Jacquie's a disease and The Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta is the cure!
Or, I suppose more correctly, Jacquie's a virus and Queen's Bench is the vaccine!
That's not a half-assed comparison I drunkenly dredged up, it's the reasoned opinion of Queen's Bench itself. It's in a very recent released decision where the court whacks away at Jacquie's purple-hued head yet again!
[53] This may appear to be the use of a sledgehammer to crush an ant. I would instead use the analogy of an inoculation to stop a virus. OPCA and MCLR gurus harm people. Ms. Robinson has already harmed MHVB and her family. These gurus teach illusions that will predictably fail. They promise much, but their clientele gets less than nothing.
https://www.albertacourts.ca/docs/defau ... c6186683_2
But I'd have to say it's not the most sensitive comparison from Jacquie's point of view because she, along with the rest of her tribe, are ardent anti-vaxers. This is what one of her avid followers (who I'll return to later) thinks of coronavirus vaccines;
Else Smart
December 8 at 4:40 AM •
If you do take this, highly suspect and potentially dangerous "vax zine", please do yourself and your family a favour and do the following:
1) Record yourself on a 10 min video before taking the "vax ine" so you have a medical reference point of what you were like before.
2) Get your last will and testament done.
3) Make amends with people you may have harmed in the past.
4) Make sure your medical insurance will cover you in case you become a "vegetable". Do not burden your family for your mistake.
5) Write down all passwords for banking information etc and give it to someone you trust.
6) Designate someone "power of attorney" over you and your estate.
7) Tell your family and close friends you love them.
Make peace with your Creator/God/Universe.
That is all.
And more than enough! Words of wisdom else, words of wisdom. But back to Jacquie. While Jacquie is off in England saving the grateful Brits from the tyrannical horrors of a parliamentary democracy Queen's Bench has unleashed another diatribe of unkind words about Ms. Phoenix. Actually, Ms. Robinson as far as the Queen's Bench is concerned, the court isn't even willing to give her the courtesy of using her self-invented free-spirited moniker.
[1] This is a follow-up to my decision of August 26, 2020 in AVI v MHVB, 2020 ABQB 489 [AVI #1]. That decision centred on an intermeddler to a child custody dispute. The third party, whose actual name is Jacqueline Robinson, instead self-identified as “Jacquie Phoenix, Sovereign Woman Living on the Land, Legal Beneficiary / Soul Administrator To the Trust of the Legal Fiction Known as Jacqueline Robinson”. I will in this decision refer to Ms. Robinson by her actual name, “Jacqueline Robinson”, rather than the legally meaningless “Strawman” legal persona she has adopted.
Immediately after declining to use her new sovereign title the judge started getting very personal about his thoughts on Jacquie;
[2] As discussed in AVI #1, Ms. Robinson is a pseudolaw promoter, or “guru”. Pseudolaw is a collection of spurious legally incorrect ideas that superficially sound like law, and purport to be real law. In Meads v Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 [“Meads”], ACJ Rooke grouped these concepts together under the term “Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments”, or “OPCA”. In layman’s terms, pseudolaw is pure nonsense.
[3] Gurus are a particularly obnoxious component of the pseudolaw phenomenon. They operate as “Typhoid Marys” who spread the pseudolaw “disease of ideas” into new populations: Donald J Netolitzky, “The History of the Organized Pseudolaw Commercial Argument Phenomenon in Canada” (2016) 53:3 Alta LR 609 at 611.
[4] In Meads at paras 669-671, Rooke ACJ characterized OPCA gurus as “evil counsellors”, “falsifiers”, and “hustlers” who “profit at the expense of naïve and vulnerable customers”, “selling lies or wildly dubious concepts.”
[5] I agree with these descriptions of OPCA gurus. They apply to Ms. Robinson. As I observed in AVI #1 at para 19, Ms. Robinson knows her techniques do not work because, despite having deployed her pseudolaw shield, Ms. Robinson was nevertheless convicted of traffic offences in 2019.
Goodness! That's a bit of a negative assessment. Judge Graesser also tossed in a comment about Jacquie's somewhat underwhelming performance at Queen's Bench which got her in trouble with that court in the first place;
[7] The fakery of the Magna Carta Lawful Rebellion is exemplified by this case. A year ago, MHVB had access to her daughter. She wanted greater access and access without restrictions. After joining with Ms. Robinson and her group, MHVB no longer has any access to her daughter. She has been removed as a guardian of that child. There is a warrant for her arrest following her failure to appear on criminal proceedings against her.
Admittedly Jacquie didn't manage to get her client the most optimal of outcomes but even Clarence Darrow lost a case once in a while! So what's got Judge Graesser so riled up? Jacquie's been acting up again and Queen's Bench isn't happy about it.
II. Subsequent Developments
[21] A number of events have transpired since AVI #1 was released.
[22] I have received no submissions from Ms. Robinson on why she should not be prohibited from acting as a legal representative in Alberta Courts. MHVB sent no further MCLR documents to this Court, and therefore appears to have abandoned a partially completed MCLR “Three/Five Letters” process that targeted Associate Chief Justice Nielsen of this Court. MHVB did not attend her criminal abduction prosecution hearing (R v MHVB, Edmonton 191419951P101 (Alta PC)), and so now MHVB is also facing failure to appear criminal charges (R v MHVB, Edmonton 200728665P101 (Alta PC)). A Warrant has issued for MHVB’s arrest.
[23] On September 11, 2020, AVI applied to vary Z’s parenting arrangements to suspend MHVB’s parenting time.
[24] AVI’s application states he and his lawyer had been threatened by MHVB and Ms. Robinson, who claim they are above the law. AVI perceived a “severe risk” that MHVB would abduct Z again, and that MHVB, Ms. Robinson, and/or Ms. Robinson’s followers would engage in illegal activity directed to Z.
[25] Justice Sulyma granted AVI’s application, on September 14, 2020, and ruled AVI is the sole guardian and decision-maker for Z. Any further direct or indirect contact between MHVB and Z is prohibited. MHVB did not attend this application.
[26] AVI in his September 11, 2020, application also reported that Ms. Robinson had made public statements in response to AVI #1, including video rebuttals of articles published in the National Post reporting on AVI #1. Ms. Robinson was said to have rejected the Court’s judgment, saying “it had no more effect on (her) than a statement by the CEO of McDonalds.” AVI noted Ms. Robinson claimed to have thousands of followers in a number of countries.
[27] If nothing else, the newspaper report indicated by AVI (Tom Blackwell, “Lawyer files criminal complaint against ‘pseudo law’ follower accusing Alberta judge of sedition” National Post (3 September 2020), online: <nationalpost.com/news/canada/lawyer-files-criminal-complaint-against-pseudo-law-follower-accusing-alberta-judge-of-sedition>), and Ms. Robinson’s YouTube video rebuttals, establish that Ms. Robinson had received the AVI #1 decision, and that Ms. Robinson does not accept the Court’s judgment as correct or valid. She has not, however, appealed that decision.
[28] That conclusion, in any case, has subsequently become obvious. Ms. Robinson has sent further MCLR correspondence to the Court. First, a packet was received from “Jacquie Phoenix”, dated October 16, 2020, and addressed to “All Alberta Clerks of the Court (Failure to Identify is Misconduct in Public Office) doing business as Clerks of the Court”. It reads:
Dear, Alberta Clerks of the Court rubber stamping and signing documents without your printed name. Failure to Identify is Misconduct in Public Office.
Notice to Principle is Notice to Agent
This document is meant to inform you it means what it says and it says what it means.
On March 23rd, 2001 Article 61 of Magna Carta 1215 was invoked according to Constitutional Protocol due to Treason at the Highest Levels. This is Evidential Fact, The Queen has been deposed all her governments were dissolved of all authority. It is by Royal Command that we take the Oath of Article 61 and defend the Constitution. We the People of the Commonwealth of Great Britain demand that our Rule of Law be Restored. Our Common Law Justice System. Properly Convened Court De Jure Jury Trials of the People with full Jury Nullification.
On February 27th, 2019 Sharon Lepecich Executive Director of the Provincial Court of Alberta was put on Notice of the Evidential Facts. Notice to Principle is Notice to Agent. It was her Duty to inform you that Treason has and is being committed against the people and that Article 61 is the Only Law in effect throughout the Commonwealth Realm.
The courts have been Usurped by a Treasonous Regime and they are using Unconstitutional Acts and Statutes to commit very serious crimes against the People and the Clerks of the Court are rubber stamping these crimes. We are all responsible for our own Actions inactions and omissions. I urge you to consider Nuremburg I was just doing my Job is NO defence as Evidenced from those Trials.
Maxum in Law Ignorance of the Law is no excuse
[Jacquie Phoenix signature]
[Sic, emphasis and formatting in original.]
[29] This item was accompanied by a “Notice of Conditional Acceptance” document dated October 14, 2020, that is addressed to “Failure to Identify (Misconduct in Public Office) doing business as Clerks of the Court”, carrying the docket number of this action (#FL 03 055142”), and signed “Jacquie Phoenix” in purple ink and with a purple ink fingerprint. This document otherwise largely matches what I received from Ms. Robinson on June 27, 2020, and that is reproduced in AVI #1 at Appendix “D”. The exception is that Ms. Robinson now threatens the Court and its staff:
Failure to respond to this 'Notice of conditional acceptance' within the reasonable time frame allotted, and or without providing evidence in substance that clearly defines that article 61 is no longer in effect, shall be taken to mean by all interested parties (including interested third parties) that Alberta Court of Queen's Bench has NO lawful claim against I, Jacquie Phoenix or [MHVB] and, that Failure to Restore Her Property or any future attempt to extort monies or goods relating to this this matter would be harassment, coercion and demanding monies with menaces, which may evoke a counter claim for damages against Alberta Court of Queen's Bench and you personally Court Clerks who Failed to Identify. All Records and Hard drives will be seized by a Jury of the People to Identify you
[Sic.]
[30] Ms. Robinson also attached another copy of the MHVB “Power of Attorney” document.
[31] In addition, Ms. Robinson, as “Jacquie Phoenix”, has witnessed additional MCLR documents sent to Associate Chief Justice Rooke of this Court. These appear to be the parts 4 and 5 of the MCLR Three/Five Letters process. These items, “Notice of Coercion to Aid and Abet High Treason & Misprison of Treason”, and “Notice to Stop”, are attached as Appendices “A” and “B”.
[32] The contents of these documents are typical of a Three/Five Letters scheme (Rothweiler v Payette, 2018 ABQB 288; Bank of Montreal v Rogozinsky, 2014 ABQB 771), though the “Notice of Coercion” provides a more expansive and detailed historical narrative that explains the conspiracy, treason, and sedition which led the 28 new rebel barons to stage their revolt in 2001.
[33] These documents purport to clear up any mystery about the 2001 Barons’ fears for treason. It turns out the Nazis are behind it all. In 1942, the Nazis set up the foundation for the European Union:
... with the effect that should the Nazis lose the war, militarily, they should continue their plans for a European dictatorship economically, through corporatism (aka fascism), and political subversion.
[34] I have carefully reviewed the timeline of wrongdoing found in the “Notice of Coercion”, and note that while this document concludes that a succession of UK Prime Ministers and governments engaged in high treason, treason, and sedition, that absolutely nothing described has anything to do with Canada. This leads me again to wonder how it is that Ms. Robinson and her followers can imagine that these declarations of UK (and Nazi) wrongdoing would purportedly affect the authority and legitimacy of Canadian governments and institutions.
[35] Then there is this strange claim:
... The last constitutionally correct coronation Oath was taken by the traitor James II in 1685.
[36] I assume that this claim follows the theory that Queen Elizabeth II was not properly crowned and never became the Queen, such that no legislation since then and no official acts have any validity. The defect in her coronation as I understand it is that the Queen did not kneel on the Stone of Scone when giving her oath. All Kings and Queens since James II had knelt on this famous stone, which was housed in Westminster Abbey in London. Shortly before the coronation, the Stone was stolen. Lore has it that the Queen knelt on a replica of the Stone, as the original had not been recovered from its thieves (allegedly Scottish Nationals).
[37] I am unaware of why coronations prior to that of Queen Elizabeth II are alleged to be invalid. The allegation is just another example of the gibberish that is in these documents.
I guess the judge just wasn't ready to accept that the leaders of Canada's various governments are secretly Nazi worshipers! So, first for some unfinished business, stopping Jacquie from acting on behalf of others in Alberta's courts;
[43] In light of Ms. Robinson’s failure to respond to my request for submissions in AVI #1, and her post-AVI #1 conduct, I order, effective immediately, that:
1. Jacqueline Robinson, a.k.a. “Jacquie Phoenix” is prohibited from:
a) providing legal advice,
b) preparing documents intended to be filed in any Alberta court for any person other than herself, and
c) filing or otherwise communicating with any Alberta court, except on her own behalf.
2. Jacqueline Robinson, a.k.a. “Jacquie Phoenix” is prohibited from acting as an agent, next friend, McKenzie Friend (from McKenzie v McKenzie, [1970] 3 All ER 1034 (UK CA) and Alberta Rules of Court, Alta Reg 124/2010, ss 2.22-2.23), or any other form of representation in Alberta court proceedings.
Then on to her recent antics;
[44] Ms. Robinson’s MCLR materials sent to myself on June 27, 2020, and the October 16, 2020, materials received by the clerks of the Court may represent criminal conduct, “intimidation of a justice system participant”, Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46, s 423.1; Re Boisjoli, 2015 ABQB 629 at paras 58-69.
[45] Ms. Robinson appears to be in contempt of court since she has ignored the Court’s Order dated August 25, 2020, that requires her to only correspond with the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench as “Jacqueline Robinson”, and that Ms. Robinson again breached that Order’s prohibition against her filing, preparing, witnessing, and otherwise formalizing any document in relation to the AVI v MHVB action.
[46] I therefore also order that:
Jacqueline Robinson, a.k.a. “Jacquie Phoenix”, is prohibited from sending documents to the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, or justices, officers, or employees of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, where those documents purport to claim, exercise, or impose authority based on Article 61 of the 1215 Magna Carta.
[47] The Court will prepare and serve the Order giving effect to this decision. Ms. Robinson’s approval of the form and content of this Order is dispensed with pursuant to Rule 9.4(2)(c).
And, since the court is no doubt aware that Jacquie is currently of no fixed address and couch-surfing in northern England, the judge didn't require that his decision be actually delivered to her in person;
[48] Service of the Order on Ms. Robinson may be made by email or Facebook posting to Ms. Robinson’s last know electronic addresses, as well as a copy being sent by ordinary mail to the address Ms. Robinson has used in her communications with the Court. Such service is deemed good and sufficient on her.
And then a little closing lecture;
[49] In AVI #1, I cautioned MHVB about the serious consequences that pseudolaw could have for her. It is now Ms. Robinson’s turn to be warned.
[50] This Court will not tolerate harassment and threats directed to its judges and staff. The Court has the inherent jurisdiction to protect itself and its processes. If Ms. Robinson chooses to ignore this Court’s Orders, she can expect to be summoned to appear before me to explain her breaches of this Court’s binding instructions.
[51] None of Ms. Robinson’s pseudolegal claims will benefit her in any way. Her magic paperwork will not assist her. She knows why. I explained that in detail in AVI #1.
[52] The consequences of contempt are not trivial. In Fearn v Canada Customs, 2014 ABQB 114, and in particular paragraphs 215-256, the Court concluded that gurus who promote OPCA schemes that purportedly defeat legitimate court authority are engaged in criminal contempt of court.
[53] This may appear to be the use of a sledgehammer to crush an ant. I would instead use the analogy of an inoculation to stop a virus. OPCA and MCLR gurus harm people. Ms. Robinson has already harmed MHVB and her family. These gurus teach illusions that will predictably fail. They promise much, but their clientele gets less than nothing.
[54] These schemes are nothing more than cons, led by people who rely and feed on the oft-quoted statement attributed to P.T. Barnum (of circus fame): a sucker is born every minute. That is as true now as it was when spoken more than 150 years ago. The Courts are not suckers. And the Courts will not be intimidated.
We haven't heard much from Jacquie since she started her triumphant tour of decaying post-industrial Yorkshire towns. Maybe this will trigger an outbreak of righteous sovereign Legal Dissent wrath from her. Dare we hope for another drunken video?
Almost forgot, I was going to discuss Ms. Smart. The last seven pages of the decision is an appendix showing the kind of rubbish Jacquie's been dumping on the court. Specifically something called a "Notice of Coercion to Aid and Abet High Treason & Misprision of Treason” addressed to Judge Rooke. That guy just seems to keep getting himself in trouble!
I'm not going to review the entire document, a lot of gibberish about nazis, the EU, secret documents, treason by Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair, and just about everyone else in Britain since the Nazi's really won the war. However the first few paragraphs are relevant because they indicate that some legal action, by or against else smart, isn't going well from her perspective and she seems to blame Rooke for this. I'm not going to replicate her original formatting, I'd be all night just bolding. If you're interested go to the document itself;
Please read the following 'Notice' thoroughly and carefully. It is a NOTICE, a LAWFUL DOCUMENT and EVIDENCE. It informs you. It means what it says. The information herein is of the UTMOST IMPORTANCE and requires your IMMEDIATE and URGENT ATTENTION.
Please be aware that failure to act upon this LAWFUL NOTICE in accordance with the 1795 treason Act, which being the current law of this realm, contravenes the lawful duty of every/all English and Commonwealth sovereign men/women and anyone else whilst residing within these shores, or within or without the realm of the English Isles and Commonwealth and, is an OFFENCE under the (unlawfully repealed) 'Treasonable and Seditious Practices Act 1795,' SECTION 5 (Misprision of treason).
Whereby; it is an offence at common law for any person(s) who knows that treason is being planned or committed within or without the realm, not to report the same as soon as he/she can to a justice of the peace.
Also please be aware that the penalty for committing 'Misprision of Treason' in this day is life imprisonment and total asset stripping, and that my sole intention of informing you of this fact in law is one of duty and not malice, frivolity, vexation nor ill will.
Whereas you persist to harass or ignore I, else marie smart, despite being notified of the facts, and that you have made UNLAWFUL DEMANDS on myself or the fraudulently created 'legal fiction', and that you are either continuing to coerce me to comply with unlawful, treasonous statutes by threat of enforcement, and or have ignored my claims entirely and, that you are acting in a criminal capacity for a 'corporation' whom has at this time no lawful claim against I, else marie smart, a sovereign subject/resident standing in lawful dissent and, whilst Parliament is committing high treason against the sovereign peoples of the English Isles and Commonwealth at this time, therefore I cannot lawfully nor morally support financially, or in any other way a treasonous administration of governance, or any private/public entity/person not also standing under article 61 of Magna Carta 1215 whilst demanded/commanded by law to do so. Indeed our constitutional law FORBIDS ME TO DO SO!
And if he doesn't smarten up immediately she seems to be saying she's going to stop paying her taxes. Or something;
Therefore ...
It is to my understanding that you must now by the common laws of this realm and, with the evidence herein/therein supplied STOP all unlawful actions against I, else marie smart, immediately. I have absolute 'lawful excuse' to deny payment or service to any agency of the Crown, or to make deals with anyone not also standing under said article 61.
Judge Rooke seems to be demanding something, perhaps documents, that she's not willing to provide. Maybe he asked for some common sense or coherency, either are obviously impossible goals.
In light of the evidence reported to you personally John D Rooke herein this notice, also the evidence supplied within previous Notices served, by LAW must now be reported by YOU to the police for you to stay within the confines of constitutional law, failure to do so would contravene the 1795 Treason Act section V and would therefore be an act of 'misprision of treason at common law'.
I may be forced by law to report any further illegal demands from you to the police.
This nonsense must be from Jacquie. She witnessed it at the bottom with that hallmark of judicial authority, a red ink fingerprint. Either I'm misunderstanding the intricacies of applying common law magic correctly or Jacquie's just being whimsical in choice of ink colours because, as the decision relates, she sometimes favours colour-coordinating the fingerprinting ink to match her hair;
[29] This item was accompanied by a “Notice of Conditional Acceptance” document dated October 14, 2020, that is addressed to “Failure to Identify (Misconduct in Public Office) doing business as Clerks of the Court”, carrying the docket number of this action (#FL 03 055142”), and signed “Jacquie Phoenix” in purple ink and with a purple ink fingerprint. This document otherwise largely matches what I received from Ms. Robinson on June 27, 2020, and that is reproduced in AVI #1 at Appendix “D”. The exception is that Ms. Robinson now threatens the Court and its staff:
Overall it seems that Jacquie is choosing to escalating her conflict with Queen's Bench. Is she delusional or just stupid? Does it even matter? Either way if she keeps this up she may be looking at some jail time in her future. Maybe she can use this decision as the basis for an asylum claim in Britain. Heads up you British readers, PLD may have found a replacement for David Robinson!
I will be here till March 1 and I have big plans for the Regime so I will need the support of as many UK members as possible. We need these Police to do their jobs. I have a plan to see to it that they do but it will take all of us to get it done
