Johannus Boots - Artist and Failed Freeman

[Burnaby49]

Or at least a failure at using Freeman tactics to keep himself out of jail. By profession he is an artist. You can check that out here but be warned; his art, at least in my opinion, is terrible. Derivative New Age rubbish with the main gimmick hiding animals and people in the foliage, clouds, rocks, whatever. He did note at his trial that he was in financial difficulty because sales are down so perhaps my opinion reflects the market;

http://www.johannusboots.com/

Anyhow, why is he posted here? Because of a 21 day sentence for obstruction of justice after refusing to co-operate with police at a routine traffic stop. Standard Freeman stuff, refusing to identify himself, driving without a license or insurance, having to be physically removed from his car, the full "Freakin' Idiot" Brian Alexander.

At trial his defense seemed to straight Freeman but with the disclaimer that he did not consider himself a Freeman, a toxic badge of identity in Canadian court nowadays;

Among other things, Mr. Boots appealed to the right of freedom of movement as a defense. However, Section 6 of the Charter does not guarantee the right to operate a motor vehicle. Mr. Boots ascribes to the belief that birth certificates and other forms of government registration are used to enslave or control citizens. This is a form of pseudo-legal argument derived from the common "freeman-on-the-land" movement, though Mr. Boots does not identify himself as a freeman or belong to any such organization.

His explanation for using Freeman tactics, if true, shows his own assessment of his chances;

Asked why he decided to proceed with his line of argumentation despite a historical tendency for courts to reject them, he stated that he had "nothing left to lose," and was going with what he believed to be his best chance.

However I'm skeptical of his denial. The "links of Interest" section of his website includes this;

http://spiritualeconomicsnow.net/

This is the website of Mary-Elizabeth: Croft, a woman referred to by one of our contributors as "the Karl Marx of the Freemen". Her website offers helpful advice about what to do when stopped by the police;

I always imagined being stopped by a cop who might say, “Do you know why I stopped you?” “Are you asking me if I can read your mind?” “I clocked you at 120 in a 90 zone.” “How are you going to prove that?” “I got you on radar.” “How are you going to prove, three weeks from now, that the detector even works, never mind that you didn’t fabricate that?” Or, how about those camera trucks. How can they prove that it wasn’t photo-shopped? The burden of proof is always on the accuser. Answering questions only fuels them. If they think we violated a statute –not that any of them apply to us, anyway– it is their job, and I do mean their job, to PROVE IT.

If they cannot prove that we owe a legal fiction, that we injured a legal fiction, etc., then, they are out of luck. Remember, no one can ‘prove’ anything; e.g.: the only way to “prove” our fingerprints are unique is to compare them to every other fingerprint on the planet. Since it is ‘they’ who started this harassment, then it is ‘they’ who ought to get charged. We must bill them for stopping us, hindering us, and questioning us, as their doing so is subject to a ‘consultation fee’, at least, and even more for our time. “Please tell me what it is that makes you think that you, a public servant, have any authority over me, one who funds your salary.”

In other words, since, in Mary-Elizabeth: Croftland nothing can ever be proven if deconstructed enough, nobody is ever guilty. Sadly it didn't work for Johannus.

Had he acted reasonably at the traffic stop he would have been ticketed for driving without a license or insurance, nothing else. As I see it (I'm not knowledgeable about Ontario traffic laws) this might have resulted in his car being impounded and maybe a fine but no jail sentence. So his Freeman antics got him free room and board at Her Majesty's expense. Another impressive Freeman victory!

http://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/ ... f-buckhorn

http://www.mykawartha.com/news-story/44 ... isdiction/

[notorial dissent]

It really is a sad commentary on FOTL reality, when poor stupid stupid dim and bewildered Brian Alexander becomes a hallmark? signpost? descriptor? for FOTL stupidity above and beyond the call. I don't quite know if he has become a benchmark to aspire to, or just a guidepost of how bad some of them can screw up. A sad state none the less.

Yep, Bootsy going full bore FOTL stupid and sticking to his guns, well failed arguments since FOTL'ers supposedly don't believe in guns, at least most of them keep saying that, and continues to shoot himself in the foot, even though deep down he really knows it's a gonna fail, big time. Definitely a true FOTL hero.

I do think Barnaby is right, I can't help thinking that if Bootsy had just not done a Brian, he'd have come out of this in a whole better shape.

[Fmotlgroupie]

21 days is quite a lot for an obstruction charge, especially with no criminal record. His magic words seem to have had quite an effect on the judge, albeit not the one he wanted!

It's a little less completely irrational to, well, go crazy and OPCA when stopped for driving without insurance in Ontario than other places in Canada, since in Ontario that charge carries a $5000 minimum fine. If you're dead-set on losing touch with reality rather than paying up, Probably better off to just accept the chicken and hire a witch doctor to make it go away

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

The "myKawartha.com" news story indicates that Mr. Boots received his 21 day sentence from a Justice Lorne Chester, who coincidentally is identified time and again by Dean Kory as a chief antagonist.

It's a small world, both judicial and in the Freeman legions...

SMS Möwe