Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Moderator: Burnaby49

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

Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by Burnaby49 »

TLP, a local British Columbia Freeman, was convicted of 16 counts of sexual offending against five of his nieces, all of whom were between the ages of four and nine when the offences occurred. He chose to represent himself and readily admitted to the offenses, in fact his statements were critical evidence in convicting him;
[28] While I acknowledge some difficulty arising from the evidence of the complainant C. concerning the identity of the accused as the alleged offender and some issues arising from the accused's evidence about the possibility of the existence of another sexual offender against C., I am satisfied with respect to the offences alleged in Counts 7, 8, and 9 of the Indictment, that the Crown has, by the accused's own testimony, proven the identity of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt as the alleged offender.


He had two defenses. Firstly he claimed his goal was to teach them how to interact with child molesters by molesting them himself. Not, to my mind, a winning defense strategy;
[39] Other than the repugnant notion that children of the ages of these complainants could consent to the sexual activity for which he has been charged, the accused has also sought to justify and decriminalize his behaviour by reference to what he considers to be appropriate methods to teach children of tender years about all aspects of sexual activity they might encounter so that they will not become victims of sexual predators. He also espouses the theory that if such children do become sexual victims, they will know that they are not to blame and will not suffer guilt.

[40] A part of his theory also is that children of tender years are inherently sexual and that if they are not properly taught about sexual activity in all of its aspects and possibilities so that they will have full knowledge about those sexual topics, they will explore sexuality in ways that might prove harmful to them and prevent healthy sexual development in later years into their adulthood.

[41] Those notions have become an essential part of the accused’s belief system based upon his observation and participation in discussions about child sexual abuse and pornography and child development on a website he identified as "Anonymous," which he believes to be credible and in respect of which he has contributed.

[42] Primarily, based upon those theories, the accused testified and has submitted that the admitted sexual activity in which he engaged with the complainants and most specifically with, his four nieces, were not engaged in for a sexual purpose. He says they were engaged in solely for the purposes of teaching and development of trust relationships with them that would encourage them to come to him with sexual issues, questions, or concerns in the future after having been so instructed.
His second defense was that the children had legally consented to his activities. He'd imposed unilateral contracts on his victims stating that he could molest them. Since they failed to deny consent to his offer by issuing formal notices of refusal or default they had contractually agreed to his sexual advances.
A. No defence of consent available due to age of complainants

[32] Although the accused did admit to knowing the complainants’ ages he did nevertheless seek to suggest that the five children were somehow capable of consenting to the sexual offending with which he is charged.

[33] Those suggestions were made by the accused not only in his testimony at trial but also in the statement he made to the police on January 1, 2013.

[34] I specifically advised the accused that consent was not and is not a defence to the sexual offences for which he is charged. I gave that advice because of the provisions of s. 150.1 of the Criminal Code which provide that:

150.1 (1) Subject to subsections (2) to (2.2), when an accused is charged with an offence under section 151 or 152 . . . or is charged with an offence under section 271 . . . in respect of a complainant under the age of 16 years, it is not a defence that the complainant consented to the activity that forms the subject-matter of the charge.

[35] That provision makes any suggestion by the accused of the complainants’ consent legally inapplicable.

[36] The accused's testimony concerning his belief in the ability of a child of tender years to consent is based upon his adherence to a belief system espoused by those persons who style themselves Freemen-on-the-Land or some iteration thereof.

[37] To the extent I understand his evidence, the accused says that consent is a matter of contract formed by offer and acceptance in social settings in which, unless an offer is refused and notice of refusal given to the offeree, consent is established. He asserts also that silence in the face of an offer, whether verbal or physical, for example, an unwanted touching of a person, can result in acceptance and therefore establish consent.

[38] While the accused is entitled to his beliefs and may seek to govern his own conduct by them, they do not form part of Canadian law and, most particularly, do not override the provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada, enacted for the protection of children, to which I have referred.
He explained to the court how he taught the intricacies of the unilateral contract scheme to the children;
[104] On the first incident which occurred in Prince George, while they were sitting on a hill, the accused asked K. whether she wanted to learn about sex and what to do if someone did something wrong to her. She said she knew what to do. She would tell her mother.

[105] The accused proceeded to explain that was not right because she first had to engage in a process by which she said no, and if it that was not accepted, she had to give a second rejection, a “notice of default”, and if necessary repeat it, and then if the individual persisted, tell her mother.

[106] In doing so, the accused testified that he demonstrated his teaching by . . . (note - We don't need to go into the details) . . . to show what would be the appropriate response and the sequence of those responses. He also told her that she had to reject by words or actions because silence means consent.
This news report appears to relate to this matter, but does not offer any additional details.

http://www.vancouverdesi.com/news/nridi ... ung-girls/

R v TLP, 2015 BCSC 618
http://canlii.ca/t/gh7qr
"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
User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 4287
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am

Re: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by grixit »

I don't want any more details.

This reads like something a critic of fotl philosophy might make up as a reductio ad absurdum.

Except the fotls don't recognize absurdity even when it stands there, pants down with sticky fingers!
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
fortinbras
Princeps Wooloosia
Posts: 3144
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 4:50 pm

Re: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by fortinbras »

Goddam amazing what excuses pervs/junkies/psychos will cook up and expect to work.
Last edited by fortinbras on Thu May 14, 2015 12:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
LaVidaRoja
Basileus Quatlooseus
Posts: 841
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:19 am
Location: The Land of Enchantment

Re: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by LaVidaRoja »

That almost made me sick (literally). This is the type of situation that makes me believe we should continue to have a death penalty.
Little boys who tell lies grow up to be weathermen.
Jeffrey
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 3076
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 1:16 am

Re: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by Jeffrey »

http://www.vancouverdesi.com/news/nridi ... ung-girls/

As disturbing as the news is, at least it's getting some coverage.
JamesVincent
A Councilor of the Kabosh
Posts: 3048
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 7:01 am
Location: Wherever my truck goes.

Re: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by JamesVincent »

LaVidaRoja wrote:That almost made me sick (literally). This is the type of situation that makes me believe we should continue to have a death penalty.
Yeah, but we need to stop wasting it on honest murderers.
Disciple of the cross and champion in suffering
Immerse yourself into the kingdom of redemption
Pardon your mind through the chains of the divine
Make way, the shepherd of fire

Avenged Sevenfold "Shepherd of Fire"
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: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by Pottapaug1938 »

LaVidaRoja wrote:That almost made me sick (literally). This is the type of situation that makes me believe we should continue to have a death penalty.
Naw. Let him live the rest of his miserable life either 1) in solitary confinement or 2) worrying that some pissed-off fellow inmate is going to something not-very-nice to him when his back is turned. Child molesters, so I'm told, occupy the bottom rung of the prison status ladder.
"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
The Observer
Further Moderator
Posts: 7502
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 11:48 pm
Location: Virgin Islands Gunsmith

Re: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by The Observer »

JamesVincent wrote:Yeah, but we need to stop wasting it on honest murderers.
We really do need a "like" button for posts.
"I could be dead wrong on this" - Irwin Schiff

"Do you realize I may even be delusional with respect to my income tax beliefs? " - Irwin Schiff
User avatar
NYGman
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2271
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:01 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by NYGman »

Pottapaug1938 wrote:
LaVidaRoja wrote:That almost made me sick (literally). This is the type of situation that makes me believe we should continue to have a death penalty.
Naw. Let him live the rest of his miserable life either 1) in solitary confinement or 2) worrying that some pissed-off fellow inmate is going to something not-very-nice to him when his back is turned. Child molesters, so I'm told, occupy the bottom rung of the prison status ladder.
Maybe one of his fellow inmates can teach him all aspects of being someone's jailhouse b!#*h so that when it happens to him, he will know what to expect, and be able to know what is right and wrong. I would like to see how he refuses the offers in jail, and what the required jail form of the notice of refusal takes as failing to provide this will establish his consent to be somoene's jailhouse b!#*h.
The Hardest Thing in the World to Understand is Income Taxes -Albert Einstein

Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose - As sung by Janis Joplin (and others) Written by Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster.
fortinbras
Princeps Wooloosia
Posts: 3144
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 4:50 pm

Re: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by fortinbras »

I have been told by reliable sources that a very substantial number of prison convicts were abused/neglected as children, and, because of their own background, they will take a DEEP PERSONAL AND ACTIVE INTEREST in the rehabilitative/penal experience of someone like this.
Dr. Caligari
J.D., Miskatonic University School of Crickets
Posts: 1811
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by Dr. Caligari »

fortinbras wrote:I have been told by reliable sources that a very substantial number of prison convicts were abused/neglected as children, and, because of their own background, they will take a DEEP PERSONAL AND ACTIVE INTEREST in the rehabilitative/penal experience of someone like this.
...or, as my wife says, even axe murderers have children.
Dr. Caligari
(Du musst Caligari werden!)
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: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by Burnaby49 »

I reported on T.L.P.'s conviction two and a half years ago. Things move slowly here in Canada and we've finally gotten to the second act, sentencing. Yes two and a half years. But I doubt T.L.P. minds. The time served between conviction and sentencing generally counts as time and a half and, given his crimes, T.L.P wasn't going to over serve by waiting years for sentencing. So his time spent between the two events was essentially money in the bank. This is the sentencing decision;

R. v T.L.P.
2017 BCSC 1868
http://canlii.ca/t/h8rv3

T.L.P got 11 years less 31.5 chronological months for actual time served between conviction and sentencing and less another 16.5 months for the 50% boost-up.

This is a very long and technical sentencing decision with much psychiatric evidence so I'll do a superficial review to show the odd path (at least to me) that it took to get to the sentence. The delay was largely the result of the Crown preparing a case against him to be determined whether or not he is a "Dangerous Offender".

First the battling experts;
[132] As noted, T.L.P. did not oppose the Crown’s application under s. 752.01 Part XXIV of the Code that he be remanded for psychological assessment.

[133] T.L.P. also fully co-operated in the assessment that was then conducted by Dr. Hervé.

[134] Dr. Hervé’s assessment report dated August 25, 2015 was filed with the Court on August 28, 2015. Dr. Hervé was also called by the Crown as an expert witness during these sentencing proceedings.

[135] In response to Dr. Hervé’s report and opinions T.L.P. tendered a psychological assessment report dated October 20, 2016 prepared by Mr. Conrad MacNeil who also testified.

[136] Dr. Hervé is a registered psychologist in the Province of British Columbia who specializes in Forensic Psychology. He has over eighteen years of experience in conducting assessments including risk and threat assessments both generally and in the context of dangerous and long-term offender applications.

[137] Dr. Hervé interviewed T.L.P. for slightly more than 12.5 hours in July of 2015. He also administered two psychological tests, being, the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) and the Hare Psychology Checklist-revised (PCL-R) both of which measure personality and psychopathology.

[138] In formulating his opinions that are contained in his assessment report Dr. Hervé also conducted a collateral interview with one of T.L.P.’s sisters. In addition he reviewed: British Columbia Corrections files concerning T.L.P.; transcripts of the Proceedings at Trial; copies of interviews of T.L.P. by the police during their investigation of him; and, the reasons for judgment in which I convicted T.L.P.

[139] Mr. MacNeil has a Master of Arts degree in Psychology from Carleton University in Ottawa, Ontario that he obtained in 1981. He has worked in the field of forensic psychology as a clinical and consulting psychologist in Alberta until 2008 and in British Columbia since then but is not a registered psychologist in either province. He has, however, worked extensively in correctional facilities primarily as a private contractor involved in assessment and treatment of offenders and program development. Mr. MacNeil has also lectured on various psychological topics including violence and criminal behaviour at the third and fourth year level at Lethbridge Community College (1988 to 1993), Athabasca University (2002 to 2007) and the University of Lethbridge (2005 to 2007).

[140] Mr. MacNeil interviewed T.L.P. for five hours on October 20, 2016 and administered two psychometric tests: the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and the Beliefs Attitudes and Sexual Experiences Composite (BASEC).

[141] Before doing so Mr. MacNeil reviewed court documents and transcripts, police interviews of T.L.P. conducted during the investigation of him, information from the Correctional Service of Canada concerning assessment and treatment protocols; documentation from British Columbia Corrections concerning T.L.P.’s post-conviction incarceration; Dr. Hervé’s report and “a multitude of letters written by T.L.P. between March 13, 2015 to August 16, 2016”, the contents of two of which I have addressed.

[142] Although the expertise and qualifications of Dr. Hervé and Mr. MacNeil are very different, with Dr. Hervé being more academically accomplished and having greater assessment experience, I qualified both as experts able to provide opinion evidence on the psychological and risk assessment issues that must be addressed in respect of applications under Part XXIV of the Code.

[143] I did so because, given Mr. MacNeil’s extensive experience with treatment in corrections settings, his more limited academic qualifications and assessment expertise are matters that go to the weight to be accorded to his opinions rather than the admissibility of them.
So fine, battling psychiatrists. The big issue in dangerous offender applications is future potential harm to the public. So, next to be determined was whether or not he could be 'cured' of his proclivity for very young children, the so-called Risk for Recidivism;
[173] On the present state of the law as enunciated in Szostak, and the Court of Appeal’s decision in Boutilier the possibility of successful treatment is of limited application in determining whether an offender is a dangerous offender. Rather, the possibility of successful treatment is significant in choosing the appropriate disposition.

[174] In this case given that the Crown has agreed that if he is found to be a dangerous offender, T.L.P. should be sentenced to a determinate rather than indeterminate term of incarceration the only remaining issues concerning “appropriate disposition” in contest are the length of the determinate sentence that will appropriately address T.L.P.’s offending and the terms of the ten year Long Term Supervision Order that should be imposed upon him.

[175] What is at issue at the designation stage of the dangerous offender inquiry is whether the Crown has met the burden of proving that T.L.P. is a dangerous offender under the provisions of s. 753(1)(a) or (b).

[176] If not he must be sentenced as a long term offender under s. 753.1.

[177] To the extent that I may undertake a limited inquiry into the issue of treatability at the designation stage I find that the totality of the evidence requires a finding that while T.L.P. may at times pay lip service to a willingness to engage in treatment to address the causes of his sexual offending against children -- as he expressed to Mr. MacNeil – the genuineness of that willingness is highly suspect.

[178] Both Dr. Hervé and Mr. MacNeil have opined that T.L.P. meets the DSM-5 criteria necessary for the diagnoses of a Pedophilic disorder of the non-exclusive type.

[179] Both experts also agree that the greatest risk of T.L.P. re-offending sexually against children as he has in the past is with respect to prepubescent female children with whom T.L.P. is in a familial or similarly close adult-child relationship.

[180] T.L.P. has demonstrated in his evidence at trial, in his interviews with Dr. Hervé, and Mr. MacNeil and in his letters to Crown counsel to which I have referred the belief that: he is not a pedophile and that others are; that he is a protector of children, not a predator; and, that he understands childhood development and sexuality better than medical or other professionals.

[181] As far as I am aware T.L.P. continues to make those assertions and has never espoused a different or ameliorated view of his offending.

[182] Perhaps the most disturbing of the evidence related to the prospect for effective rehabilitative treatment to address the pedophilic causes of his offending identified by both Dr. Hervé and Mr. MacNeil is that found in T.L.P.’s letter to Crown counsel which I excerpted at para. 130 of these reasons. He writes that he will take treatment programs to gain knowledge of the treatment available so that he can credibly pose as a pedophile for the purposes of his proposed “secret society” to be created so that, as a protector of children, he can expose pedophiles.

[183] The totality of the evidence satisfies me that T.L.P. is not genuinely motivated for rehabilitative treatment and that in those circumstances together with his long standing and still continuing obsession with childhood sexuality and prepubescent female children it is highly unlikely that any treatment will be successful in addressing the root causes of his criminal offending.

[184] That evidence also leads me to conclude that given his conduct in the commission of the predicate offences and the pattern of his sexual offending against children since 2001 it is highly unlikely that any treatment he may receive will in future restrain his behaviour or control his sexual impulses against prepubescent female children.
So we have a judge who says that treatment is useless. He will probably in future, if released, again predate against young girls. But then the Crown throws him a lifeline;
[185] The Crown has conceded that the evidentiary record of T.L.P.’s performance both under community supervision while on bail pending the trial of the charges against him as well as while incarcerated demonstrates that he can be subject to control in the community.

[186] As a consequence of that evidence the Crown has taken the position under s. 752(4.2) of the Code that notwithstanding its position that T.L.P. should be designated as a dangerous offender under s. 752(1) he should be subject to a determinate sentence rather than an indeterminate sentence followed by a ten year Long Term Supervision Order.
This was the "WHAT THE FUCK?" moment for me. As I understand it the purpose of declaring an individual a dangerous offender is to allow the court to give him an indeterminate sentence so that he can be incarcerated indefinitely. So why is the Crown going for a fixed-term sentence and a Dnagerous Offender status? I contacted an expert and asked him. The issue that drove the Crown to go for the dangerous offender status is probably the Long Term Supervision Order. TLP was born in 1972 (para 96). That makes him 45 or 46. A 20 year sentence means he's liable for release around age 65. While it's not cited in the decision there is caselaw that says sex offender's risks drop off at age 65 because that's what the stats show. So TLP's risk will probably diminish at that point. A LTO of 10 years, plus an eleven year sentence can to some extent manage TLP's risk.

However even the judge had some problems with a deteminate sentence for a dangerous offender;
[187] It is somewhat difficult to rationalize those provisions of Part XXIV of the Code that allow for a determination that an offender meets the criteria for designation as a dangerous offender yet can be sentenced to a determinate sentence because of evidence showing a reasonable expectation of control in the community under supervision after release from prison.

[188] That is, however, the legislative regime now in place after the 2008 amendments to the Code as discussed in Szostak and by our Court of Appeal in Boutilier. The issue of dangerousness is determined at the designation stage based upon proof that the offender meets the statutory criteria for a finding that he or she is a dangerous offender. The issue of whether there is a reasonable expectation of control in the community is a part of the inquiry at the disposition stage.
The judge had no problem designating him a Dangerous Offender and nailing him with the ten year LTO, in fact he made the LTO indeterminate after the ten years.
[189] A finding that there is a likelihood, as opposed to only a substantial risk that, based upon a pattern of either previous aggressive behaviour or failure to control sexual impulses, the offender will re-offend in the same way with the same consequences for his or her victim requires the designation of the offender as a dangerous offender under s. 752(1).

[190] While the issue of eventual control in the community may ameliorate the sentence to be imposed upon the dangerous offender it does not affect the designation.

[191] The consequence of designation as a dangerous offender is that in the event of the commission of another serious personal injury offence by the offender the dangerous offender designation will govern any prosecution of that future offence.

[192] To that extent, I find that Mr. MacNeil’s opinion that the high risk that T.L.P. will in future re-offend against prepubescent female children is limited to situations where he is “in the community unsupervised, without restrictions and having access to children within a home environment” conflates issues of control with issues of intractability.

[193] In my opinion a “reasonable expectation of control in the community” must be read as extending beyond any period under which T.L.P. may be subject to a Long Term Supervision Order.

[194] In those circumstances I am satisfied that notwithstanding the evidence of T.L.P.’s past performance while under supervision does establish a reasonable expectation for his control and the protection of the public, it does not overcome the likelihood that he will in the future fail to control his sexual impulses as he has in his offending against his four nieces that is the subject of the predicate offences as well as in his sexual offending against C in 2001.

[195] The totality of the evidence adduced at trial and during this Part XXIV sentencing hearing, in combination with concessions and admissions made by T.L.P. identified by me in para. 49 of these reasons establishes that by application of s. 752(1)(b) of the Code T.L.P. must be designated as a dangerous offender.
"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
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: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by Burnaby49 »

One thing I failed to point out in the rambling post above. It appears T.L.P. became a child molester (at least as far as he explains his situation) as a result of becoming a one-man crusader against child poronography. He got caught up in the world of conspiracy theorists and internet poronography chatrooms. This change in his worldview resulted in his becoming a self-proclaimed Freeman on the Land. An odd route to FOTL status.
[151] Of particular importance are the following excerpts from T.L.P.’s background history as reported by Mr. MacNeil in his report dated October 20, 2016:

[T.L.P.] met his estranged wife when they were 19 years of age when he was living in Keremeos, and after their marriage they moved to Quesnel so that he could return to work fighting forest fires, in the offseason [T.L.P.] worked in construction while his wife remained a home maker taking care of their two children. He and his wife remained together for approximately 15 years, and he stated that he left her because of her addiction to crack cocaine. His son is now approximately 22 years of age where as his daughter is approximately 19 years old. Both children were essentially raised by his in-laws with the Ministry becoming involved and ultimately custody being granted to his estranged wife's parents. Collateral information suggests that there were some issues associated with abandonment and possibly neglect, with the children's mother signing over custody to her parents; however [T.L.P.] stated that there was a "string of allegations, falsehoods and lies" that led to his children being removed from his care.

Most significantly [T.L.P.] continued to spend unsupervised time with his children, and it was during this period that his daughter disclosed that she had been sexually molested. Allegations were made that the perpetrator was [T.L.P.’s] brother-in-law; however the focus came to be placed upon him when further disclosure details from his daughter pointed to him. It was during this time that [T.L.P.] developed a preoccupation with sexual predators/pedophiles and began a long history of searching for child pornography sites on the internet; acquiring child pornography images and making alleged efforts to develop a complex software program designed to detect these sites, reveal the identity of those involved and report such to authorities.

[T.L.P.’s] sister indicated that her brother had already begun to demonstrate fairly odd and peculiar thinking patterns and beliefs; especially those involving conspiracy theories which she reported he liked to talk to others about extensively. [T.L.P.] also visited internet chatrooms and became involved with others who supported and/or allied with him in his efforts to bring child pornographers and sexual predators to justice. He stated that his involvement with the sub-cultural internet group Anonymous evolved from these pursuits.

It was also at or around this time that [T.L.P.] adopted his self-appointed status as a Freeman on the Land and expounded his loosely structured associated beliefs with this doctrine as the means to counteract perceived injustices imposed by the Government. Collateral information suggested that the anti-authority activities arose in the face of [T.L.P.’s] frustrations in dealing with the Ministry with respect to the removal of his children.
"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: Freeman child molester was only trying to help

Post by notorial dissent »

It's a nice theory/excuse/explanation, but in otherwise the veriest of hooey, for a very vile behavior. There IS NO CURE, and if there is a behavior modification that works, I am unfamiliar with it. If this man is released he WILL BE A DANGER, and I question their age statistics.
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.