Robert Menard - Court-Sanctioned Peace Officer!

[arayder]

. . .Maybe they contained the part where he was told he was a peace officer.

Maybe. . .

Like the old Menard story about the North Vancouver cop who checked his computer and found he wasn't allowed to arrest the freeman Menard for drinking in public?

Or like Bobby tale about the Irish law firm that endorsed freemanism. . .until they didn't?

Like the time he said his lawyer sister admitted the truth of his "security of the person" theory?

Or like the two constitutional lawyers he ran into at a barbeque who told him his latest freeman law theory was exactly correct?

Like all his "clients" he says he help beat the rap, avoid taxes or dismiss their student loans?

It's always the same thing. . . Menard has a story which, conveniently for him, nobody else was there to see. Bobby lies like a witless 10 year-old. I swear I have great nephew in grade school who can make up better stories than arrested-development-Bobby! What next, Bobby? The lithe yoga instructor down the street has the hots for pudgy fez wearing freemen with bad teeth? A white knight is about to buy the ninja goat idea for a zillion dollars? The government says you are a peace officer? The RCMP is going to arrest Burnaby as you so bid?

One envisions the grade school Bobby who upon getting a beating for lying to his father and his sisters decided he needed to work on his lies rather than start telling the truth. It's just that simple! Decades ago Bobby decided to be a lair.

--------------
Dope Clock: It has been 89 days since freeman guru Robert Menard promised to bring legal actions to secure precedent setting judgments. So far there is no documentation of a single legal action by Menard.

[Burnaby49]

Burnaby49 to you.

I'll note that it was in December 2015 (I think, I'm not bothering to look it up) that Rob said he'd ordered the RCMP to arrest me "sometime in the new year" and so I'd better pack my bags in anticipation of an imminent arrest. That was almost a year ago and I'm still waiting for the knock on the door. Getting a few tonight but it's Halloween. To be fair to Rob he didn't stipulate which new year he was referring to. So I suppose, with yet another new year coming up, I'd better re-pack that bag and keep it by the door.

[arayder]

Then there was the time Menard created the Synergy Property Stewards scheme out of thin air, pretending he was organizing and financing the effort. If the reader recalls Bobby proposed have homeless people and drug rehabbers squat in and renovate foreclosed homes.

As usual Menard asked for donations!

Following his regular method of operation Menard controlled the narrative of the tale by setting himself as the only person who could report on the scheme. Menard hyped the fund raising effort with a twice delayed launch date and went so far as to recount the details of a couple of meetings he claimed to have had with a Vancouver credit union. He even took a photo of himself in a suit, wearing his ridiculous fez, in order to make it look like he was dressed up for the meetings.

Naturally Bobby claimed the credit union was really impressed with his idea and he promised big things. He knew full well it would be nearly impossible to check out his story with the credit union!

After the donation pipeline dried up and Bobby got his new project hype fix he simply quit talking about the scheme and moved on to his next freeman fantasy scam!

--------------
Dope Clock: It has been 90 days since freeman guru Robert Menard promised to bring legal actions to secure precedent setting judgments. So far there is no documentation of a single legal action by Menard.

[rumpelstilzchen]

I'll note that it was in December 2015 (I think, I'm not bothering to look it up) that Rob said he'd ordered the RCMP to arrest me

Why would Rob run to the RCMP when he has his own band of peace officers at his beck and call?

[notorial dissent]

That Burnaby is one scary dude, just ask Bobby? Obviously the R2D2's aren't up to the task of dealing with such a scary dude. Or maybe that's Mrs Burnaby he's afraid of. Then again we're talking about Bobby who's pretty much scared of his own shadow these days, could be a cop with that outstanding warrant dontchaknow?

[LordEd]

Looks like it was a "personal information" request, so it probably won't be published.

So i'll just assume that the contents of the missing pages didn't fit his desired narrative so he simply ignored them.

[arayder]

Looks like it was a "personal information" request, so it probably won't be published.

So i'll just assume that the contents of the missing pages didn't fit his desired narrative so he simply ignored them.

Mr. Menard claims to live by a freeman code which requires honor in one's dealings.

But the fact is Bobby is hardy honorable. He is willfully deceiving gullible freemen. The harm in doing so is seen in the several well documented cases of freemen going to ruin after being duped into believing Bobby's theories work and that he, himself, has successfully used them!

Let me be clear. .. Robert Menard's tall tales about his successes are not just mis-construed notions of the law. They are willfully constructed lies. I believe we are seeing yet another such lie in Bobby's I-am-a-recognized-peace-officer tale.

But we may take solace in dwindling reserve of gullibles willing to give Bobby any money or pay him any mind. Who knows one day Bobby might have to actually do enough honorable work to keep himself in Mooseheads and pretzels.

Dope Clock: It has been 90 days since freeman guru Robert Menard promised to bring legal actions to secure precedent setting judgments. So far there is no documentation of a single legal action by Menard.

[pigpot]

So Rob has conlusively proven that he could walk into the Vancouver Provincial Courthouse flashing his toy badge!

What makes something "toy" or real? Legal opinion or fact. Would this be a court that deals in law or a court that deals in facts? I care not for legal opinions (law). I only care to deal in facts.

[Judge Roy Bean]

... Would this be a court that deals in law or a court that deals in facts? I care not for legal opinions (law). I only care to deal in facts.

Courts deal in both whether you care or not.

[LordEd]

I only care to deal in facts.

Freemen don't deal in facts. They deal in half-truths and cherry picking to spin stories. For example, how Menard is skipping a number of pages in his FOI package, or continuing to talk interactively on a hung-up phone.

[pigpot]

... Would this be a court that deals in law or a court that deals in facts? I care not for legal opinions (law). I only care to deal in facts.

Courts deal in both whether you care or not.

So which holds the greater value in said courts, points of law (legal opinion) or points of fact (empirical evidence)?

[Judge Roy Bean]

... Would this be a court that deals in law or a court that deals in facts? I care not for legal opinions (law). I only care to deal in facts.

Courts deal in both whether you care or not.

So which holds the greater value in said courts, points of law (legal opinion) or points of fact (empirical evidence)?

Both. You have to deal with facts and the law. In a bench trial, the judge is the trier of both fact and law. In a jury trial, the judge is the trier of law and the jury is the trier of fact. If you attempt to ignore the law, you lose, no matter what the facts are.

[Burnaby49]

We're starting again with Pigpot asking vague questions trying to get something going that he can at least semi-legitimately eventually turn into one of his demented rants. So don't play his little game because, if it goes the way of prior Pigpot baiting, I'm going to be stepping in with my usual heavy-handed methods.

[notorial dissent]

Courts deal with "facts" and "points of law" all the time, that is their purpose. The kicker is that the "facts" and "points of law" HAVE to have some relationship to the matter at hand. If not they are irrelevant to that matter. The judge gets to make that determination, that is part of his job description.

[pigpot]

What is a "point of law"?

[rumpelstilzchen]

What is a "point of law"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_of_law

[arayder]

What is a "point of law"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_of_law

A point of law was reiterated when Menard's statement of claim asserting that he was a peace officer was dismissed (just trying to get the thread on topic).
--------
Dope Clock: It has been 93 days since freeman guru Robert Menard promised to bring legal actions to secure precedent setting judgments. So far there is no documentation of a single legal action by Menard.

[noblepa]

... Would this be a court that deals in law or a court that deals in facts? I care not for legal opinions (law). I only care to deal in facts.

Courts deal in both whether you care or not.

So which holds the greater value in said courts, points of law (legal opinion) or points of fact (empirical evidence)?

That's an incredibly stupid question.

If the question is one of law, then a point of law carries more weight.

If the question is one of facts, then facts are more important.

The fact is that Menard carries a badge. It is real, in the sense that one can touch it and pick it up. So, there is no question of fact that he has a badge.

The question of law, and whether it is "real" or "a toy", is, does said badge confer any legal authority on him? That is not a question of fact. It is a question of law.

Virtually any court case involves both questions of fact and questions of law. One can be charged with murder, admit that you killed the victim (point of fact), but argue (point of law), that you did so in defense of yourself or others. Sometimes the facts are unclear and must be decided by a jury. Other times the law is unclear, or it is unclear which law applies. The judge usually decides the latter questions.

[wserra]

You guys do realize that these aren't good-faith questions, right?

[The Observer]

You guys do realize that these aren't good-faith questions, right?

You do realize that someone is letting these questions get through?