Lentz, Karl

[wserra]

This guy seems to be receiving increasing attention in the usual places, and so I thought it time he received some attention here. There is a lot to look at - but no thanks to him. For all the claims of success, both from Lentz himself and from acolytes, I have yet to see a single verifiable cite where he didn't get his ass kicked. I wonder why that is.

So let's start with Lentz' experience in his own stuff. After all, if you don't win at home, why should anyone expect you to win on the road? Lentz' own description of the matter:

Karl Lentz’s child was taken away by the state for having Down’s syndrome. He paid a fortune on lawyers and lived in a shipping container to divert all his money to legal costs. After nearly 6 years, he decided to learn Law for himself as clearly the lawyers couldn’t help. He learnt how to get a court of record and moving the court. He realised his child was classed as property and the legal & lawful meaning of over 50words. He will talk about his 2 carefully constructed sentences, he said at the court office. He didn’t even get to the next hearing and the court instructed the state to return his son back within 24 hours.

So Lentz lost his kid just because s/he was disabled. Once he got rid of the useless lawyers and "learn(ed) Law for himself", he kicked ass. How much of this is true?

I'm sure the reader will be shocked to learn that the answer is "very fuckin' little". Why don't we start with the reason why CPS took Lentz' child - was it because of Down's, as Lentz says? Not exactly. According to the CPS documents - before anyone gets excited, Lentz himself filed these in one of the cases I discuss below - the child was removed for his own safety "due to domestic violence between mother and father". Lentz was only permitted to see his child in supervised visits "due to history of domestic violence". He was directed to attend "anger management / domestic violence prevention class".

Sounds like Down's Syndrome was the reason, right?

So let's begin our examination of Lentz' pro se excursion into something that should be of some importance to him, the custody of his son. He brought four cases in the Middle District of Alabama and one in the Northern. The first (06cv626, ALMD) was in the name of his mother, one "Patricia Garner-Russo, SUI JURIS". If anyone can figure out what the suit is about from the complaint, please enlighten me. One thing that's clear - she not only wants custody, she wants $10M per year. Hey, raising kids is expensive. Dismissed with prejudice, including as against defendants who had not even been served.

Lentz then tries on his own. 07cv641, ALMD. Forty-six pages of garbage in the complaint. Dismissed sua sponte.

Not to be deterred, Lentz waits a couple of years and tries again, again his own name - "a man, Karl Rudolph Lentz, the aggrieved party, prosecutor". 12cv1014, ALMD. The complaint amounts to a lengthy whine. He throws in this gobbledygook and this nonsense. Moreover, he submitted these fake orders - which he considerately pre-signed - for the Court's signature. Dismissed sua sponte. The complaint is so bad that the Court can't tell whether is has to be dismissed on Younger (abstention based on pending state proceedings) or Rooker/Feldman (federal courts are not state appeals courts) grounds.

Lentz then tries again, quickly. 13cv387, ALMD. The complaint is once again less than a model of clarity - except that he is clear that he is due $371,520,000.00. Glad it's all about the kids. This time he fires both barrels. Man, look at that docket: Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, Notice, NOTICE. Well, the Court noticed: dismissed with prejudice.

Oh, and then there was the case that was dismissed because Lentz refused to pay the filing fee - 07cv75, ALND.

Now, I can't know what happened subsequently in the Alabama state courts. Perhaps Lentz got his kids back. If he and his wife are good parents, I hope they did. But, if so, it doesn't seem to have happened because of any "2 carefully constructed sentences".

[LaVidaRoja]

If he was paying a fortune to lawyers, why didn't they file ANYTHING on his behalf? Given that his visitation was restricted, and he claims he was living in a shipping container, was he perhaps party to a less-than amicable divorce in which his ex-wife got the house and he was ordered to pay her legal fees?

[bmxninja357]

and he claims he was living in a shipping container,

living in a shipping container does not mean one is out of cash. there are many well off folks doing this. here is a news item on this: http://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/edmonton-com ... -1.1934679

i dont think it means he is living in poverty. he could still be doing quite well.

peace,
ninj

[notorial dissent]

Of course the question of him actually telling the truth might be called in to question, since it would appear his legal claims are all bogus. If one lies about one thing, it is always best to assume that may be the default response.

[Jeffrey]

So the entire Karl Lentz mythology was a lie, who would have guessed?

[wserra]

Interesting:

Viewing profile - Karl Lentz
...
User statistics

Joined:
Wed Feb 25, 2015 3:32 pm

Welcome, Karl. Got anything to add?

[Jeffrey]

Could he have been discouraged by the email bug?

[LightinDarkness]

Oh, I missed this, thanks for the summary wserra. As expected, yet another sovereign citizen that has somehow become popular among the deluded even though hes batting for 0 in terms of 'successes.'

I think the reason why Lentz is so beloved is because he really tries hard to put on this "I AM: A MAN" sovereign citizen stupidity, and it seems to really appeal to guys who feel like the court system has somehow emasculated them because they lost their children/cant pay their debts/whatever. Lentz truly does a three ring circus on his calls about being a MAN and acting hardcore. He sets up this charming little mythology that if you just show the court how much of a MAN you are, then they will do whatever you want.

He has quickly figured out being a sovereign citizen guru is a good way to make cash, there isn't a show that goes by where he doesn't spend a significant amount of time berating his followers for not sending enough money. But he does seem to get paid very well...at least very well for the amount of work he is doing (which is, zero). There are idiots lining up to give him thousands of dollars per week to help them lose their cases. And lately hes been doing weekly shows where you have to pay $100 just for the privilege of talking with him one on one.

[wserra]

Lentz apparently noticed this thread, and felt that it might be a little difficult for the reader to believe that he won a hands-down two-sentence victory when the records show that case after case of his was ignominiously dismissed. So he responds - well, sort of - in a youtube video dated yesterday. A youtube? Yes, these guys don't believe in writing. First of all, most of them are illiterate. I mean, look at the docs I linked to above. Second, it is much easier to quote a writing in order to point out the bullshit than to quote a video. That, of course, is exactly what happened with Lentz' court docs.

I actually listened to all 13 minutes of the thing, the first time I've listened to an entire sovrun video in a long time. Lentz takes up most of it telling a completely pointless - and likely equally false - story about some interaction he had with a group of Marshalls. Finally, at the very end, he gets to the point. PACER is wrong. He actually won. But since he makes "claims under the common law", and not "complaints", PACER doesn't track his cases. His wins are "behind the scenes". Very much so, since there is no proof of them at all. Can't get much more behind the scenes than that.

He doesn't explain why he bothered to file those FIVE useless complaints that got dismissed sua sponte, given his brilliant "common law claims". He also doesn't explain - since the electronic files are the official record - how courts even keep track of his masterpieces.

Hey, Karl, why don't you come explain it to us? You're obviously reading this.

[LightinDarkness]

You know, the sovcits are so predictable it would be amusing if it wasnt so tragic that they have idiots paying them big money for such terrible advice:

(1) Sovcit rises to popularity on the internet by bragging about court "successes."
(2) One of the skeptic websites that tracks the crazies observes this and debunks their claims with the actual court documents.
(3) Sovcit claims the court documents are all lies, and they really have won its just in secret because the court cant have anyone know how well their legal incantations work.

I swear this has happened with every sovcit that has ever been tracked on these boards. The exact excuse as to why they have a 0% success rate is always a bit different, but it is ALWAYS a variation of "the court is lying in official court records because my magick is so good!"

[Jeffrey]

Someone claiming to be Lentz has responded to the allegations in this thread here:

https://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=WpwIObv0wy4

Fun for the whole family.

[wserra]

Lentz claims that the CPS docs to which I linked above are "forged". Therefore, when the Alabama CPS clearly states that his kid was removed from the home due to "father's history of domestic violence" - well, that's wrong. He was really removed because he had Down's, a claim for which there is no evidence whatsoever. And the documented dismissals of all of Lentz' actions - well, they're wrong too, because Lentz' multifaceted superduper commonlawper claims (not complaints! not complaints!) actually all won. There is, of course, no evidence whatsoever for that either.

The Karl Lentz credo: "Evidence renders it false, no evidence renders it true". Try to live by that one for a while.

[Jeffrey]

More specifically he claims the safety plan referred to "another family" yet the safety plan mentions him and presumably his ex-wife specifically and other documents you posted, specifically the lawsuit Lentz' mother filed, also makes reference to "false domestic violence" allegations being made by Karl's ex-wife.

I'm open to the possibility that this was just a scorned ex-wife making up DV charges to gain leverage in custody proceedings or divorce proceedings. But the fact that he omitted mention of it for years despite the paper trail, and denied it when confronted with it makes me suspect maybe he actually did beat his wife. Not to mention his general "act like a man" credo and several shows in which he claims the government does not have jurisdiction as long as you beat your wife inside your own domicile.

[NYGman]

He seems to talk about something that i do not think he quite understands, Domestic Authority Doctrine. I vaguely recall something about passing laws that effect domestic affairs, and not legislating other countries.

However, it can not be what Karl thinks it is. You are not immune to the government's laws inside your house. You can't, for example, kill your wife just because you feel like it. You can't manafacture or package drugs in your house, you can not commit sex crimes in you house.

Just because it is your home, doesn't make it immune from the law. There can be cases of domestic violence committed in the home, and it is still domestic violence.

How he uses the domestic authority doctrine to explain that there is no such thing as domestic violence in the home is just plain crazy.

My recolection is that the domestic authority doctrine, if there is such a thing anymore, is Just the notion that domestic laws are enacted to deal with domestic issues and are enforced domestically. it also may have something to do with preventing us legislating outside of our country. I don't believe it has anything to do with dometic violence or the rights of somebody in their own home.

Unfortunately I went to look it up some more, but the only things that seem to come up on a search for the domestic authority doctrine, are write ups from Ken, nothing much else.

[wserra]

Whether Lentz committed acts of domestic violence is, for our purposes, almost beside the point. It's his truthfulness that matters. He didn't say, "The State took my kid because my wife made up allegations of domestic violence"; he said, "The State took my kid because he had Down's". That's false. And he claimed that it was due to his legal genius that the kid was returned, if in fact he was returned. That's clearly false.

We can give Lentz the benefit of the doubt as to whether he is a batterer. But there is no doubt that he's a liar, and a charlatan.

[LightinDarkness]

There is dissent in the Karl Lentz ranks! In his latest 15 HOUR SHOW (I am not kidding):
http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-127469/TS-953594.mp3

One of the hosts of his weekly sovcit call has been kicked off! Seems as though he was telling people purchasing from Karl's website to buy from him personally. So Karl wasn't pocketing any of the money from the marks.

It all seems to come down to how much hes getting paid when it comes to Karl.

[LightinDarkness]

Listening to portion of the insane 15 hour conference call listed above, Karl gives a little bit of insight on his philosophy of marriage.

He says that marriage is a contract and that the wife is expected to do certain things: cook, clean, and "satisfy" him "in bed." If the wife fails at any of those things, then she has broken the contract and he is free to "contract out" for a maid or prostitute. And that would not be cheating (in the case of a prostitute), because you see the wife broke the contract.

He also says he has had 3 wives. I am sure we are all shocked, given his views of marriage.

[notorial dissent]

I'm sure his theories on child rearing are equally enlightened. No wonder he and child services are not bosom buddies.

[Jeffrey]

I've been pacing myself to get through the 15 hour show, so far only 3 hours in (sorry but Better Call Saul has priority over Lentz' rant).

Some good stuff in there, anti semitism, some stuff about his first wife being a prostitute in Vegas, general mysogyny, Bali betrayed him because it's natural for Indians to backstab white people. Some pretty astonishingly stupid things, Karl and Bali were sharing a paypal account for example. Karl seems to lend credence to the $120k figure Bali gave when he mentions Bali made $30,000 from another client selling Lentz advice to him in the UK.

Assuming they really are saying the truth about this, they really should be reported to whatever is in charge of charging people with giving legal advice without a license. I mean these guys are making serious money giving bad legal advice to people in some pretty bad situations.

[Hyrion]

Assuming they really are saying the truth about this, they really should be reported to whatever is in charge of charging people with giving legal advice without a license. I mean these guys are making serious money giving bad legal advice to people in some pretty bad situations.

I imagine that would require one of the "victims" raising such a complaint in the first place.

One sov-cit involving the authorities against another?

If it did dawn on any of them that was possible, I think it's likely considered the ultimate taboo. Along the lines of being an internal informant.