Jump to content

American woman attempts to use freemanism


cookyy2k
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

 

American woman attempts to use "free inhabitant" nonsense to claim she has all the rights of a citizen without having to obey any laws. Spoiler: it doesn't go well for her.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These people make me despair: do they genuinely think the officer is just going to let them go?!

Im at court with one of these sort of people tomorrow. I'll keep you posted as to how it goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would imagine magistrates who know of these people shrivel inside when the know one is coming before them. Of if they dont know about them strongly consider a MH assessment being completed before trial 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking "If I were him, I would be cutting that bag off" and then he did just that. Awesome :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, she was just lovely!

 

Love how even when she was resisting and shrieking like a banshee, the officer was still unflappable. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aaaaaand.... My man who I mentioned above was convicted of everything. When will they learn that their rubbish just isn't true?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Global Moderators

Well the 4 I've encountered seem to back themselves out of their 'belief' when the cuffs go on, though a colleague had a particularly nasty #### who decided that being lawfully arrested (and subsequently found guilty at court, having defended himself), who decided that he must make a false allegation of sexual assault, because he was 'touched near the groin' during a S32 search...

I wish we could make freemanism and false complaints an aggravating offence that increases your sentence!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freeman due in court on two charges last week. The police prosecutor calls for 'John Smith'. A man steps forward and says he is the representative of John Smith. 'Is John Smith here' 'I am his representative,' 'John Smith needs to be here in person.' 'No he doesn't I am representing the person of john of the family Smith.' 'If John Smith is here and pleads guilty to charge A we will drop charge B and he will probably get a £100 fine.' 'I am here to represent him.' Back in court the Magistrate asks for John Smith and is told he is not there. 'Call for him again officer,' In comes 'the representative of John Smith' and there is a similar conversation as before. The Magistrate tells the representative to leave, who refuses so security remove him. Case heard in the absence of John Smith. Both charges proved £600 fine, £85 costs, £15 victim surcharge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Techie1 + unfeatured this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...