Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jews

Moderators: Prof, Judge Roy Bean, ArthurWankspittle

Hilfskreuzer Möwe
Northern Raider of Sovereign Commerce
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 12:23 am
Location: R R R SS Voltaire 47N 31 26W 22 R R R SS Voltaire 47N 31 2 [signal lost]

Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jews

Post by Hilfskreuzer Möwe »

Brendon Lee of the family O'Connell does not like Jews. Not one bit. You may ask, when I say that, whether he believes Jews are malevolent, conspiratorial, kill innocents, and so on. And the answer is yes. Do they draw others into wars? Yes. Do they pretend to be Muslims and murder, so as to cause hate? Yes. Did Jews do 9-11? Yes. Do they run the Internet? Yes. In fact, you could probably propose pretty much any negative thing you wish, about Jews, and Mr. O’Connell would adopt that statement.

And if you were to meet Mr. O’Connell, and say you are a Jew, then he probably wouldn’t like you, too.

If you have any doubts about Mr. O’Connell’s Jew-hatery, read this:
It reproduces Mr. O’Connell’s in and out of court opinion of Jews in elaborate detail. I’ll leave that to interested readers.

Mr. O’Connell was tried by a jury and found guilty of anti-Semitic hate speech, both in person and online. He received a three year sentence. O’Connell appealed on a variety of grounds (without success). I mention this case because, among other things, O’Connell is an Australian Freeman. Here’s how he explained that (para. 77):
Just to clarify the jury - for the jury, my name is Brendon Lee - Brendon Lee of the family O'Connell. I am a sovereign subject of Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors. I'm a free man. This court does not sit under Ch 3 of the Australian Constitution - if you're that bored you can leave - sit under Ch 3 of the Australian Constitution, nor does it sit under 1903 Judiciary Act. This whole court is a farce. It's an insult to Skippy. But I'll continue on with this farce, this comedy. Absolute comedy. Here under duress ...
Oh, Skippy? His pet name for the judge. He used other ones, too (para. 77):
There are many examples of the appellant's disrespectful and insulting behaviour towards his Honour and the court during trial. The flavour of his behaviour can be gauged from the following examples:
  • 1. He said to his Honour, 'I wish to get your neck size so we can go straight to the gallows for treason': ts 280.

    2. When referring to his Honour, the appellant often called him 'adjudicator'. On other occasions, the appellant referred to his Honour as 'Captain Pugwash': ts 682, 'De Fuhrer' and 'Comrade Stalin'.

    3. He referred to the court as 'a kangaroo court': ts 261. To emphasise the point, he sang the theme song to the well-known children's television program 'Skippy': ts 662, and made references to Skippy, at other times during the trial.

    4. He insulted his Honour, saying, at one point, 'Shut up, you old fool': ts 683; and at another point, 'Were you paid or do they have something on you?': ts 733.
At trial he argued the judge and court had no authority (paras. 78-79):
THE APPELLANT: I'm sorry, adjudicator, I'm still waiting for the court to sit under common law under section - chapter III of the Australian Constitution and the Judiciary Act of 1903. When that happens - - -

WISBEY DCJ: The jury - - -

THE APPELLANT: When that happens, we can talk business. Till then, I'm just staring at the ceiling: ts 271.
How pleasant.

The more fanciful aspects of the appeal were a constitutional challenge, but leave was denied on that. The notice of constitutional challenge was “confused, contradictory and largely incomprehensible. It does not clearly identify any relevant matter arising under the Constitution or involving its interpretation.”: para. 84.

The court outlines the details of the arguments in paras. 87-88:
87 The first is that the passage of the Acts Amendment and Repeal (Courts and Legal Practice) Act 2003 (WA) (which, in broad terms, changed references to the Crown or her Majesty in a large number of statutes, including the District Court Act 1969 (WA), to the Governor or the State) 'purported to dissolve the indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown of the United Kingdom by removing the Sovereign': appeal ts 16.

88 The second issue is that the appellant asserts that, as the Department of the Attorney General has an Australian Business Number (ABN), the courts in this State have effectively become corporations. Thus, it is said the judiciary is no longer a separate and independent arm of government: appeal ts 18, 19.
These arguments were rejected as “trivial, unarguable, frivolous or vexatious” (para. 90). Changes to name for the Crown did not affect government authority (para. 91). This specific issue had been previously addressed in various actions advanced by Freeman-on-the-Land Wayne Kenneth Glew (viewtopic.php?f=47&t=9335).

Similarly, courts had already decided that an Australian Business Number does not convert someone or something into a corporation (paras. 93-94). In this case Freeman Harley Robert Williamson (viewtopic.php?f=47&t=9362) provided the relevant authority.

When I searched for more about Mr. O'Connell I was deluged by all manner of reporting from media sources of all kinds. What I did not find were comments from his fellow Freemen on his beliefs, conduct, and lack of success.

SMS Möwe
That’s you and your crew, Mr. Hilfskreuzer. You’re just like a vampire, you must feel quite good about while the blood is dripping down from your lips onto the page or the typing, uhm keyboard there... [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNMoUnUiDqg at 11:25]
Backo
Gunners Mate
Gunners Mate
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:27 am

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by Backo »

I'm surprised by some of the grounds advanced by Counsel on appeal. They must surely have known they were on a loser.

Oh well, better the money in the lawyer's hands than that of Mr O'Connell.
Hilfskreuzer Möwe
Northern Raider of Sovereign Commerce
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 12:23 am
Location: R R R SS Voltaire 47N 31 26W 22 R R R SS Voltaire 47N 31 2 [signal lost]

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by Hilfskreuzer Möwe »

Backo wrote:I'm surprised by some of the grounds advanced by Counsel on appeal. They must surely have known they were on a loser.

Oh well, better the money in the lawyer's hands than that of Mr O'Connell.
A very interesting point Backo. I had not noticed there was a lawyer representing Mr. O'Connell of the oh-so gentle spirit. A "Dr. John Walsh of Brannagh."

Who is this fellow? Not being Australian I could only guess, but it seemed an unlikely name for a native of that continent. And His "LinkedIn" profile (http://www.linkedin.com/pub/sir-john-wa ... /b/b41/213) provides a plethora of fanciful credentials!
Settlor and Founder
Australian Constitutional Trust
Nonprofit; 10,001+ employees; Legal Services industry
January 2011 – Present (2 years 7 months)

The Australian Constitutional Trust was established on 1st January 2011 by a Deed of Trust.

Notary Public
Court of Faculties
September 1997 – Present (15 years 11 months)

President
Norfolk Island Bar Association
July 1994 – Present (19 years 1 month)

Barrister-at-Law
Doctors' Commons
May 1994 – Present (19 years 3 months)

Chancellor Emeritus
Greenwich University
January 1989 – Present (24 years 7 months)

Barrister-at-Law
Independent Law Practice
March 1983 – Present (30 years 5 months)

International Lawyer and Advocate
Europe and the Americas
March 1983 – Present (30 years 5 months)

Constitutional Lawyer
Independent Law Practice
March 1983 – Present (30 years 5 months)

Barrister-at-Law
International Practice
March 1983 – Present (30 years 5 months)

International and Constitutional Lawyer
Doctors' Commons
October 1982 – Present (30 years 10 months)

International and Constitutional Lawyer
Norfolk Island Bar Association
October 1982 – Present (30 years 10 months)

Barrister-at-Law
PopulusHR
1981 – Present (32 years)
What is all this stuff?!

The "Australian Constitutional Trust" has 10000+ employees - but no webpage? (At least that I quickly identified.) There actually does appear to be a Norfolk Island Bar Association, and he does appear to be a lawyer listed there.

Wait - there's more! Walsh of Brannagh is the "International & Constitutional Law" team member (http://www.humanitad.org/team/) of "Humanitad" (http://www.humanitad.org/):
Humanitad is an international non-governmental, non-profit, self-funding organisation committed to the promotion of interfaith and intercultural tolerance and fellowship between all nations and faiths. We do this through global arts and cultural exposition, education and the facilitation of coherent and progressive exchange amongst international leadership.
And defending manic over-the-top anti-Semites?

I'd never heard of "Greenwich University". Oh - now I see why - it's a 'diploma mill'. Perhaps as substantial as our friendly neighborhood Strawman:
(Yes, yes, I know that by definition the Strawman is insubstantial - it's just an analogy...)

I'm going to stop digging at this point as I do not think I have the local expertise to properly evaluate "Walsh of Brannagh", but I bet there's far more of a tale here than what I have already uncovered.

Where there's smoke, there's usually a ship.

SMS Möwe
That’s you and your crew, Mr. Hilfskreuzer. You’re just like a vampire, you must feel quite good about while the blood is dripping down from your lips onto the page or the typing, uhm keyboard there... [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNMoUnUiDqg at 11:25]
Backo
Gunners Mate
Gunners Mate
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:27 am

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by Backo »

I'll do some digging to find out if he holds a practising certificate.

I suspect not, some of those qualifications appear dubious and there is something fishy about the Norfolk Island reference (for which I can't quite recall the reason at this time).
Backo
Gunners Mate
Gunners Mate
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:27 am

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by Backo »

Norfolk Island is an island off the coast of New South Wales in Australia. It is essentially a territory (rather than a state) of Australia and has its own legislative assembly. It has about 2300 residents, some of whom are descendants of the Bounty mutineers.

I was initially somewhat suspicious of the rigour of its oversight of its legal profession. My suspicions were misplaced. It has enacted the Legal Profession Act 1993, requiring practitioners to hold an interstate practising certificate (it may not have the resources or the need to govern admission in its own right).

Mr Walsh holds a principal level practising certificate via the Victorian Law Society. There is a provision in the NI Act for a local register of practitioners but I can’t find an online version. He is therefore a bona fide lawyer in Australia.

As for his CV:

- any mention of a his standing as a barrister, advocate or lawyer would be justified, although I note a certain amount of repetition.
- A notary public is a lawyer of a certain number of years standing who applies to the registering body in the UK providing community references. He is entitled to witness documents, usually for overseas purposes
- I suspect that the president of the Norfolk Law Associations does not have to campaign too hard for the position in a community of 2,300 people. But good on him none-the-less.
- The Australian Constitutional Trust sounds like hokum. If it is based on NI then it has more employees than residents. It claims to have accumulated 10,000 employees in two years. Australia’s 10th largest employer (the lowest for which I could easily find data) is the airline Qantas with 33,000 employees. So this guy runs an entity one third the size of Qantas. I’ve never heard of it and at that size I think I ought to have.
User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 4287
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by grixit »

Hmm. In the US, a notary public is a professional witness. Their function is merely to affirm that, as best as they can determine, the person who signed a given document is the person they claimed to be. There are business that offer that as well as more professional legal services, but this is unnecessary. You only have to be a trustworthy person to apply to become a notary public.Two of the clerical staff at my university's financial aid office were notary publics. So was the administrative assistant in a 5 person contractor firm i once did some work for.
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 8219
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by Burnaby49 »

I don't pretend to be knowledgeable on the topic but in British Columbia Canada (and apparently Australia, the topic of this thread and Great Britain) a notary public is considerably more than just a witness and takes on many of the duties of a lawyer. My wife and I have used notaries numerous times for functions that would have required a lawyer elsewhere such as buying real estate and doing our wills. Apparently in Australia most notaries are also lawyers. To quote Wikipedia;

Canada Canadian notaries public (except in the Province of British Columbia and Quebec) are very much like their American counterparts, generally restricted to administering oaths, witnessing signatures on affidavits and statutory declarations, providing acknowledgements, certifying true copies, and so forth

British Columbia In British Columbia, a notary public is more like a British or Australian notary. Notaries are appointed for life by the Supreme Court of British Columbia and as a self-regulating profession, the Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia is the regulatory body overseeing and setting standards to maintain public confidence.[6] Furthermore, BC notaries exercise far greater power, able to dispense legal advice and draft public instruments including:

Notarization
notarizations/attestations of signatures, affidavits, statutory declarations, certified true copies, letters of invitation for foreign travel, authorization of minor child travel, execution/authentications of international documents, passport application documentation, proof of identity for travel purposes

Real estate law
home purchase/sale; business purchase/sale; mortgages and refinancing; residential, commercial, & manufactures home transfer of title; restrictive covenants & builder's liens

Wills & estate planning
preparation and searches of last wills and testaments, living wills, health care directives, representation agreements, power of attorney

Contract law
preparation of contracts and agreements, commercial lease and assignments

easements and right of way

insurance loss declarations

marine bills of sale & mortgages

marine protestations

personal property security agreements

purchaser's side for foreclosures

subdivisions & statutory building schemes

zoning applications

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notary_pub ... h_Columbia
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by notorial dissent »

Has much the same connotation that it does in Mexico, Spain and France, whereas US notaries are quite limited as to what they can do.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
Backo
Gunners Mate
Gunners Mate
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:27 am

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by Backo »

I suppose I should have said that I was basing my post on my own jurisdiction. For a description of the process of becoming a notary public here see http://www.societyofnotaries-qld.org/appointment.htm

A notary public in Australia could do all the things listed in Burnaby's post, but not because they are a notary public. They are entitled to do those things because they must also be a solicitor. Their legal qualification is what entitles them to perform legal work, not their standing as a notary.

I would best describe a notary in my jurisdiction as a fancy witness whose certification is more likely to be accepted in other jurisdictions.
User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 6107
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by Pottapaug1938 »

In Massachusetts, a Latino notary cannot call himself (herself) a "notario", because in many Latin American countries a Notario has powers which are not available to Massachusetts notaries, and more than one notary has ripped off people thanks to their avoidance of disclosure of that difference.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 4287
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by grixit »

California has a similar law.
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Australia: Brendon Lee O'Connell really doesn't like Jew

Post by Famspear »

Pottapaug1938 wrote:In Massachusetts, a Latino notary cannot call himself (herself) a "notario", because in many Latin American countries a Notario has powers which are not available to Massachusetts notaries, and more than one notary has ripped off people thanks to their avoidance of disclosure of that difference.
To similar effect, in Texas:
Sec. 406.017. REPRESENTATION AS ATTORNEY.

(a) A person commits an offense if the person is a notary public and the person:

(1) states or implies that the person is an attorney licensed to practice law in this state;

(2) solicits or accepts compensation to prepare documents for or otherwise represent the interest of another in a judicial or administrative proceeding, including a proceeding relating to immigration to the United States, United States citizenship, or related matters;

(3) solicits or accepts compensation to obtain relief of any kind on behalf of another from any officer, agency, or employee of this state or the United States;

(4) uses the phrase "notario" or "notario publico" to advertise the services of a notary public, whether by signs, pamphlets, stationery, or other written communication or by radio or television; or

(5) advertises the services of a notary public in a language other than English, whether by signs, pamphlets, stationery, or other written communication or by radio or television, if the person does not post or otherwise include with the advertisement a notice that complies with Subsection (b).

(b) The notice required by Subsection (a)(5) must state that the notary public is not an attorney and must be in English and in the language of the advertisement and in letters of a conspicuous size. If the advertisement is by radio or television, the statement may be modified, but must include substantially the same message. The notice must include the fees that a notary public may charge and the following statement:"I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAW IN TEXAS AND MAY NOT GIVE LEGAL ADVICE OR ACCEPT FEES FOR LEGAL ADVICE."

(c) It is an exception to prosecution under this section that, at the time of the conduct charged, the person is licensed to practice law in this state and in good standing with the State Bar of Texas.

(d) Except as provided by Subsection (e) of this section, an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

(e) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if it is shown on the trial of the offense that the defendant has previously been convicted under this section.

(f) Failure to comply with this section is, in addition to a violation of any other applicable law of this state, a deceptive trade practice actionable under Chapter 17, Business & Commerce Code.
--Texas Government Code sec. 406.017.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet