Robert Arthur Menard FOTL (Freeman on the Lam)

Jeffrey · Post by **Jeffrey** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:39 pm

Well with Dean Clifford they kept using the suspended drivers license number for identification purposes, it might be the same case here.

Fmotlgroupie · Post by **Fmotlgroupie** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 1:26 am

Burnaby49 wrote:
arayder wrote:
Jeffrey wrote:Just to save me some trouble, where's the license bit in the document?

On the left side of page 5 it lists Bobby's driver's license number. Burnaby would know better than me, but in all fairness it is possible this is Bobby's long ago issued number and he didn't have the license on him upon arrest.

On the other hand, Bobby is said to have coughed up proper ID upon his arrest, like a good like plantation slave.
I assumed that the license was at least part of the ID he showed them on arrest but I could be wrong about that. If he no longer had a valid license I can't see them listing the number. I just compared Menard's driver's license number to mine and he does not hold a British Columbia license. His has fourteen numbers, the last six being his birth date. I have my license in front of me and it is only seven numbers, none of which have date of birth information. No need, the date of birth is printed right on the license. I'm guessing that it is an Ontario license otherwise they would probably have noted province of issue. Since he has been in B.C. for quite a while it may well be an old license he has kept valid.

First of all yes, the DL number is in the Ontario style, unlike anything else in Canada. In Alberta at least there's a spot for Driver's licence on informations as well, and I suspect they would have included his DL number on the information regardless of whether it was valid or associated to the charges - just another way of confirming who is being charged.

Post by **Burnaby49** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 3:23 am

I reported on Menard's specific charges and posted the court documents on Mediafire about 24 hours ago. Since then the documents have been downloaded 822 times. Way more than anything else I've ever posted. There have been almost five hundred viewings of this discussion since yesterday's posting and about 8,500 viewings since I first noted Rob's charges on January 23rd. Obviously a lot of interest but one voice has been absent, the Freedom Pickle himself. No doubt he is just too busy hiding from the law and trying to salvage something from his ACCP scam to spare any time for trivialities. We'll just have to wait until davidickes.com comes back on line again to see how Winteral spins this. No doubt he will demolish my assumptions with a stout defense of Rob's actions.

Since my name is attached to the Mediafire page it is being bandied about in some strange corners of the internet. Some have no problem accepting Rob's charges;

https://www.facebook.com/kent.barrett/p ... 3685777948

Others are more skeptical; those documents could mean anything!

https://www.facebook.com/groups/3385614 ... 837234052/

One contributor to that last discussion is David Lange. Last time I saw Dave he was in the dock pleading guilty to charges of personating a peace officer. Just like Rob! Dave didn't show up for his court hearing either and ended up arrested under a bench warrant.

One bright spot for our Freeman freedom fighters. Brian Alexander reports that he was treated splendidly in jail once he informed the staff who he was!

Brian Alexander
the courts certainly disagree with u jimmy...show us your dictionary meaning jimmy. "they came forthe jews"people like you are to much of a coward to speak out....indeed like asking the jews how was the concentration camp; jail is a reality when dealing with rogue gov terrorists. actually it was quite nice...the sheriffs had a big change in their tune, treated me like royalty...sendng a notice to the head sheriff worked well...recomend anyone going to court to do the same.

arayder · Post by **arayder** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 1:00 pm

Once again, nice job, Burnaby!!!

It is interesting to note that in all the legal-isn't-lawful denial at the free Dean fb page there isn't any mention by the faithful that Menard:
1. Lied to them about his arrest.
2. Unable to do the time, begged a regular old lawyer to get him out of jail.

------------
Dope Clock II
It has been 54 days since Robert Menard announced the revival of the Association of Canadian Consumer Purchasers. So far there is no documentation of a successful purchase using Menard's system.

rumpelstilzchen · Post by **rumpelstilzchen** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 1:39 pm

arayder wrote: 2. Unable to do the time, begged a regular old lawyer to get him out of jail.

The Not So Great Fezzed One ran to a member of the British Accreditation Registry.

What a turncoat.

arayder · Post by **arayder** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 1:57 pm

rumpelstilzchen wrote:
arayder wrote: 2. Unable to do the time, begged a regular old lawyer to get him out of jail.
The Not So Great Fezzed One ran to a member of the British Accreditation Registry.
What a turncoat.

And it seems that at the early hearings Bobby pulled the old strawman defense. This is the same ruse he tried after the BC courts laid their "stop playing lawyer" ruling on him in 2009.

He not only gave up the strawman defense when he realized he was about to get hauled away, but later turned right around and begged a lawyer (i.e. evil agent of the law society) to please, please get him out of jail!

What a Menard!

Jeffrey · Post by **Jeffrey** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 2:17 pm

Might be a good time to give Menard some free legal advice.

Make sure you toss out any weed and unregistered firearms before the cops show up. Learn from Clifford's mistakes.

Alternatively, turn yourself in and avoid putting your roommates through some drama.

LordEd · Post by **LordEd** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 2:53 pm

Its always been 'do your own research' when talking to Freeman.

I think Burnaby has out researched them all.

All hail the anti-guru!

Bill Lumbergh · Post by **Bill Lumbergh** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 4:22 pm

What's noteworthy to me is that each bench warrant, up until the final one, was issued "with discretion."

The justice has the option to issue a bench warrant but to delay its execution to give the accused an opportunity to appear voluntarily before the court. If he does show up, the bench warrant is rescinded or more precisely "deemed executed" (note the "R.Sc." notation after the first warrant was issued), so the accused doesn't get arrested and charged with FTA.

A discretionary warrant is typically issued where an accused has appeared in person before and duty counsel or someone else has contact information for him. The court will give the accused another chance to appear and duty counsel makes best efforts to get a hold of the accused. These warrants are also issued as a professional courtesy when there appears to be a lawyer on record. Courts give lawyers the benefit of the doubt and rather than have their client hauled in and charged they issue a discretionary warrant, at which point duty counsel contacts the lawyer to advise them of the missed court date.

So what does that mean here? Note that Mr. Saggi was there at the first appearance on Sept. 21. Any subsequent justice looking at this information would see his name and be hesitant to issue a straight bench warrant right away, without giving the lawyer some notice that no one appeared. Alternatively, the lawyer could have sent duty counsel a message asking to adjourn the matter on his behalf because he wasn't fully retained (which could be the case, if you see the December 11 adjournment was to "retain counsel"). If there was no one in court, a discretionary bench warrant would have been issued.

Now, you can only get these discretionary warrants for so long before a justice says "wait a minute, this matter isn't moving forward, counsel is not retained, and the accused didn't show the last few appearances!" The discretion is then removed and a straight bench warrant issues.

My theory is that while Mr. Saggi was initially engaged to assist, he wasn't ever fully paid. Lawyers will sometimes make initial appearances for an accused for free, expecting a full retainer down the road, but if there's no sign of payment, they bail. He may have requested adjournments for this purpose while Menard didn't bother going to court. Eventually, he may have appeared in court and said "look, I'm not fully retained (or retained at all), give me one more adjournment and I will try to get the accused here, but he's on his own".

One last thing.. the two "Disclosure" stamps on the informations don't mean that those pages form part of disclosure. Disclosure files are not available to the public. Those stamps indicate that on those dates (Nov 7 and Dec 11) disclosure for those matters was handed to either the accused or his lawyer. So either Menard or his lawyer must have been there to receive it. The information gets the stamp so that accused can't come back later and claim they never got disclosure, as well as for measuring delay.

arayder · Post by **arayder** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 5:34 pm

Just to help the chronology here, from looking at Menard's Facebook page it seems that January 13th or so is is when he went up to Montreal and filed his C3PO appeal to the courts.

This would just about match the series of events Burnaby documented:

Burnaby49 wrote: December 11, 2014
Menard appeared and was represented by Duty Counsel. The matter was adjourned to January 8, 2015 for Menard to retain counsel (see 14-35003547), notation "ACP".

January 8, 2015
Menard did not show, and an arrest warrant was issued. The matter was adjourned to Jan. 9, 2015, notation "TBST"

So once more, somehow, the Justice of the Peace knows that Menard will be present the following day for the next hearing. Explanation? He's pulled the strawman crap yet again. I bet Menard once more said the Flesh and Blood Man Menard was not there, and it was only his Person who is subject to these allegations! Result? Arrest warrant for Menard, Menard is put in remand overnight to reappear the following day to see if he still is not here.

January 9, 2015
Menard did not show, and an arrest warrant was issued. The matter is adjourned to Jan. 12, 2015, notation "TBST". Jan. 9, 2015 is a Friday. Jan. 12, 2015 is a Monday. Again, how did the Justice of the Peace know Menard would be there on Monday? Because in all likelihood Menard had once more tried Freeman Antics on Jan. 9 to miracle himself out of detention. It didn't work, and he got to spend the weekend in remand.

January 12, 2015
Mr. Saggi the BAR member returns! But now things get a little strange. The notations indicate that:

Menard failed to appear.
A bench warrant for his arrest was issued.
"Discretion" is checked off
The last column is hard to read on pages 3 and 9, but on pages 2 and 8 it reads "Certificate of Default". Both the Jan. 9 and Jan. 12, 2015 entries have "EX" entered in that.

The matter is adjourned to Feb. 9, 201 with the notation "ION TBST".

After February 8, 2015 Bobby starts posting a lot of freeman copy pasta on Facebook and a few posts announcing this and that about the ACCP. I can't see any indication of where he was located at that time.

On February 11th he posts:
"Things are either going spectacularly well or horribly badly and I haven't got enough data to work out which so I'm going to panic instead."

Ya' think?

Along about February 26th or 27th Menard started sockpuppeting as winteral at the Ickes forum. So my guess is the couch he's sleeping on has internet nearby and since he's laying low he has lots of time to diddle at the forum and try to keep the ACCP scam going.

If the original speculation that his bail agreement precluded him from using the internet is correct, then our boy may have added to his woes.

Post by **notorial dissent** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 6:57 pm

I wonder if Bobby's hosts du jour realize that they could have an unannounced and not necessarily friendly visit by the local constabulary executing a fugitive warrant, or that any and all of their peccadilloes could suddenly become of police interest if they are out laying around? Something to bear in mind when you are harboring a fugitive.

slowlyslowly · Post by **slowlyslowly** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 7:51 pm

I predicted this ending for old Robert years ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MybLVHnGxHo

arayder · Post by **arayder** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 9:17 pm

Oh, Bobby says he will win.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGCrwJDXeH4

How very laughable!

Post by **grixit** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 9:48 pm

arayder wrote:
rumpelstilzchen wrote:
arayder wrote: 2. Unable to do the time, begged a regular old lawyer to get him out of jail.
The Not So Great Fezzed One ran to a member of the British Accreditation Registry.
What a turncoat.
And it seems that at the early hearings Bobby pulled the old strawman defense. This is the same ruse he tried after the BC courts laid their "stop playing lawyer" ruling on him in 2009.

He not only gave up the strawman defense when he realized he was about to get hauled away, but later turned right around and begged a lawyer (i.e. evil agent of the law society) to please, please get him out of jail!

What a Menard!

And he's been hoist by his own menard.

Post by **Burnaby49** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 9:53 pm

I've been thinking about Bill Lumbergh's posting and he does offer a possible alternative to the analysis of the court documents that I posted. Not the charges or Menard being on the run, those are correct, but what happened in court.

As I understand it Bill is saying that the judge could have issued those multiple bench warrants but not enforced them as a courtesy to Saggi, Menard's putative lawyer, while Saqggi tried to get Menard to pay up for his services. When it became clear (as we Menard fans would have known from the start) that Menard was never going to pay for legal services Saggi bowed out and left Menard on his own. At that point Rob scuttled away and is still on the lam.

Bill is familiar with Ontario court procedures and what he describes is plausible. So what actually happened at the hearings is still a mystery. I'd hate to think Bill was right, my version where Menard tried and failed at his Strawman defense is far more entertaining! But reality is often mundane. Time to dig further.

The court documents have now been downloaded more than 1,100 times. However not much discussion about them on the Freeman sites I've checked. Strange.

Bill Lumbergh · Post by **Bill Lumbergh** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 10:09 pm

To be honest Burnaby, your theory is as plausible as mine. I don't know much about Ontario proceedings as I am not from there. However, I've seen enough criminal lawyers in action to know how they operate and I can't imagine things are much different from province to province when it comes to discretionary warrants.

littleFred · Post by **littleFred** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 10:42 pm

Rob's defence as of 11 June 2014, few days after the 8 June encounter, would have been that he was a peace officer, so wasn't falsely claiming to be one. Going by Winterall's recent comments on davidicke.com (which is still down), his defence would still be this.

TOPOPO 1sm

Extract from 24m30s, transcribed so typos are mine:

There are questions about whether or not I am a peace officer. So, hey, Quatloosian and Randian members, here it is: the charge that I could face if I am not a peace officer is falsely representing that you are. Now, I have repeatedly represented myself as a peace officer publicly, openly and notoriously. I've done so to cops, judges, sheriffs, sheriffs' deputies, crown counsels, justices of the peace. I've sent letters to the head of the RCMP identifying myself as a peace officer. I am operating under contract on my oath. I have ceremony, notice and action. Everything necessary to be able to claim truthfully that I am in fact a duly sworn peace officer. ... So you people on the Quatloosian forums who refuse to accept the simple fundamental truths: bring this tape to the attention of whatever your nanny authority is and tell them that you want me charged with falsely representing myself as a peace officer. And when I don't face any charges, well, I guess you'll have to suffer your cognitive dissonance and run around making up all sorts of stories.

Sorry, Rob, it seems your words have turned round and bitten you.

He later makes clear that police officers should submit to the authority of C3PO peace officers. Provided they do so, there is no need for C3POs to be armed. But if police officers don't submit, then C3POs could (with Rob's reluctance) be armed.

I'm not Canadian, and have had no encounters with Canadian police. Transferring Rob's philosophy to the UK: no self-proclaimed unaccountable group can claim authority over the police. Nor would we (most of us) want them to.

Jeffrey · Post by **Jeffrey** » Sat Mar 14, 2015 11:49 pm

bring this tape to the attention of whatever your nanny authority is and tell them that you want me charged with falsely representing myself as a peace officer

Why specifically bait us into contacting the authorities to get him charged?

And in any case, if we had actually gotten him busted, we wouldn't have found out months after the fact.

Post by **notorial dissent** » Sun Mar 15, 2015 12:06 am

Besides, he saved everyone the trouble and did it all himself, and now he's hiding out from the fallout.

Post by **Burnaby49** » Sun Mar 15, 2015 12:33 am

An announcement to posters and followers of this discussion. Wserra has suggested that I break this discussion up. It is getting too big and unwieldy. Good idea so I plan to split it into two discussions, the current one and the new one starting with LordEd's post of January 05, 2015;

Re: Robert Menard

by LordEd » Mon Jan 05, 2015 3:39 pm

Randomly went to menard's facebook and it seems he's working to further the truth of the exchange actout of money and hungry again.

Canadians interested in joining the Association of Canadian Consumer Purchasers and leveraging $250 into $2500 every month please contact me for details. Thank you.

LordEd's post was the first mention of the revival of the ACCP scam. This seems like a good break point since this was immediately followed by Rob's Federal Court of Canada filing of his moronic Statement of Claim and the uncovering of his criminal charges. Interest in this discussion was languishing before that posting but now Menard is the center of attention! Things are finally happening in Rob's life!

I plan to call the new discussion;

Robert Arthur Menard FOTL (Freeman on the Lam)