke A.C.J. gets any local traction.

[Dai Kiwi]

Good luck to you. If Meads gets accepted in any form In the US as reference source it will make future cases interesting.

[notorial dissent]

Neat, do keep us posted, adn good luck with it.

[fortinbras]

Lexis does not show any mention of "Meads v. Meads" in a US court decisions for all of 2013.

[Lambkin]

The Economist has a brief summary of the freeloaders & OPCA
http://www.economist.com/news/americas/ ... aders-land