Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canada

Moderator: Burnaby49

arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by arayder »

rumpelstilzchen wrote:
arayder wrote:
The absurdity of Bobby's claim aside I have to point out that our manipulative subject forgets that not too long ago he freely admitted that freeman fee schedules are nothing more than attempts to obstruct the courts.
You're right. Bobby wrote this on Icke's:
So many people forget that a Fee Schedule is not to get paid at all. It does not exist because there is a contract, but because there is not one, and yet someone performed.
[snip]
So if success is determined not by getting paid (that is how a child would see a fee schedule as working) but by stopping others from ordering us about with impunity and without liability, then they work quite well.
Note how Bobby attempts to infer in the mind of the reader that if you are of the opinion that getting paid for a fee schedule is how you would measure success then it must follow you are a child. :snicker:
Well, Bobby's losing on both counts. Freemen aren't collecting any fees and the courts aren't hindered in the least by the fee schedule ruse. If anything it seems to tick off the judges.

I point out too that Menard has no problem telling the tall tale that he's made the powers that be change their ways by his very presence.

On Ream's Facebook page he responded to criticism that the C3PO was ineffective by inferring that the cops change their ways when he's watching.

If that isn't a narcissistic ruse, I don't know what is.
User avatar
The Observer
Further Moderator
Posts: 7502
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 11:48 pm
Location: Virgin Islands Gunsmith

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by The Observer »

arayder wrote:If that isn't a narcissistic ruse, I don't know what is.
Or an attempt on his part to fleece the flock even more by having them pay him to show up with them.
"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
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by arayder »

The Observer wrote:
arayder wrote:If that isn't a narcissistic ruse, I don't know what is.
Or an attempt on his part to fleece the flock even more by having them pay him to show up with them.
The picture of, Bobby, a middle aged loser trolling the net for newbies who have no idea of his decades of failure and lies is too sad to see.

Far from the world of freedom and abundance Bobby promised his minions just a few years ago his legacy is one failed scheme after another, one more surfed couch, one more mooched Moose Head, one more begged bong and one more ass covering tall tale after another.
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: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Burnaby49 »

While we wait for the authorities to put the cuffs on Fearn (he's just too stupid to stay at large for long) some information on what he was up to down in Texas just before giving we Canadians the benefit of his presence. Apparently he likes filing lawsuits but not paying the fees to keep them active.

http://www.courthousenews.com/home/Open ... usID=99704
"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: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Burnaby49 »

And our Bi-Citizen Freeman, the subject of a monumental court decision, is back in jail. Picked up a week ago;

http://www.ipick.ca/lethbridge/man-who- ... l-arrested
"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
The Observer
Further Moderator
Posts: 7502
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 11:48 pm
Location: Virgin Islands Gunsmith

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by The Observer »

As litigants, they employ Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments: legal-sounding techniques intended to allow persons to avoid obligations and reject government authority. However, judges agree their arguments are usually gibberish.
Usually gibberish? Is there a freeman argument that isn't gibberish?
"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
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: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Hilfskreuzer Möwe »

The Observer wrote:... Usually gibberish? Is there a freeman argument that isn't gibberish?
Arguably yes - some can be explained and expressed, but are just spectacularly wrong. Such as "includes" or "including" means "is the only example of".

You can express the argument. But it's just really, really wrong.

So Glenn was actually apprehended and cuffed by U.S. Consulate authorities in Calgary, and then handed over to the Canadian police? Gosh, I can only imagine the legal actions Glenn will now have for "Barack Obama, C.E.O.".

I wonder if Glenn tried to claim asylum?

Looks like we'll have to wait a few months for the next Youtube installment of Glenn Tells it All.

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]
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: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Hilfskreuzer Möwe »

Glenn's trial decisions in his smuggling matter in Alberta Provincial Court have been released. Congrats Glenn! It's triplets!
All three judgments are nicely written - very thorough. The first decision discusses the trial itself, and finds Glenn guilty on all counts. The media reports appear generally accurate. One gets the impression that Judge Redman wanted to get a point across from the manner in which he opens the decision:
[1] A fundamental and pervasive feature of Canadian society is the universal applicability of the Rule of Law. An effective criminal justice system is a key aspect of the Rule of Law. This system must ensure that adjudication is timely and impartial, free of outside influence and that it recognizes and enforces due process of law and the rights of the accused. The Rule of Law also maintains that all individuals, no matter their beliefs or standing, are accountable under the law. When they absent themselves for the purpose of impeding or frustrating the due process of the law, with an intention to avoid its consequences, that person’s purpose will not be fulfilled and his intention will be defeated.
Short form - don't screw around with the courts! It looks like Glenn really tried hard to shut down the trial before he started. In addition to the Queen's Bench application documented in Fearn v Canada Customs, 2014 ABQB 114, Glenn also tried these in the Provincial Court (para. 5):
1. Demand to dismiss and counterclaim filed October 24, 2013.
2. General demurrer and counterclaim filed November 7, 2013.
3. Notice of Void Judgment and Notice of Non-Suit, filed December 4, 2013.
4. Demand for a common-law jury trial filed February 11, 2014.
5. Notice of Objection and Non-Consent to this proceeding, under Roman Civil Law in Your Show Trial and Notice of Contempt by Affidavit, filed February 11, 2014.
6. A series of Notices of Constitutional Question, filed February 25, 2014
7. Declaration of Fraud filed February 25, 2014.
8. Declaration of Fraud filed March 3, 2014.
They didn't deserve much comment (para. 11):
...The applications were dismissed for the following reasons:
  • 1. Those applications which related to constitutional questions were not served upon the Crown in a timely fashion as required by the Judicature Act of Alberta.
    2. Mr. Fearn, when first asked about preliminary applications, only made reference to his request for a jury trial and to no others. In addition he did not return to Court and so did not pursue them. As such I deem them to be abandoned.
    3. There was no, or at least an insufficient evidentiary foundation, for his applications.
    4. Mr. Fearn’s applications were the same or substantially similar as those argued before Mr. Justice Tilleman and were carefully analyzed by Justice Tilleman and rejected.
There is a succinct account of Glenn's brief stay in court:
[6] Although Mr. Fearn refused to stand at the commencement of these court proceedings, he, with some reluctance, confirmed that he was the person named in the Information before the court and the trial commenced.

[7] The parties were then asked if there were any preliminary applications to be made. The Crown responded by applying for an Exclusion of Witnesses, which was granted. Mr. Fearn applied to have a trial by jury. After hearing brief submissions, this application was rejected as the Crown had proceeded by way of summary conviction process and there was no right in law for the matter to proceed by way of jury.

[8] Mr. Fearn then made no further applications, but instead attempted to disrupt the court. He purported to fire me and indicated that he was taking his box of materials and leaving, which he did. The court then recessed for a few moments to determine if Mr. Fearn was going to return and to give the Crown an opportunity to consider their position. When the court returned, Mr. Fearn was not present and the court recessed until 10:00 a.m. to again determine whether Mr. Fearn was going to voluntarily return. ...
Of course, he never did. The Crown sought to have the matter proceed in Glenn's absence, and Judge Redman agreed:
[10] After considering the matter I directed that the trial proceed ex-parte for the following reasons:
  • 1. Mr. Fearn, by his conduct in court, displayed disregard for court process in both his language and mannerisms. After he left the courtroom and did not return, I concluded his actions were indicative of a desire to delay and disrupt the proceedings and he did so with the intent of impeding or frustrating the trial with the intention of avoiding its consequences.

    2. The applications which Mr. Fearn had filed with the Provincial Court in this matter were the same or substantially the same as the arguments advanced before, and rejected by Mr. Justice Tilleman, in Fearn v Canada Customs.

    3. The language used in the applications that Mr. Fearn filed with the Provincial Court display a total disregard for the process of the Court and a total lack of respect for court process and court officials.
The remainder of the decision deals with some logical issues, the evidence itself, and the conclusion on guilt. There are some amusing tidbits, such as Glenn's not-at-all unsuspicious responses to Canada Customs officers (para 22):
Matthew Patching was working at the Coutts border crossing in the primary inspection lane when a Dodge half ton truck pulling a travel trailer approached his booth and stopped. Officer Patching noted that there was a male person driving the vehicle and asked for his I.D. and vehicle registration. The male produced a Canadian passport and the registration for the vehicle. Officer Patching scanned the passport into a Customs data base which provides, amongst other things, a risk assessment of a traveller. This individual’s name as it appeared on the passport was Glen Winningham Fearn and the System noted that he was categorized as “armed and dangerous”. Officer Patching asked Mr. Fearn a series of standard questions which included the question, “Do you have any firearms or weapons?” to which Mr. Fearn responded, “I do not believe in them”. Noting that Mr. Fearn was evasive in his answer, he again asked Mr. Fearn if he possessed any firearms or weapons to which Mr. Fearn replied, “No”. He also noted that Mr. Fearn was evasive in one other question with respect to whether or not he possessed any alcohol or tobacco, to which Mr. Fearn responded, “I do not drink or smoke”. Upon being asked the question again, Mr. Fearn responded in the negative.
Glenn's evasive answers become a key element in proving he was very well aware of what was in his locked trailer and that it was contraband (para. 43):
[43] I have concluded that the Crown has established beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Fearn possessed the necessary mens rea to possess these items and that he knew their characteristics. In that regard I rely upon the following:
  • 1. Mr. Fearn was the lone occupant of a truck which was connected to and towing a travel trailer.
    2. Mr. Fearn was deliberately misleading to Officer Patching when he was asked if he possessed any weapons or firearms and he responded that he did not believe in them.
    3. Mr. Fearn, by being evasive and by subsequently lying to Officer Patching regarding whether he had any weapons or firearms, was attempting to divert suspicion from himself. This is probative of the question as to whether he had actual knowledge that the items seized were in the trailer and whether he was aware of their characteristics. ...
The Crown did face an interesting evidentiary issue - Glenn left before any of the Crown witnesses could identify him! Fortunately there was a solution (para. 25):
Officer Van Dyke was outside the courtroom where this trial was being conducted. Shortly after the trial commenced he saw a man burst from the courtroom, carrying a box of materials, in an agitated state and watched him as he went down the stairway from the second floor in the courthouse. He confirmed that this individual was the same person who he had dealt with at the border on October 11th and 12th, 2013.
Skulking Customs Officer skulks!

The second judgment simply deals with the appropriate response when a person is convicted of two offences that have the same illegal basis - a Supreme Court of Canada case called Kienapple requires one of the duplicates be stayed. Four of Glenn's charges were stayed on that basis.

Last we move to sentencing. Again, that tone emerges. The Crown suggested that the proceeding adjourn until Glenn was there to argue his sentence. Judge Redman rejected that outright:
[5] I decided to proceed in absentia for the following reasons:
  • 1. Mr. Fearn attended the opening of the trial, was well aware that it was proceeding and elected to absent himself in circumstances that could have been deemed contemptuous.

    2. Before the trial commenced, Mr. Fearn brought a series of applications before the Provincial Court which could be categorized as organized pseudo-legal commercial arguments (“OPCA”) of the type that were comprehensibly reviewed in the decision of Meads v Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 (CanLII), 2012 ABQB 571. As the filing of Mr. Fearn’s applications progressed, the contents became increasingly foul, rancorous and severe, clearly designed to delay, defeat and otherwise frustrate the due process of the Court.

    3. Mr. Fearn also filed an application in the Court of Queen’s Bench disputing the jurisdiction of the provincial court to hear and deliberate on these charges. His application was dismissed by Mr. Justice Tilleman in Fearn v Canada Customs, 2014 ABQB 114 (CanLII), 2014 ABQB 114. In Fearn v Canada Customs, Justice Tilleman reviewed Mr. Fearn’s litigation history and identified a total of three Canadian and seventeen U.S. actions initiated by Mr. Fearn. All were dismissed as fatally flawed or otherwise abandoned. Justice Tilleman determined that Mr. Fearn’s application met the criteria for frivolous and vexatious litigation and ordered that Mr. Fearn be precluded from filing anything in the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench related to the border action, without first obtaining an order of that Court. It is clear from Mr. Fearn’s actions as described in Fearn v Canada Customs and from his conduct in this matter that he is not interested in advancing any legitimate argument. To delay his sentencing to a future date would only accede to his desire to delay and disrupt the administration of justice.

    4. There is no evidence before me that would suggest there is any reasonable likelihood that if the matter is delayed, it can proceed within a reasonable time.

[6] The inescapable conclusion that I reached were that his actions were for the purpose of impeding or frustrating the trial and avoiding the consequences of the trial. It cannot be said that his absence was unexplained or excusable. By is own conduct, he voluntarily excused himself. He had the opportunity to return over the last three days and did not do so. There is no miscarriage of justice to proceed with sentencing in absentia. It is correct that the Court did not have the benefit of submissions by Mr. Fearn. This however falls squarely on the shoulders of Mr. Fearn.
Perhaps that could be restated as "Jerks deserve a reduced standard of procedural justice."

The Crown asked for five month and suggested no sentence served in the community - Glenn wouldn't follow the instructions (para. 8 ). Glenn himself was a cypher, and little was known of him beyond he did not have a Canadian criminal offence history (para. 7).

The principle sentencing considerations were denunciation and deterrence (para. 17):
In my view a fit and appropriate sentence in cases of this nature must emphasize the principles of general and specific deterrence and must denounce the serious nature of these crimes. That is not to say that the other principles are to be ignored, but the court must recognize that these are very serious crimes. The goods Mr. Fearn attempted to import had the potential of wreaking havoc on an unsuspecting public.
And generally the relevant factors here were aggravating (para. 19)
In considering the gravity of this offence and the degree of responsibility of this offender and taking into account the mitigating, aggravating and other circumstances, I note the following:
  • 1. At the time of the commission of these offences, Mr. Fearn had no criminal record in Canada. Accordingly, he should receive the benefit accorded to someone who is of previous good character.

    2. It is aggravating that Mr. Fearn showed no remorse or insight into his criminal behaviour. In fact, within days of the commencement of the trial, Mr. Fearn sent a Notice which contained a declaration of war to not only the prosecutor charged with the responsibility of prosecuting this matter, but also numerous judges, political persons and other persons associated with the administration of justice.

    3. Both the number and type of prohibited devices and weapons is an aggravating factor. The magazines were designed for an AK-47 assault rifle. It is hard to imagine a peaceful purpose to which these items could be put. They were certainly not found in a state where it could reasonably be concluded that they were for a benign purpose such as a collector. It seems more likely that they were for the purpose of distribution or possessed in support of his “declaration of war”.

    4. As noted in R v Ross, 2010 BCCA 314, the border context of the offences is a further aggravating circumstance. Importing prohibited weapons and devices into Canada from the U.S. is behaviour that may further impede the ability of law abiding citizens of each country to conveniently cross the border. See also R v Jacques (1996), 110 CCC (3d), (SCC).
Sadly, Glenn's declaration of war has not yet come to light. One can only hope!

Jerks don't get conditional (in the community) sentences (para. 27):
In considering the safety of the community I am concerned about Mr. Fearn’s willingness to abide by any terms imposed upon him. It appears by the nature of the statements contained within the applications he has brought before this Court and before the Court of Queen’s Bench in this matter, and his behaviour in court, and his absconding, he has no intention whatsoever in complying with any obligations placed upon him by a judicial authority.
A four month sentence was ordered (para. 30), which is harsh for a first-time offender when the maximum sentence was six months. There are a lot of ancillary orders (para. 30):
Mr. Fearn will also be subject to a Probation Order for a period of two years, commencing on the termination of his period of imprisonment. The conditions of his probation will include:
  • 1. He shall:
    a. Keep the peace and be of good behaviour
    b. Appear before the Court when required to do so by the Court; and
    c. Notify the Court or the probation officer in advance of any change of name, address, employment or occupation.

    2. He shall remain within the jurisdiction of the Court unless written permission to go outside that jurisdiction is obtained from the Court or the probation officer.

    3. Outside his actual residence, he shall not carry on his person or possess any weapon, including a knife, save to the extent that it is used for culinary or work purposes.

    4. He shall have no contact or communication, direct or indirect with any Justice of the Alberta Court of Appeal or of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, or any Judge of the Alberta Provincial Court, or any prosecutor, Canada Border Services officer or employee, or any person who is providing services related to the administration of justice, except when he is legally required to do so, or through legal counsel or pursuant to subsequent Court order.

    5. He shall attend for assessment and complete to the satisfaction of his probation officer, such counselling as may be recommended by his probation officer which may include, but is not limited to: psychiatric/psychological counselling.

    6. He shall not consume or possess any alcohol or intoxicating substance or any substance within the meaning of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act except as prescribed by a medical or dental practitioner.

    7. He shall not permit or allow any alcoholic beverage or intoxicating substance or substance within the meaning of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to be in his approved residence unless prescribed by a medical or dental practitioner.

    8. He shall reside at such place of residence as approved by his probation officer.
I think number 4 will be breached, probably sooner rather than later. Can Glenn resist the temptation to file/mail paperwork? I'm skeptical. As for number 5, oh, to be a fly on the wall during a head-shrinking appointment...

And a 10 year weapon's prohibition (para. 34) and Victim Fine Surcharge (para. 33).

Nothing too hugely surprising, but again, a nice detailed and careful analysis - which is a good thing since my take on Glenn is that he'll appeal this decision in no time.

And that appeal will go to the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench. Hmm, I wonder how that would turn out...

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]
Fmotlgroupie
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 278
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 7:09 pm

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Fmotlgroupie »

Another good read, thanks Mowe!

Very strict probation conditions, on a number of fronts. I agree he'll breach condition 4, but frankly I doubt that he won't breach every one of those conditions in his first month back on the street. His only hope, given that he probably isn't smart enough to not draw police attention, is to go back to the States (despite condition #2) and stay there (and not get busted down there and get a real-life American-type prison sentence).

As an aside, I know Glenn's citizenship had come up before and it was generally agreed he was a dual citizen. Reading the first decision, I think he may be a US citizen with permanent residency in Canada because he had a Canadian passport but was still read his Vienna convention rights (i.e. given a chance to call his embassy for assistance). Maybe the customs guys read them to a dual national out of an abundance of caution but then I wouldn't get to expound a pet (and irrelevant) theory.
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by notorial dissent »

Möwe, i think you are overly optimistic here.

i think you are probably right, 4 will most likely be the first to go, but I'm also betting that 1 - 3 won't last past the ink drying on the page, and I wouldn't put much store in 5 - 8 since he doesn't strike me as the type to let someone else tell him what to do or where to live. it would appear that there is an awful lot of rage and fury buried under that sorry surface, and I think it will come out sooner rather than later.

In all honesty, I think he is a good deal more dangerous than your system is used to. He may have claim to Canadian citizenship, but he has wallowed in good old fashioned Texas sovrun citizen teachings and beliefs, and that is not a good combination for peace and quiet north of the border.
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.
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: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Burnaby49 »

Fmotlgroupie wrote:Another good read, thanks Mowe!

Very strict probation conditions, on a number of fronts. I agree he'll breach condition 4, but frankly I doubt that he won't breach every one of those conditions in his first month back on the street. His only hope, given that he probably isn't smart enough to not draw police attention, is to go back to the States (despite condition #2) and stay there (and not get busted down there and get a real-life American-type prison sentence).

As an aside, I know Glenn's citizenship had come up before and it was generally agreed he was a dual citizen. Reading the first decision, I think he may be a US citizen with permanent residency in Canada because he had a Canadian passport but was still read his Vienna convention rights (i.e. given a chance to call his embassy for assistance). Maybe the customs guys read them to a dual national out of an abundance of caution but then I wouldn't get to expound a pet (and irrelevant) theory.
I've read somewhere that he was born in Canada and later emigrated to the states. That automatically makes him a Canadian citizen. Additionally you can't get a Canadian passport without being a citizen.

As much as I hate to admit it, he's one of us.
"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
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by arayder »

So this mean-as-a-snake Texan is supposed to stay in Canada, not carry a gun or a knife, not drink or take drugs and report to the probation office for counseling which may include a psychological evaluation?

It's just not going to happen. I could bet you all $10 to your donuts that Glenn will break probation lickety split and I'll end up with a big ole box of donuts.

I suspect:
1) The court doesn't want the public saying it left any stones unturned the next time Glenn of the Family Rage Disorder ends up in trouble.
2) The authorities honestly want to give Glenn a chance to straighten up.
3) The cops don't mind the stringent conditions of Glenn's probation since they know his next encounter with them may well include a search that's sure to turn up either a pistol, knife or a half empty bottle of Jack Daniel's.
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by notorial dissent »

I too, am of the opinion that you are going to be in donuts sooner rather than later with Fearn's past history and general attitude.

From my point of view, the probation conditions seem pretty cut and dried, about what I would expect here when it comes to it, the evaluation and counseling, not so much, and I am of the opinion that the one would just tell us what we already know and the other would have zero effect.
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.
Bill Lumbergh
Pirate Captain
Pirate Captain
Posts: 225
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:06 pm
Location: Initech Head Office

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Bill Lumbergh »

Hilfskreuzer Möwe wrote:
The second judgment simply deals with the appropriate response when a person is convicted of two offences that have the same illegal basis - a Supreme Court of Canada case called Kienapple requires one of the duplicates be stayed. Four of Glenn's charges were stayed on that basis.
Charges stayed! Victory!

Seriously though, the tough sentence imposed could very well be setting a precedent for what freeman types can expect when they inevitably lose in court. And I too fear that this chap will violate his probation sooner rather than later. Freemen generally don't like to follow rules they didn't invent themselves.
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by arayder »

notorial dissent wrote:. . .From my point of view, the probation conditions seem pretty cut and dried, about what I would expect here when it comes to it, the evaluation and counseling, not so much, and I am of the opinion that the one would just tell us what we already know and the other would have zero effect.

I am increasingly of the opinion that there are many individuals like Winningham whose underlying problems with society's rules and figures of authority are merely expressed through freemanism.

In some of the freemen the level of rage appears so great that one can imagine their first exposure to the freeman woo must have seemed a revelation since it affirmed a pre-exisitig and deep seeded belief that the powers that be have been messing them over since the day they were born.

I think that if there was no such thing as the freeman movement these individuals would find another "movement" as a way of expressing their rage.
User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 7550
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by wserra »

Bill Lumbergh wrote:Freemen generally don't like to follow rules they didn't invent and change at will themselves.
You're welcome.

And welcome to Q, BTW.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
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: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Burnaby49 »

Yet another American smuggling a gun into Canada. Although he probably didn't consider it smuggling, just a reasonable precaution for a commercial airline pilot on the job. As you can tell from the article the Canadian government thinks otherwise. While Fearn was bringing in an assortment of odds and ends that seemed to surprise American readers as being banned items a Smith & Wesson .380 handgun is unquestionably a serious issue. I'd think this will have a negative impact on the pilot's further employment prospects with SkyWest.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/l ... -1.2597084
"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
Lambkin
Warder of the Quatloosian Gibbet
Posts: 1206
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:43 pm

Re: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Lambkin »

Katherine Dalgleish has been writing about Freeman cases in Canada including this recent update on Glenn Fearn, apparently intended for consumption by lawyers. Exerpt:
http://www.mondaq.com/canada/x/305500/t ... earn+Cases
Last February, the issue of Freemen-on-the-Land / Sovereign Citizens in Alberta courts was reignited by the case of Fearn v Canada Customs, 2014 ABQB 114, in which Glenn Winningham Fearn, an American Freeman and OPCA (Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument) litigant applied to Queen's Bench to overturn a yet-unheard criminal trial. Fearn had been arrested at the Canadian border and faced a weapons charge. Fearn's application was dismissed due to the rule against collateral attack, as well as due to Fearn's OPCA arguments, which included claims that the laws of Alberta were "pretend," that the members of the Law Society of Alberta were agents of the Vatican, and that Fearn had the right to use lethal force against Canada Customs agents if he deemed his arrest to be unlawful.

The case clarified and solidified the growing body of case law in Alberta dealing with the issue of OPCA litigants. I have previously written about the Fearn civil case here, and now the decision regarding the related criminal case has been released in R v Fearn, 2014 ABPC 58.
And more (click on "Latest Articles"):

http://www.mondaq.com/content/author.as ... id=1096188
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: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Hilfskreuzer Möwe »

Media reports indicate that Glenn has not given up! He is appealing his conviction (and presumably sentence), though the reports do not detail the undoubtedly many errors committed at his trial:
The appeal date is set for June 9.

I looked to see if Glenn has made any public statements or appearances - didn't see anything.

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]
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: Glenn Winningham of the House of Fearn - Sovran in Canad

Post by Burnaby49 »

I've said elsewhere that using a Freeman defense in Canada is toxic and a guarantee of a very bad outcome in court. Mowe has said a few times that Freemen are actively disliked by Canadians and get no support outside of their quickly fragmenting fringe support. Fearn stands as the poster boy for why we all despise these Freemen idiots.
"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