"Chief Rock Sino General" - Freeman guru-to-be?

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

Mr. Usher - welcome to Quatloos!

I very much appreciate your efforts to explain via the media the effect of OPCA litigation on public institutions, the courts, and to the persons foolish, desperate, or unfortunate enough to attempt to use these concepts. You and the Society of Notaries deserve recognition for taking this issue into the public forum in a way I believe is very helpful. The message definitely had an impact. For example, quite a number of my acquaintances mentioned to me your appearances on CBC Radio, discussion of this topic, and how that helped them better understand the Freeman-on-the-Land phenomenon.

Thank you - I wish other legal professional associations in Canada were as direct in their response, both inside and outside the courtroom.

I also look forward to developments in the B.C. Society of Notaries action. I too hope Chief Rock Sino General takes this opportunity to test his concepts in court. He seems very enthusiastic, at least in Internet forums.

SMS Möwe

[wserra]

Ron Usher: Two matters upon which my colleagues have already commented, and one upon which they have not.

(1) Welcome to Quatloos. We would certainly welcome information and comment from you, whether about ChiefDate or someone else's delusions and cons.

(2) I too doubt whether he will appear or otherwise answer, other than in a place such as this site or his own. Predicting what someone irrational will do, however, is a chancy enterprise.

(3) What's the "D" in "GC_SDNPBC" stand for?

[AndyK]

#3 ??? des ???

[GC_SDNPBC]

(3) What's the "D" in "GC_SDNPBC" stand for?

The "D" was random variation entered when registering for Quatloos. After a number of registration attempts did not work (likely a web browser problem at my end) the "GC_SDNPBC" name did finally work. It was meant to be "GC_SNPBC"

Ron

[GC_SDNPBC]

Here is the text of the order granted by the Supreme Court of British Columbia in Vancouver, B.C. today:

No. S-134883
Vancouver Registry

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
BETWEEN:
THE SOCIETY OF NOTARIES PUBLIC OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
PETITIONER
AND:
SINO GENERAL also known as SINO CAMERON GENERAL also known as
CHIEF ROCK also known as HAJISTAHENHWAY, NOTARY PUBLIC
RESPONDENT

ORDER MADE AFTER APPLICATION

Before Honourable Mr. Justice Bowden Friday, The 29th day of November, 2013

ON THE APPLICATION of the petitioner, The Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia, coming on for hearing at The Law Courts, 800 Smithe Street, Vancouver, November. 29, 2013, and on hearing Brian J. Konst, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and no one appearing on behalf of the respondent, Sino General also known as Sino Cameron General also known as Chief Rock also known as Hajistahenhway, Notary Public, herein;

THIS COURT ORDERS that:
1. Sino General also known as Sino Cameron General also known as Chief Rock also known as Hajistahenhway, Notary Public, or Hajistahenhway-Notary Public (hereinafter altogether, "Sino General"), until such time as he becomes a member in good standing of the Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia, be prohibited and enjoined from holding himself out as a notary public and engaging in the practice of a Notary Public.
2. Sino General, until such time as he is appointed a commissioner for taking affidavits in the Province of British Columbia, be prohibited and enjoined from holding himself out as a commissioner for taking affidavits, and prohibited and enjoined from administering oaths and the taking of affidavits, declarations and affirmations concerning any matter in connection with which an oath, affidavit, affirmation, solemn •declaration or statutory declaration is permitted, authorized or required by law to be sworn, affirmed, declared or made.
3. Without limiting the generality of paragraphs 1 and 2, Sino General shall not do the following for or in expectation of a fee, gain or reward, direct or indirect:
(a) draw, prepare, issue or revise a document that is intended, permitted or required to be registered, recorded or flied in a registry or other public office or that is a will or testamentary instrument, or
(b) hold himself out as qualified to draw, prepare, issue or revise a document referred to in subparagraph (a) except:
(i) if, by the provisions of a statute, the document in question is required or permitted to be drawn, prepared, issued or revised by that person or the class of persons or profession of which Sino General is a member, or
(ii) if Sino General is an employee acting in the course of his employment, and his employer may lawfully do such act, or
(c) draw instruments relating to property which are intended, permitted or required to be registered, recorded or flied in a registry or other public office, contracts, charter parties and other mercantile instruments;
(d) attest or protest all commercial or other instruments brought before the member for attestation or public protestation;
(e) administer oaths; and
(f) draw instruments for the purposes of the Power of Attorney Act, British Columbia.
4. Sino General shall advise all of his clients, past and present, and members of the public with whom he comes into contact in relation to legal matters of any kind of his lack of status as a member with the Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia.
5. Sino General shall advise all of his clients, past and present, and members of the public with whom he comes into contact in relation to legal matters of any kind of his lack of status as a commissioner for taking affidavits.
6. Sino General shall notify the Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia of all matters in which he has purported to act as a Notary Public.
7. Sino General shall deliver up to the Society of Notaries Public any stamps, seals, stationery, or other materials in his possession or under his care and control which describe, depict, or otherwise suggest that Sino General is a Notary Public.
8. The approval of Sino General as to the form of this Order be dispensed with; and
9. The petitioner is awarded its costs of this application at Scale B.
THE' FOLLOWING PARTIES APPROVE THE FORM OF THIS ORDER AND CONSENT TO EACH OF THE ORDERS, IF ANY, THAT ARE INDICATED ABOVE AS BEING BY CONSENT.

B. J. K.
Counsel for the Petitioner

By The Court

Registrar

[GC_SDNPBC]

Given the above order, I would ask that anyone who becomes aware of a document signed or witnessed by Sino General AKA Hajistahenhway (that suggests that he is a Notary Public or a Commissioner for Taking Affidavits) please bring it to the attention of the Society of Notaries Public of B.C. (contact details at www.notaries.bc.ca)

Thank you.

Ron Usher
General Counsel
The Society of Notaries Public of B.C.

[Burnaby49]

And how did my day at the Supreme Court of British Columbia in respect to Chief Sino Rock, Notorious Notary go? Check out the court order, hot off the press and now submitted to the court registry, just posted on Quatloos by Ron Usher

It took from 9:45 to a bit past noon to get that although the time was almost entirely spent waiting. The actual total judge face-time was 16 minutes. An unusual but surprisingly entertaining day even though the Chief did not show up.

As Ron Usher had notified us session started at 9:45 so I was in court about 9:40, place all to myself except for the court registrar. Suddenly a stampede of lawyers came boiling through the door, the most legal talent I've seen in one spot at one time since the OJ trials. In seconds the center aisle was log jammed with dark suits and wheelie briefcases. Turns out it was an Applications Session where lawyers try and cajole a judge to sign court orders on their behalf and they were all lined up to sign in with the registrar.

They were required to give an estimate of time required and they ranged from 1 minute (and he did it, in and out in 37 seconds, I timed it) to 1 hour 59 minutes with a few 1 hour 55 minutes. I checked later on that. Any request 2 hours or longer had to go to a trials session so this was a little legal trick to sneak trial session matters in through the back door. You lawyers! The registrar questioned those; "is this really an hour and fifty five or are you trying to avoid trial division". They all assured her it was legit and since they were all lawyers it must be true!

Anyhow at 10:20, when registration finished, the 86 seat court was almost packed and almost all lawyers on billable hours. I was one of the few people there off the clock. The registrar started calling them one at a time by their claimed session time, shortest first. Since the notaries were slated for 30 minutes (most seemed to want 5 to 15) I thought long boring day. Not a bit of it. Each lawyer told the judge (very astute business-like guy, impressive) what he wanted signed and then told the story behind why he wanted it. What stories! Miss Barbie and her brush with maritime law! Castles in Scotland! Peripatetic Pharmacists, failed restaurants, service-dodging debtor, wayward husbands, The woes, toils, and travails of humanity all wanting the court's blessing.

First up was our castle in Scotland. A local had bought it and then stiffed the seller. Lawyer was trying to serve papers on the debtor to enforce a Scottish default judgment but the wily chap kept dodging the process servers. So the lawyer was requesting court approval for a Substitute Service where the plaintiff could just leave the papers with the commissionaire at the debtors swanky high-rise condo. Approved. Next was a wife trying to track down a wayward ex-husband who kept failing to show up in court. Her lawyer also wanted a Substitution Service. The judge, after reviewing the guy's woeful court attendance record cut to the chase by asking the lawyer "Why don't I just approve an arrest warrant?". Talk about judicial activism! No, the lawyer wanted to give the guy one more chance. Judge said "then this is just another trip on the merry-go-round". The judge approved the Substitution Service after the lawyer assured him that next time he could sign an arrest warrant.

Miss Barbie was a fishing boat seized by a creditor in 1978 for an outstanding debt. It was released from seizure by somebody, nobody can remember who, putting $12,000 in a trust account at the Federal Court of Canada. Then things went to hell, the boat owner went bankrupt, assets sold off, but everybody forgot about the $12,000. In 2003 the lawyer who had acted for somebody in the initial proceedings got a letter from the Federal Court saying the money was still sitting there and they wanted rid of it. Now, 35 years after the money went into the trust account, he was still trying to get it out and get some of his legal fees covered. The judge asked "who, apart from you, is laying any claim to this money?" Nobody. All records supporting back story gone, all parties dead, disappeared or don't remember. Well, $12,000 plus uncompounded interest at government rates wasn't going far anyhow so judge approved.

Enough reminiscing about the good times, on to Chief Rock. Notaries up to bat at noon. They had an assigned 30 minutes and judge said they weren't getting one second more. Didn't need it. No Chief so they first had to show he had been served. Quatloos was involved in that! As part of their proof that they had served notice on the Chief the Notaries included as evidence both Ron Usher's Quatloos notice and my question to the Chief and the Chief's reply. The lawyer for the Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia, knowing I was a Quatloos scrivener (note, an appropriate word in this context since "The Scrivener" is a quarterly publication put out by the Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia), asked me a few questions before the hearing so he had a better idea what the website was about.

Now I have to bring in a comment I'd made on the:charles-norman: holmes discussion thread. I'd said that there was a family court hearing yesterday that I wanted to attend because the father being sued for child support was a noted local OPCA type. I said I wouldn't write about it unless he acted up,OPCA style, at the hearing. In the event I didn't go anyhow. Turns out that hearing was relevant to the Notary Society's proof of service because the delinquent father was Chief Sino Rock and the Notaries used the occasion to serve him yet again. So they demonstrated to the Aplications Court judge that the Chief had been served in June and the day before this hearing. When served yesterday the Chief had denied he was the Chief but the process server was the same guy who served him in June so he could attest to it really being the Chief. After that an entertaining five minutes while the Judge thumbed through some of the documents the Chief had notarised. He commented "An interesting use of fingerprints". Twelve minutes into the slated half hour the judge said "you don't need to go further with this, do you have a draft order?".

One little glitch. You'll note on the Society's order it says:

THIS COURT ORDERS that:

1. Sino General also known as Sino Cameron General also known as Chief Rock also known as Hajistahenhway, Notary Public, or Hajistahenhway-Notary Public (hereinafter altogether, "Sino General"), until such time as he becomes a member in good standing of the Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia, be prohibited and enjoined from holding himself out as a notary public and engaging in the practice of a Notary Public.

2. Sino General, until such time as he is appointed a commissioner for taking affidavits in the Province of British Columbia, be prohibited and enjoined from holding himself out as a commissioner for taking affidavits, and prohibited and enjoined from administering oaths and the taking of affidavits, declarations and affirmations concerning any matter in connection with which an oath, affidavit, affirmation, solemn •declaration or statutory declaration is permitted, authorized or required by law to be sworn, affirmed, declared or made.

The lawyer for the Notaries was careful to point out that they really didn't have the authority to request that the Chief stop being a commissioner as well as a notary. I'm not going to try and explain the distinction between them but they are different functions. The judge asked if the Notaries had confirmed that the Chief was not a rgistered commissioner and the lawyer replied in the affirmative. The judge said in that case he could use his inherent jurisdiction to approve both paragraphs and signed the order.

[Dr. Caligari]

The Chief had better get Interpol and the U.S. Marshals on this right away.

[The Observer]

Turns out that hearing was relevant to the Notary Society's proof of service because the delinquent father was Chief Sino Rock and the Notaries used the occasion to serve him yet again.

So the Chief is a deadbeat dad? I'm shocked, I tell ya, shocked. Hard to imagine that someone like the Chief, who is always lecturing us about Native American rights, is oppressing his own Native American children.

[Chief2k13]

Well i would really appreciate if you guys did not focus on my family case its not respectful and its private and up for discuss at all. I do have private contracts with my childs mom, she has accepted my private payments and we are removing ourselves from this extortion system they call family law. I told her not to remove herself from it immediately because i wanted to practice going in and trying some stuff out. However, i learned quickly that, collusion is a real practice here in B.C as well as extortion, meaning, the abuse of ones office/position.

So, we agreed today to just remove ourselves from this system but i rather no more comments on this as it is personal and about my daughter, so that is all that i ask. If you wish to be a douchbag goof , keep on posting about it but i wont come back to this site ever again, i wont be impressed in the least bit, if you wanna be super disrespectful. its not funny and i dont find it at all humorous in the least bit.

Anyways, Yes i been quite busy, i havent been on in a while and wow Ron Ron is on here Weeeooooo damn Ron Ron, what made you come here ? Im not dodging Ron Ron he just doesnt know here to find me and im not offering up that info. I will for a price of course.

Nah i dont wanna go to their injunction court case, for what, same result if i went, im sure they spoke about it over golf him and the judge. Or over brunch whichever, either way i know for a 1000% fact, it would have been same result, so why waste my very valuable time going to a racist court run by mainly criminals for the most part, im sure there are some wonderful judges who are truly honorable but i have yet to see more than 2 since i been here. i have seen one, well, you know what, i saw two.

Anyways i wrote up a blog about Ron Ron and his activities. Im not sore at all, im amused because my prediction came true.
All i wanna know now Ron Ron, now that your here and queer, lets have you post up some evidence for everyone on here, of the material and witnesses you have to back your claims ? I really hope you read my blog, it was really fun to write. It was more of a rant but who is really judging lol. Anyways guys thanks again for keeping this thread alive, i welcome all the comments negative or positive lol. Hope you all have wonderful holiday if you celebrate it, i dont but still wish you the best. Oh and yes again, my family issue is off limits i hope you all would respect that thanks.

http://chiefrockmusic.wordpress.com/201 ... extortion/
the blog link, almost forgot

[Burnaby49]

I think my post to be somewhat more intelligible than whatever the Chief was trying to tell us. Ron Usher's publication of the signed application on this site as notification to the Chief seems to have served its purpose quickly.

And Chief, please note, I posted nothing about your family court proceedings apart from the fact that you were served there, a fact relevant to the Applications Court proceedings. Neither Ron Usher nor I attended your family court hearing. I did hear that you were sporting some pretty impressive headwear.

[Chief2k13]

Thanks Burnaby49, im sure you and mowe would be honorable in this area. What do you mean, what i was trying to say, in what post ? What did you need me to clarify ?

[Burnaby49]

Message for the Chief that I forgot to mention.

I don't know if you are aware of it but you have been discussed, at least casually, in another Quatloos discussion thread. Your compatriot :charles-norman: holmes had his day in court at the New Westminster Provincial Court Trial Division and I attended (link below). You were brought up in court by Charles, he insisted you were an International Notary and the court had to accept your documents as legally notarized. Charles recognized me fron Bernard Yankston's hearing. He was sitting beside you but I had to tell him I hadn't noticed and didn't recognize him. You were both strangers to me at that time. Charles lost badly and didn't take it well.


viewtopic.php?f=47&t=9683

[LightinDarkness]

Being a deadbeat dad is certainly has a nexus of relationship to the Chief's current antics, both show a failure to adhere to the reality that courts do indeed have jurisdiction over the Chief. As you can see by Chief's dodging of the process servers (in both cases, it seems, since they had to use the Quatloos message to show he had been notified), he apparently DOES realize that the court has authority over him. Otherwise why dodge the service? I don't really buy Chief's claim that he is working something out with the mother and not being a deadbeat dad, if that were the case there would be no need to have family court involved.

It is all par for the course really, this is the same guy that has tried to absolve himself from responsibility in everything he doesn't want to do. Unfortunately for him, as we've seen, actions have consequences, and no amount of magical sov'run paper work (or refusing to pay your child support obligations) is going to change that. However, personally, I don't think anyone really cares to go into depth about your deadbeat dad status Chief, its just a noteworthy fact about you that is unsurprising. Deadbeat dads are people who:

(1) Do not accept personal responsibility for their social and moral duties
(2) Do not accept legal responsibility which has compelled them to uphold those duties

From what Chief has already told us about himself, and by virtue of teaching others the same non-sense gibberish hes pushed here, we already knew (1) and (2) anyways. Thats the last thing I'm going to say about it, unless Chief wants to keep arguing about it.

Anyways, what I find so fascinating about the good Chief is that despite the endless evidence that what he believes has no relationship to reality, he just keeps ignoring the truth. Its a total break from reality. And I get why he wants, needs to believe this stuff - its part of his political ideology. But the fact he continues to push this propaganda in face of all the evidence that hes wrong simply stuns and amazes.

[Dr. Caligari]

Being a deadbeat dad is certainly has a nexus of relationship to the Chief's current antics, both show a failure to adhere to the reality that courts do indeed have jurisdiction over the Chief.

I agree. If Chief doesn't like us talking about his being a deadbeat Dad, he can leave in a huff as he has threatened (promised?) to do. It will only improve the quality of discussion here.

[LordEd]

Since the chief said "we" agreed, there would be no further family court to go visit. However, if the "we" referred to by chief means himself and his multiple personalities at the detriment of his wife/kid(s), then that might be of public interest.

[grixit]

The Rock 'em Sock 'em robot has officially complained he says he wants "my family" to be off topic.

Sorry, no one has said a word about your family, Chief. They have only mentioned you and some court filings. No one has offered any details about the case such as the number of children involved, their ages, how much you supposedly owe, whether you are behind, and whether there are any other allegations beyond a simple claim for payment.

You are right in that such things in and of themselves are outside the strict scope of Quatloos. However, if it turns out that you have been trying to thwart the judicial process with pseudo legal verbiage, then you will have put that, as well as other filings in the case, on topic.

[Kestrel]

Well i would really appreciate if you guys did not focus on my family case its not respectful and its private and up for discuss at all. I do have private contracts with my childs mom, she has accepted my private payments and we are removing ourselves from this extortion system they call family law. I told her not to remove herself from it immediately because i wanted to practice going in and trying some stuff out. However, i learned quickly that, collusion is a real practice here in B.C as well as extortion, meaning, the abuse of ones office/position.

If I'm reading this right, the Chief just told us he intended to abuse his access to family court for purposes not relating to the child support issue at hand, but instead to get practice giving the arguments he intended to present in the Big Court.

Then he has the nerve to be upset that someone might talk about what he did.

I sincerely feel sorry for his kid, and have absolutely zero interest in private family matters. But he opened the barn door himself when he made this announcement.

[Chief2k13]

i did not make any mention of my familys case that was brought up by another. So, again, im not leaving in a huff, i just felt like you guys had a little respect for someones family life, its not a zoo for on lookers. I just requested respectfully not to talk about it period. Anything else i dont care..it doesnt bother me. Ok, so lets keep on going now. Back on topic here.

[rumpelstilzchen]

Question for the Chief:
Do you intend to comply with the decision of the court or will you continue to do the notary stuff?