Robert Arthur Menard FOTL (Freeman on the Lam)

[LordEd]

Need to cut/paste the link location, not the shown text, but yes that was what I was looking for.

Claim:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/ieai8etga ... 0Claim.pdf

Result:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/yyct95xbk ... -43-15.pdf

[Burnaby49]

There is no link location. It was not a reported decision. Do you think that Menard warrants the effort to report it anywhere?

I went to the Federal Court of Canada registry in Vancouver, had them print me a hard copy of the decision, converted it to pdf, then put that up on mediafire. If it was linked anywhere I wouldn't have needed to go to the trouble.

The best you can do without going through all that is to go to the Federal Court website and look him up. You get a summary;

6 2015-03-18 Montréal

Order dated 18-MAR-2015 rendered by Richard Morneau, Esq., Prothonotary Matter considered without personal appearance The Court's decision is with regard to Motion in writing Doc. No. 2 Result: granted FOR THE REASONS provided by the defendant in her written representations dated January 30, 2015, the plaintiff¿s statement of claim is hereby struck out pursuant to paragraph 221(1)(a) of the rules, without leave to amend, the whole with costs, since it is plain and obvious that the statement of claim contains no reasonable cause of action. Filed on 18-MAR-2015 copies sent to parties entered in J. & O. Book, volume 1261 page(s) 239 - 240 Final Decision

http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/fc ... no=T-43-15

[Burnaby49]

http://www.mediafire.com/view/yyct95xbk ... -43-15.pdf

This settles it as far as I'm concerned. The court determined that his claim, even if we accept all of his pleadings as true, has no hope of success at trial. Done.

EDIT: it seems that link is broken.... Burnaby?

The decision was transcribed earlier in this thread:

Date: 20150318

Docket: T-43-15

Montréal, Quebec, March 18, 2015

PRESENT: Prothonotary Richard Morneau

BETWEEN:

ROBERT MENARD
(ACTING FOR THE CANADIAN COMMON CORPS OF PEACE OFFICERS)

Plaintiff

and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Defendant

Motion in writing on behalf of the defendant for an order striking the statement of claim.
[Rules 4, 24, 221(1) and 369 of the Federal Courts Rules (the rules)]

ORDER
CONSIDERING the statement of claim of the plaintiff filed on January 13, 2015;

CONSIDERING the motion record filed by the defendant on February 4, 2015 in connection with the above motion;

CONSIDERING that no motion record in response has been served and filed in connection with the motion at bar;

FOR THE REASONS provided by the defendant in her written representations dated January 30, 2015, the plaintiff’s statement of claim is hereby struck out pursuant to paragraph 221(1)(a) of the rules, without leave to amend, the whole with costs, since it is plain and obvious that the statement of claim contains no reasonable cause of action.

“Richard Morneau”

Prothonotary

No idea why that link doesn't work, I've deleted nothing from Media Fire. If anyone else has problemw with other links let me know.

[LordEd]

The reposted link that didn't work was a cut paste of the incomplete link text. My copy of the original as posted above works.

[LordEd]

He took issue with me saying 'supreme court' when it was in fact federal court.

Has anybody seen a video of Menard saying the phrase 'i am not a person'. I need a clip.

[Burnaby49]

The reposted link that didn't work was a cut paste of the incomplete link text. My copy of the original as posted above works.

Reposted link copied incorrectly? My fan club can't even copy a link after I do all the work? I hadn't checked the broken link so I didn't know it was one of the large number of reposts floating around. All my Media Fire links should be fine.

[LordEd]

Better use your magical green powers to correct some links in posts.

[rumpelstilzchen]

Has anybody seen a video of Menard saying the phrase 'i am not a person'. I need a clip.

Won't help. In the past Menard has said that he can choose to be a person when he is a peace officer and not a person when he is not performing the duties of a peace officer. Or words to that effect. He said it on Icke's in his 3CPO thread. Expect Muddy Puddle to say the same.

[Burnaby49]

He took issue with me saying 'supreme court' when it was in fact federal court.

Has anybody seen a video of Menard saying the phrase 'i am not a person'. I need a clip.

Nolan is the answer to all of Menard's arguments. Also the criminal convictions of our "Nanaimo Three" gang on the same charges Menard is facing.

You're wasting your time arguing with Menard. He just keeps attacking his questioners rather than answering anything and he's happy to do that forever. He's got to much invested in his failed life to give any critical objective thought to the fact that he has failed completely. If he hadn't why is he on the run from an arrest warrant? Sorry, forgot, he is prioritizing. He's just too busy to cover everything on his to-do list at once.

He can't accept that he is wrong and move on. I want him to make all of those arguments in court instead of all that inane babbling on forever on websites.

He's now saying things like this at TPUC;

Pretty sure you are mistaken there too. I say this because of a quote I once read from the Chief Justice. They stated that the authority of the court is not stand alone, but that it comes from the public when some member of the public makes a claim. THAT is where the authority actually starts. Wanna test it? Can a judge command someone to attend their court, and answer their questions, without the court being engaged and empowered by someone making claims first? Can you show me even one singular case, where some judge gave an order, or a ruling, without first being engaged by someone else? I bet you can't, and to me that is evidence their authority comes from the people making claims. If they can't then your position is shot to hell. If they require a claimant BEFORE they can act, we see they are not the source of authority at all. The claimant actually is. Ask any judge if they have power to command or dictate, without there first being a claimant. Go ahead. We will wait.

That was gibberish. It is impossible to answer even if anyone wanted to because it is meaningless. An unattributed comment Menard claims he read from an unidentified Chief Justice without any context at all stands as evidence that he is right?

He just wrote;

So the questions is:

Do members of the public have the right to employ someone to be a peace officer directly, or is that limited to governmental organizations?

My position is yes they can.

So go to your trial and prove it Rob. Even if you could convince Arayder and edofquatloos that would contribute nothing towards getting your coveted peace officer status. You get than only by winning in court. You've got that claimed quote from an unidentified "Chief Justice" (I assume of the Supreme Court of Canada). You've got that comment from an unidentifed receptionist, and you've got your videos. Throw in your brilliant analysis on TPUC and you're as ready as you'll ever be. What more do you need? Go for it!

[LordEd]

Nolan is the answer to all of Menard's arguments. Also the criminal convictions of our "Nanaimo Three" gang on the same charges Menard is facing.

You're wasting your time arguing with Menard.

I know.

The point isn't the convincing of Menard. The point is the Reams of the world researching this type of thing and finding an argument they can't resolve in their own mind.

I can build a perfect checkmate, but then he'll change the board, add force fields in convenient locations and make queens only move like kings because everyone is equal and he doesn't consent to the powers of the queen.

[LordEd]

Your approach is the research, real world court cases, and actually reporting on the end results (which is great entertainment value). My approach is the argument. I am convinced given enough material, a freeman argument will self-contradict itself.

I had too much fun in a philosophy course.

[Hanslune]

It was said by a wise man: What more do you need? In regards to Menar

What does Menard need?

Courage - which he is lacking in

A plan - his present one is working as well as Mussolini's invasion of Egypt

A brain - he's actually not thinking well with his present one. Could he get one of those Chinese made canned/tinned brains?

[Burnaby49]

My goodness! Is Pudywuddy talking about me?

Dear Readers: So for those interested, what you are seeing here is one of the tactics of the online harassment Menard deals with. (See I am talking about Menard, and what he has to deal with) Many people in the Freedom movement are attacked in the same fashion. It is called ‘forum flooding’ . See all these new posters who only want to discuss Menard, but also insist on attacking him, and claiming that anyone who doesn’t is an apologist? They are part of a crew who make it their business to attack Menard and other Freemen types, any and every chance they get.

Notice how they do not wish to discuss their intents or motives? That is because their intent is malicious and their intent is to harm Menard. If they admitted that however, you dear reader would be less likely to accept their words as truth. We all know malicious people acting to harm are more likely to be lying.

You will see their arrogance too. Their insistence to 'keep it on topic' when they are a new guest at the forum shows a level of arrogance which only they can't see. Their desire to restrict the discussion to Menard and his apparent failings, and refusal to allow discussion about their intent, is evidence of their motives. They want to talk about Menard, but they do not want to talk about the people who talk about him, or their motives.

One in particular has some serious psychological issues, and has developed an obsession with Menard, and spends many hours a day, visiting any site that discusses Menard, attacks him in his way, and then run backs to his favourite forums, to bring back up if anyone starts questioning their motives.

If Menard and a group of people were to do what these people do, they would face criminal charges. If Menard did what one in particular does on a daily basis, he would be in a psych ward.

Like many good propagandists, they include just enough truth to get you to not question their lies. If you point out their lies, they gloss over them, and go back to hammering a truth, adding their own assumptions and beliefs and guesses.

Do not be fooled.
This is a perfect example of forum flooding.
They all come from the same home forums too.

http://www.tpuc.org/forum/viewtopic.php ... &start=150

[Hyrion]

Pretty sure you are mistaken there too. I say this because of a quote I once read from the Chief Justice. They stated that the authority of the court is not stand alone, but that it comes from the public when some member of the public makes a claim. THAT is where the authority actually starts. Wanna test it? Can a judge command someone to attend their court, and answer their questions, without the court being engaged and empowered by someone making claims first? Can you show me even one singular case, where some judge gave an order, or a ruling, without first being engaged by someone else? I bet you can't, and to me that is evidence their authority comes from the people making claims. If they can't then your position is shot to hell. If they require a claimant BEFORE they can act, we see they are not the source of authority at all. The claimant actually is. Ask any judge if they have power to command or dictate, without there first being a claimant. Go ahead. We will wait.

That was gibberish. It is impossible to answer even if anyone wanted to because it is meaningless.

Stand alone (without the greater context of what he might be actually trying to argue) I wouldn't say it's gibberish.

But I would add: he doesn't bother to take that as far as it should be taken.

• A: Does a Court require some form of Complainant before acting: Yes. A Judge can't just issue a bench warrant for the arrest of a name he selected at random out of the white pages for example.

He appears to be outlining that point. But he doesn't speak of:

• B: The Court also requires Congress/Parliament - via input from Society - to create Laws surrounding the issue of the complaint.

• C: Said complainant can consist of anyone including a homeless person (perhaps a civil lawsuit for a misdeed someone committed against the individual), a police Detective (warrant to collect evidence for a criminal act), and so on.

• D: Just because someone files a complaint doesn't mean the Court has to do anything about it - dismissing a claim for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted for example.

If Menard is attempting to claim:

• The Judge must accede to my every whim because I HAVE THE POWER

Then he's very much mistaken on where he's trying to take his thoughts.

[Burnaby49]

I've been wrong about Rob, so wrong. This, from puddywuddle over at TPUC, explains the real reasons Menard wants to be a peace officer;

Since as a peace officer your role is to preserve and maintain the public peace, you are invited to engage in any lawful actions which do so. This can mean feeding the hungry, providing a presence at events as a peace officer, holding talks on the importance of the public peace, offering meditation services, having picnics allowing neighbours to get to know each other, brokering truces between different groups, acting in a first responder capacity when necessary, or any other action which is lawful, does not breach the public peace, builds community in any way, alleviates suffering or poverty, and serves to preserve and maintain the public peace.

Awww. Holding "meet the neighbors" picnics. So sweet.

Although I admit to some confusion. None of these functions really require a gun yet carrying firearms is an essential part of the C3PO goal. And almost all of those functions can already be done by anybody without having to become a peace officer. You don't need a badge and gun to feed the poor Rob. No doubt Rob will explain all these details when he finally finds the time to get back to Toronto and defeat the Crown on those pesky criminal charges.

[LordEd]

Feeding the poor is definitely his goal. As in, he's poor. Feed me.

[Jeffrey]

Little bit of a cross post here but, among the Tom Crawford videos I came across these two dudes:

https://youtu.be/kXfbH2jUcek?t=17m10s

Claiming to be part of metropolitan peace officers which appears to be an UK implementation of Menard's C3PO concept.

[LordEd]

Burnaby, do you have anything on Menard's bail conditions?

[Burnaby49]

Burnaby, do you have anything on Menard's bail conditions?

No.

[Bill Lumbergh]

We do know a little... on information 14-35003747 on Page A on the right hand side the clerk noted the release.

$2000 Recog... but beyond that the writing is illegible, at least to me.