Dean Clifford - A Tale of Two Gurus

[notorial dissent]

I would day Burnaby's take on this is right on target, although I think Deano did a pretty good job of making the maximum sentence a reality with his behavior early on. I really don't think there is much mitigation for either his attitude or actions prior to this or since his arrest. Basically, he has orchestrated his own pre-sentencing all by himself, and it isn't a good one, and truth be told I don't think giving him the benefit of the doubt is going to accomplish anything either, except to let him get back to hos bad behavior all the quicker.

[arayder]

Ah, the end of the Freeman era in one spot. One convicted and awaiting sentencing, one pending re-arrest and trial.

The end is near.

For these two, yes. They are done. One is a rage filled dope who never bothered to learn the basics of law. The other is a lazy, sodded narsassist who thinks anything that pops out of his mouth is law.

The hottest trend with freemen, sovcits, members of the movement or whatever they call themselves is to offer schemes ensuring prosperity for the denizens of layabout nation.

Naturally, the schemes don't involve work or soap. Rather they hinge on the ability to access some sort of account the powers that be are supposed to have created upon their birth.

A variant is the scheme that despite claiming to be non-citizens of whatever country they are in these woo pitchers say they are entitled to their portion of their nation's wealth. In essence, they are claiming their country should plunder its forests and minerals to pay for their groceries.

Playing to greed, rather than phony altruistic freedom, might just work for the next generation of gurus

[Wake Up! Productions]

MARTIN J, 14SEPT2015, MR. CLIFFORD TO ATTEND, PARTICIPATE AND COOPERATE WITH PROB SERV FOR PREP OF PSR, MR, CLIFFORD CAUTIONED W/RESPECT TO THE PROPER WAY OF ADDRESSING THE COURT, ADJ 05NOV2015 AT 10:00AM

[Jeffrey]

So Martin put him in his place and he went online to throw a temper tantrum.

[Bill Lumbergh]

Put simply a Pre-sentencing Hearing can generally only help the convicted since it's purpose is to find any mitigating circumstances that might justify a reduced sentence. Dean has not only thrown this advantage away but he's shifted to the far side of the ledger and is now actively working on getting the maximum possible sentence.

A PSR can be as harmful as it could be helpful. It can reveal many bad things about a person's character that would otherwise have been left out of the sentencing hearing. It can show a pattern of destructive behaviour with little or no remorse, including prior acts that were never prosecuted. Generally though, you're right.

I'm a bit surprised that the judge actually ordered Dean to participate in the PSR interview. I suspect that judge Martin is "appeal-proofing" this case. He's giving Dean every opportunity at a fair trial (example: according to Dean himself, the judge implore him to put forward some sort of defence, any kind of defence) and now a fair sentencing. This way, there is no grounds for appealing on the basis of "I didn't get a chance to defend myself" or "no one listened to me at sentencing". Appellate courts can sometimes be lenient with self-reps - see the Porisky appeal.

So, is it now fair to say that Canadian freemanery is dead? On its deathbed? I can't think of any active gurus at the moment who are not wanted by police or facing jail. I guess Keith Thompson / Kate of Gaia is still "active", but I don't think he has much of a following.

[Wake Up! Productions]

So Martin put him in his place and he went online to throw a temper tantrum.

Pretty much - he lashed out at me, taking down my channel, as well as giving "Doazic" a copyright strike for using a clip from a video that Dean doesn't even hold the copyright for !!!

[Bill Lumbergh]

Here is the video from the news coverage: http://globalnews.ca/video/2220663/even ... s-sep-14-5

Starts at 4:20

[Burnaby49]

So, is it now fair to say that Canadian freemanery is dead? On its deathbed? I can't think of any active gurus at the moment who are not wanted by police or facing jail. I guess Keith Thompson / Kate of Gaia is still "active", but I don't think he has much of a following.

There's always my old favorite minister Belanger and his constant ranting about his welfare. He's never, as far as I'm aware, been in jail or even been charged with anything that would attract jail time. I'd agree that when you talk about gurus he's pretty much at the bottom of the barrel but we can't pick and chose any more.

[LordEd]

Put simply, I'd hope you guys and gal's here aren't trying to minimise the damage to your credibility, when Deano walks away with nothing and put it down to a "Pre-sentencing" (which spell checks out wrong by-the-way) hearing or somehe Judge other strange conflict in law that allows you people to thinks you have won when you have evidently lost.

Walks away with nothing? I think his best case is being credited with time served at double-time negating his sentence.

Are you putting your credibility on the idea he's going to walk out free because the court is backed into a corner?

[NG3]

Please don't begin to think that the common man with a degree of intellect thinks for a moment that any "Court" wishes to be lenient as it doesn't.

It's not a case of what the court wishes, it's a condition of law to weigh up all relevant factors and mitigating circumstances during consideration of a sentence.

[Burnaby49]

I'm a bit surprised that the judge actually ordered Dean to participate in the PSR interview. I suspect that judge Martin is "appeal-proofing" this case. He's giving Dean every opportunity at a fair trial (example: according to Dean himself, the judge implore him to put forward some sort of defence, any kind of defence) and now a fair sentencing. This way, there is no grounds for appealing on the basis of "I didn't get a chance to defend myself" or "no one listened to me at sentencing". Appellate courts can sometimes be lenient with self-reps - see the Porisky appeal.

Porisky getting his conviction quashed because he purportedly wasn't given a fair chance at a jury trial seems to be having a significant effect on judges here. In Debbie Anderson's (another Poriskyite) discussion I quoted this from her recent decision;

[3] Ms. Anderson has exercised her right to trial by judge and jury. Practically speaking, this case is particularly ill-suited to a jury trial, especially for a self-represented litigant who has lately acquired a concussion. For this reason, I had raised this as a subject to be considered, with a view to a future hearing to hear submissions on whether there were proper grounds to set aside the jury trial. However, the Court of Appeal recently overturned R. v. Porisky, 2012 BCSC 67 (CanLII), rev’d 2014 BCCA 146 (CanLII), a case in most respects identical to the case at bar, on the ground that Mr. Porisky had wrongfully been denied a jury trial.

I commented;

A couple of points of interest from these two paragraphs. Firstly, after the British Columbia Court of Appeals, in an abysmally wrong-headed decision, quashed Porisky's conviction because the trial judge didn't brand on Porisky's ass that he had the right to a jury trial, judges are being very cautious about anything that might imply that Poriskyites shouldn't be judged by a jury of their peers. Choosing a jury trial does not help Porisyites; juries hate them.

viewtopic.php?f=50&t=10747

[Wake Up! Productions]

YOUTUBE:

Dean Clifford on Global News (Sept. 14, 2015) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFKz-dk1Ioo

[LordEd]

The global new comments section is flooded with freeman sympathizers. Mostly correcting the reporter on "not following laws" vs "common law", and other nonsense.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2220411/judge ... urts-time/

[Wake Up! Productions]

The global new comments section is flooded with freeman sympathizers. Mostly correcting the reporter on "not following laws" vs "common law", and other nonsense.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2220411/judge ... urts-time/

Menard even gets in on it:

Robert Menard
A man who believes an imaginary construct (The Crown in Right of the Province of Manitoba) gave him authority over his fellow man absent their consent, claims those who question his authority live in a 'fantasy land'. Welcome to the surreal kafkaesque Canada.

[arayder]

Robert Menard
A man who believes an imaginary construct (The Crown in Right of the Province of Manitoba) gave him authority over his fellow man absent their consent, claims those who question his authority live in a 'fantasy land'. Welcome to the surreal kafkaesque Canada.

Now let me get this straight, Menard, who studiously avoids returning to the jurisdiction of Ontario were he is subject to immediate arrest is trying to tell the faithful freeman few that the authority of Ontario's government is just a fantasy?

So why doesn't Menard go back to Toronto and present himself to the cops and the courts?

Well, we know the answer to that question. Bobby gives the excuse that he won't show up in Ontario and fight it out in court because the cops want to beat him up. This despite the fact that he's already spent at least a night in jail in TO and came out unscathed! This despite the fact that in countless YouTubes he has claimed to have no physical fear of the cops!

I don't think a beating is what Bobby fears. It has been reported here that Bobby lost his nerve behind bars and ended up, in very unfreeman style, begging a lawyer to get him out of jail. I think Bobby fears being thrown in the clink by the same folks he, in his narcissistic fantasy, believes he lords over.

Menard says the only reason he didn't prevail in court was that his lawyer messed him over. He says the lawyer got away with it because he, Bobby, was ill. I suspect Bobby wasn't ill in the sense we think of illness. I suspect his fragil ego couldn't deal with being arrested, jailed and prosecuted by the same cops, prosecutors and judges he has for years pretended to have overawed. I suspect Bobby, psychologically speaking, was curled up in a fetal ball unable to deal with the destruction of his fantasy of uber superiority.

Just like he lied and told prospective clients in the early 2000's that he had "kicked ass" in court Bobby now wants everyone to believe that he's free to go anywhere in Canada he wants and do as he pleases along the way.

---------------
Dope Clock II
It has been 237 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.

[pigpot]

Put simply, I'd hope you guys and gal's here aren't trying to minimise the damage to your credibility, when Deano walks away with nothing and put it down to a "Pre-sentencing" (which spell checks out wrong by-the-way) hearing or somehe Judge other strange conflict in law that allows you people to thinks you have won when you have evidently lost.

Walks away with nothing? I think his best case is being credited with time served at double-time negating his sentence.

That'll be the cop out for the authorities. Dean remanded for 16 months or whatever it was and sentenced to time served but what about the plea. If he doesn't plead and then what? The most knowledgeable people in the freedom movement all know that a Judge can't plead for him or on his behalf and the only times it's actually happened is when the Judge knows the person to thick to work it all it for themselves. Is he going to do a deal with the Deanster behind closed doors or send him back down for contempt? I'm still backing the Deanster.

Are you putting your credibility on the idea he's going to walk out free because the court is backed into a corner?

Maybe... Maybe not. I have no credibility here so what am to loose either way. I'll back an affirmative answer. Yes Deanster walks free. Deanster WINS and then makes it even more public than it is now. I care not for the pathetic and plain silly jokes about what clothes he wears and how clean they are for a working man. Ad hominem and just pathetic. But I've been the brunt of that here and I couldn't give a fig about that. Adults.

[pigpot]

Please don't begin to think that the common man with a degree of intellect thinks for a moment that any "Court" wishes to be lenient as it doesn't.

It's not a case of what the court wishes, it's a condition of law to weigh up all relevant factors and mitigating circumstances during consideration of a sentence.

It's the consideration of a man. Not of law. Gravity doesn't consider anything. It simply IS.

[NG3]

It's the consideration of a man.

Acting under instruction, and within the guidelines of law.

eg. A judge can't just sentence you to 15 years of wearing a pink dress and calling everyone Muriel, or at least if he did it would be reversed as an unlawful, and unreasonable sentence (see appeals courts for regular evidence of this).

He can only act within the laws and guidelines laid down for him, therefore it is not the man, but the law that decides, and therefore your delusion of all judges being corrupt and callous and wanting to attack defendants, for no discernible reason, falls down at that point.

There is actually history of judges, in some countries, being removed from service, or encouraged to retire, for consistently being out of step on sentencing.

I appreciate facts tend to interfere with this particular fantasy of yours but they are what they are.

Deanster WINS

This is sentencing. He's already lost.

How can you still pick the wrong answer even after the event?

That's like me betting that the Canucks will win the 2011 Stanley Cup.

[arayder]

I agree that going round and round about the clothes and tools Dean wore during the filming of his muscular freeman video is pointless. But learning how to spot conmen is not.

It's okay with me if some otherwise gullible person decides to investigate Dean's spiel because he knows a few things about the law and thinks Dean's theories don't sound right.

It is similarly okay with me if the gullible person decides to dig into Dean's theories because he senses something phony about the video, or because he listened to Cari-Lee's audio tape.

[LordEd]

I have no credibility here so what am to loose either way. I'll back an affirmative answer. Yes Deanster walks free. Deanster WINS and then makes it even more public than it is now.

From the government sheep troll perspective, I see a guilty verdict and 16 months in remand. Those look like major losses.

What do you see as indications of an approaching win?