Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Mountain Man Win - Judge Abandons Court

  1. #1

    Mountain Man Win - Judge Abandons Court

    Last edited by allodial; 12-25-13 at 11:06 PM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by allodial View Post
    ..........
    Now this is my kind of American. In a packed courtroom, 52-year-old Ernie Tertelgte told the judge “I am a living man protected by natural law and I have the right to forage for food when I am hungry… You are trying to create a fictitious, fraudulent action.” Charged with fishing without a license and resisting the arrest for fishing without a license, Mr. Tertegte says he’s being wrongly prosecuted for trying to feed himself.
    http://conservativepost.com/mountain...nding-himself/

    DENVER, CO. A Wyoming man seeking to overturn rulings by a Wyoming federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in favor of the U.S. Forest Service in a dispute over whether his land may be used as a federal trail today received notice that his petition that the Supreme Court of the United States review the rulings was granted. Marvin Brandt, of Fox Park, claims title to a railroad right-of-way and a road that accesses his property. The land claimed by the United States was used as a railroad right-of-way from 1904 until 1995 when the railroad abandoned it; all tracks and ties were removed by 2000; thereafter, the Forest Service abandoned what was once a road. The Wyoming court, over Mr. Brandt’s objections, ruled the Forest Service retained a reversionary interest in the railroad right-of-way pursuant to two federal statutes and that the Forest Service did not abandon the road. A three-judge panel upheld the ruling in September 2012 and then refused to rehear the case. http://www.mountainstateslegal.org/n...w#.UrfyqrvnbIU

    Freeman Shuts down the court Judge abandoned the court http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m839K97KJ5Q

    Nothing wrong with enjoying the fruits of nature.

  3. #3
    I was to request deletion of the thread favoring it for an analysis for where he may have gone wrong since he appeared for the second case after the "judge' abandoned the room and was then after further analysis found guilty--although there was divergent evidence. In a sense it was a win --at first.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  4. #4
    I have restored the video link in the first post. As indicated, I would have preferred this to be moved to a discussion about Refusal for Cause and appearances. With the judge leaving the courtroom, perhaps they re-invited him the second time. Seems he made an appearance-appearance the second time: they summoned an entity and he appeared. As I've mentioned many times "summoning" is one of the most fundamental spells in magic, witchcraft--even in fantasy role playing games. This is not to suggest summoning to always be evil or unlawful. Something to consider nonetheless.



    Related: Apparitor.
    Last edited by allodial; 12-25-13 at 11:11 PM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  5. #5
    This seems worthy of analysis especially with respect to refusal for cause.
    Last edited by allodial; 12-25-13 at 11:22 PM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by allodial View Post
    This seems worthy of analysis especially with respect to refusal for cause.


    In the first vid the judge gives the answer why he failed.
    They almost always do, but when one is in that situation the mind races to fast and misses the obvious.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by walter View Post
    In the first vid the judge gives the answer why he failed.
    They almost always do, but when one is in that situation the mind races to fast and misses the obvious.
    Often they do. Perhaps you can explain?
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  8. #8
    Sure thing
    There are many mistakes he did.
    But one sticks out big time.


    0:15 Judge "but your here in court today"
    0:26 mtn. man "I am here"
    0:42 mtn. man claims the NAME
    0:46 mtn. man agrees to civic address and judge says "alright"
    1:13 judge says Mr. mtn. man was here
    1:57 judge says he was charged
    2:16 mtn. man agrees he was charged
    3:18 judge "but your here"
    3:27 judge "you are here"
    4:42 judge "you are here"
    4:45 mtn. man " i am here"
    4:46 judge "right"
    5:33 judge "you are here"
    5:36 mtn. man " i'am here"

    see the trend?


    As long as he answers to the surname its game over.
    He forfeits the NAME, he claims he is not the NAME, but then says he is their to protect the NAME.
    Why protect something that you are claiming is not yours?
    He should have got a psychiatric evaluation.

    The short of it is that the mtn. man appeared to the summoned NAME.
    File your abatement,jurisdiction challenge, bond or what ever else you want to and then stay at home.
    Appearance of any kind is still an appearance.

    Same shit happened to me before I got the picture and then I stopped going.
    Game ended, nobody to play with.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by walter View Post
    As long as he answers to the surname its game over.

    ....

    The short of it is that the mtn. man appeared to the summoned NAME.
    File your abatement,jurisdiction challenge, bond or what ever else you want to and then stay at home.
    Appearance of any kind is still an appearance.
    You pretty much got it. However, special or restricted appearances are not the same as general appearances. Likely he was seen as riding the fence.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by walter View Post
    Sure thing
    There are many mistakes he did.
    But one sticks out big time.


    0:15 Judge "but your here in court today"
    0:26 mtn. man "I am here"
    0:42 mtn. man claims the NAME
    0:46 mtn. man agrees to civic address and judge says "alright"
    1:13 judge says Mr. mtn. man was here
    1:57 judge says he was charged
    2:16 mtn. man agrees he was charged
    3:18 judge "but your here"
    3:27 judge "you are here"
    4:42 judge "you are here"
    4:45 mtn. man " i am here"
    4:46 judge "right"
    5:33 judge "you are here"
    5:36 mtn. man " i'am here"

    see the trend?
    The NAME and the word you go hand in hand. I believe I picked this attachment a few days ago from here on another thread.....maybe not....but it's worth posting ....from pg 2 of the attachment

    In “law”, this word “you”, is properly utilized in all ordinary legal discourse when
    addressing the singular mind (or the single party with volition) within the plural-nature construct of a PERSON. The PERSON being comprised of a man that answers for, or is
    liable for that PERSON, and the corporate entity that IS that PERSON. In this sense,
    addressing a PERSON, as “you”, is actually as close to a proper use of the word “you”,
    as anyone could imagine.


    Quote Originally Posted by walter View Post
    As long as he answers to the surname its game over.
    He forfeits the NAME, he claims he is not the NAME, but then says he is their to protect the NAME.
    Why protect something that you are claiming is not yours?
    He should have got a psychiatric evaluation.

    The short of it is that the mtn. man appeared to the summoned NAME.
    File your abatement,jurisdiction challenge, bond or what ever else you want to and then stay at home.
    Appearance of any kind is still an appearance.

    Same shit happened to me before I got the picture and then I stopped going.
    Game ended, nobody to play with.
    Touché !
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by ag maniac; 12-28-13 at 03:20 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •