Freeman on the land.....lawful rebellion? Anybody here?

[bambodoggy]

Hey All,

Was nosing about on the web and YouTube over the last week or so and came across the Freeman on the Land Movement, along with various other forms of it, and while I'm not convinced they will get anywhere with their cause I did find it quite fascinating in an academic way.

So, I just wondered if anybody on here knew much about it or was actually involved or had sent the affidavits to the queen and where claiming common law rights or that they were in lawful rebellion?

I know we have a varied bunch on here from protesters to police constables, from activists to solicitors so wondered if we had any Freemen on the Land here?

Cheers,

Bam.

NOTE: This isn't a political thing or an anti-authority thing so please don't make it one....Don't phone, it's just for fun! Lol

 

[Toddy]

Bam, the last person who promoted this (I'm not saying you are, just that he did) was known as peasant churl, and if I mind correctly he got himself banned last year.
He claimed that he was good at, "Creative Writing (poetry, lyrics, persuasive writing ", and, that he dressed as,"imagine a cross between worzel gummidge, the lone ranger and robin hood bouncing around the forest dressing up in FC uniform for fun", advised that folks, "get down to Delamere Forest, if the forestry commission give you any problems or harrass you tell them you know me, they had a notice up in their HQ stating to their staff not to approach me under any circumstances, it's my local woods so if you wanna meet up let me know", while he claimed, "yep i'm not bound to Act's / Statues / Byelaws etc basically as long as I don't break the Common Law I'am free to do as I please in Common Law Jurisdictions ie: New Zealand, Canada, Australia......the common wealth countries.....

It all got a little heated

Interesting topic, but ca' canny with it please ladies and gentlemen

cheers,
Toddy

 

[bambodoggy]

Blimey, I go away for a coupe of years and you let all sorts of strange'uns in lol

Listen, I'm not all that fussed about it and was only asking out of interest so if it's easier then feel free to close or delete this with my full blessing

Loved your description lol

Cheers,

Bam.

 

[Toddy]

He was a character, I'll give him that by the end though he was lashing out with insults to everyone for some reason best known to himself

I think it is interesting; the rights and responsibilities of land usage, I mean. I know it's very different up here, but I freely admit I find it awkward to moderate threads that come that encourage 'wild camping' when I know that mostly that's illegal in E & W, even on publically owned lands, and I have to rake through the forum like a blue backsided fly trying to find the relevant links to which bits 'are' okay. Ged (blessings be upon him, may his fire burn bright ) wrote out a brilliant bit on wild camping that we Stickied, which has been a real boon; I must have linked it a hundred times.

This Freeman on the Land Movement ....don't know much about it, but so long as it doesn't go 'political', or promote, encourage or condone illegal activity (trickier that one ) I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be discussed.

Did you agree with all that they were advocating ? or did some of it not sit so happily ?

cheers,
Toddy

 

[rik_uk3]

They sound like a bunch of pinko commies to me.

 

[Imagedude]

They sound like a bunch of pinko commies to me.

and they wear tin foil hats...

 

[rik_uk3]

Talking of commies, any here of an age that remembers

[video=youtube;_etnosqOFu4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_etnosqOFu4[/video]

 

[Goatboy]

Ah Rik, you must be a Commie too, having a telly in the house and being to watch a non - BBC channel (well the only non-BBC channel in those days). What permissive parents you must've had. There was I being beaten twice a day, and only being aloud to read the classics, then off to subdue the local fauna.

 

[Qwerty]

There was a case in Ireland where a "freeman" was in the dock, in summing up, the judge said:

In handing down sentence, Judge Zaidan said he would direct Mr Sutton to get “psychiatric treatment as appropriate” while in prison.

http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local/man-questions-district-court-but-is-jailed-1-1940175

 

[John Fenna]

I have had a look at their website and Wikipedia on the subject and it sounds like the judge was about right!

 

[lavrentyuk]

I know a couple of "freemen" and, believe me, in the eyes of the judiciary and the Police it doesn't hold water.

The idea that the law only applies when the individual consents is plain wrong. The law may have an implied social contract element to it, but it is imposed by force. The threat of fines, prison, whatever. This is still applied to the "freemen" whatever they say.

There is no opt out (note that I am carefully avoiding the political discussion of class, money, bankers etc (whoops)).

 

[Andy BB]

• Dennis Larry Meads of Edmonton, Alberta, stormed out of a Court of Queen's Bench hearing on June 8, 2012, related to his divorce and matrimonial property case. In response, Associate Chief Justice John D. Rooke wrote a 185-page judgment rejecting what he called "Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments" (OPCA), specifically, in this case, Meads' Freeman on the Land claims, arguments and documents,[SUP][9][/SUP] saying that:

"The bluntly idiotic substance of Mr. Mead’s argument explains the unnecessarily complicated manner in which it was presented. OPCA arguments are never sold to their customers as simple ideas, but instead are byzantine schemes which more closely resemble the plot of a dark fantasy novel than anything else. Latin maxims and powerful sounding language are often used. Documents are often ornamented with many strange marking and seals. Litigants engage in peculiar, ritual‑like in court conduct. All these features appear necessary for gurus to market OPCA schemes to their often desperate, ill‑informed, mentally disturbed, or legally abusive customers. This is crucial to understand the non-substance of any OPCA concept or strategy. The story and process of a OPCA scheme is not intended to impress or convince the Courts, but rather to impress the guru’s customer."[SUP][10][/SUP]

 

[Elen Sentier]

They sound like a bunch of pinko commies to me.

that really did have me hooting ... along with the tinfoil hats !!! Thanks for the laugh, guys :You_Rock_

 

[shogun]

freeman of the land video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWHcugN1Tyg

it seems some of our own police dont even no the law and to me thats tottaly wrong...

 

[Swallow]

I came home one night to find Ms. Swift had signed a petition telling the Home Office to release one of England's main "Freemen" as he had been "arrested out of the blue and without warrent etc. etc.". When digging a bit it turned out he had been lifted because he did not turn up to his umpteenth court appoinment for his case regarding his continued non-payment of council tax. It turned out he just hadn't told anyone he was supposed to be there.

That level of misrepresentation tell me all I need to know about the people peddling it.

 

[ReamviThantos]

freeman of the land video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWHcugN1Tyg

it seems some of our own police dont even no the law and to me thats tottaly wrong...

Lol. The thing is the police are not trained as lawyers and some of them following basic training either do not make the time or have not the time to expand upon their "very" basic training before trying to involve themselves where clearly it is not necessary. Hopefully these two will now take the time to educate themselves and stick to their job description in serving the public and upholding (and sticking to) the law.

 

[Andy BB]

With laws being promulgated at an enormous rate of knots, it would be astonishing if even the most diligent copper could keep abreast - I doubt any solicitor or barrister could quote chapter and verse either on all of them - its why they get paid the big bucks to do all the reserarch (and point out all the laws that contradict each other!). Agree that all police should be comfortable with the basics though, particularly PACE.

Re videoing the police in the performance of their duties, I seem to remember that there was a law passed about that, but am open to contradiction on this!

 

[Andy BB]

on the other hand, maybe they don't have any power to stop such filming, according to the Met Police (unless they have reasonable grounds to suspect you of being a terrorist)

http://www.met.police.uk/about/photography.htm

 

[ReamviThantos]

on the other hand, maybe they don't have any power to stop such filming, according to the Met Police (unless they have reasonable grounds to suspect you of being a terrorist)

http://www.met.police.uk/about/photography.htm

i agree Andy, you could't expect anyone to keep up with legislation but the basics as you say should be known. i don't think there should be a problem with Police being filmed in the course of their duties as long as it is not obstructive or giving cause to effect a breach of the peace by others. In the video in question as the gentleman stated he was on his own property and the Police came over to him and then advised him he was committing an offence which is not the case as there was clearly no connection to potential terrorism in operation and that was simply bad policing.

 

[bambodoggy]

With laws being promulgated at an enormous rate of knots, it would be astonishing if even the most diligent copper could keep abreast - I doubt any solicitor or barrister could quote chapter and verse either on all of them!

I couldn't agree more.....the only slight problem I have is that as far as I know ignorance of the law is not an allowable defence. I.e just because you didn't know it was an offence to do X, Y or Z doesn't mean you can get away with it. So with all being equal under the law this must apply to police constables as it does to us the public...arguably even more so as they are trained to uphold the law surely?

What is worse about the clip below is that the constables in that clip were not only ignorant of the law, they also entered private property without reason or warrant, assaulted the film maker by grabbing for and pushing his camera and then literally lied and made up the law by telling him it was an offence to film when they clearly didnt know that it was.
what they should have done was wait at the property boundary and radioed for clarification before hand.

Having said the above, the Police do a hard job and can't all be right all the time, for every vid like the one posted below there will be another of the police doing exactly what they should, so please let's not tar all constables with the same brush and turn this into a police bashing thread as that isn't why I started it.

Thanks,

Bam.