Subway man Jared Fogle

Moderators: Prof, Judge Roy Bean

User avatar
Dick Dastardly
Gunners Mate
Gunners Mate
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2015 5:20 pm
Location: Puget Sound, WA

Subway man Jared Fogle

Post by Dick Dastardly » Thu Nov 16, 2017 1:41 am

I see Jared Fogle has jumped aboard the sovcit crazy train. ... b48b7bb024
Former Subway pitchman Jared Fogle has tried to argue that he’s a “sovereign citizen,” claiming a federal court that convicted him on child pornography and sexual conduct involving minors did not have the authority to do it.

Fogle filed a motion on his own earlier this month in U.S. District Court in the Southern District of Indiana, saying he wanted to correct an “error” regarding subject matter jurisdiction in the case.

His defense?

That he is a sovereign citizen — a group the FBI calls “a domestic terrorist movement,” believing “federal, state, and local governments operate illegally.” In his motion, Fogle pointed to a “friend of the court” brief that was previously filed by a fellow inmate in the same federal prison, stating, “whether a judicial judgment is lawful depends on whether the sovereign has authority to render it.”

Fogle’s argument was thrown out.

“If Fogle is now claiming to be ‘sovereign’, the Seventh Circuit has rejected theories of individual sovereignty, immunity from prosecution, and their ilk,” U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt wrote Wednesday in her decision on the matter. She added that “regardless of his theory, Fogle’s challenge of this Court’s jurisdiction is rejected.”

In her ruling, the judge called attention to the fact that Fogle had pleaded guilty in 2015 to one count of distributing and receiving child pornography and one count of traveling and attempting to travel to engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor. He was sentenced the next year to more than 15 years in federal prison — a ruling that was reaffirmed upon appeal in a case that has captured national headlines.

As The Washington Post reported, court documents claimed that Fogle solicited commercial sex online and traveled to engage in sex with minors.

Authorities also said Fogle had received photos and videos of nude children from the former executive director of his charity foundation, Russell Taylor, who pleaded guilty to charges of child exploitation and child pornography and was sentenced to 27 years in prison.

Fogle is not the first to attempt to use the “sovereign citizen” defense in court.

Earlier this year, Markeith Loyd, who is accused of killing his pregnant ex-girlfriend and an Orlando police officer who tried to arrest him, argued that the government did not have the jurisdiction to charge him.

As The Post’s Peter Holley reported in March, Loyd, who was charged with first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder, would not enter a plea at all, telling the judge: “Y’all can’t do nothing to me.”

In 2011, the FBI said the sovereign citizen movement is a threat to authorities.
“Sovereign citizens do not represent an anarchist group, nor are they a militia, although they sometimes use or buy illegal weapons,” according to the FBI’s Counterterrorism Analysis Section.

“Rather, they operate as individuals without established leadership and only come together in loosely affiliated groups to train, help each other with paperwork, or socialize and talk about their ideology. They may refer to themselves as ‘constitutionalists’ or ‘freemen,’ which is not necessarily a connection to a specific group, but, rather, an indication that they are free from government control. They follow their own set of laws. While the philosophies and conspiracy theories can vary from person to person, their core beliefs are the same: The government operates outside of its jurisdiction. Because of this belief, they do not recognize federal, state, or local laws, policies, or regulations.”

Fogle, who is serving his sentence at the Englewood Federal Correctional Institution in Littleton, Colo., filed his recent motion pro se, meaning he did so on his own without any legal representation.

Attorneys who previously represented him in the case said they have not served as his counsel for years and have no knowledge of the motion.

Princeps Wooloosia
Posts: 3009
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 5:50 pm

Re: Subway man Jared Fogle

Post by fortinbras » Thu Nov 16, 2017 3:56 am

Here is the court decision: ... 7297737062

It appears that Fogle did NOT explicitly say he was a SovCit, that seems to be the judge's own interpretation. But quibbling over whether the court was an Art. III court is a Sovtard classic. And, yes, it was an Article III court.

Frank Pate, the fellow who typed up (neatly on an old-fashioned typewriter) the brief for Fogle, is another prison inmate, a Scientologist who got caught running a ponzi swindle. Altho Pate seems to be a very good typist, he doesn't have a clue how to cite court decisions.
Last edited by fortinbras on Thu Nov 16, 2017 6:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 3629
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 7:02 am

Re: Subway man Jared Fogle

Post by grixit » Thu Nov 16, 2017 1:16 pm

I think some of the pickles have fallen out of his sandwich.
I voted for Hillary, and i didn't even get a stupid tshirt!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4

User avatar
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1039
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 7:46 am

Re: Subway man Jared Fogle

Post by bmxninja357 » Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:34 pm

So many jokes..... all distasteful....

whoever said laughter is the best medicine never had gonorrhea....

User avatar
Quatloosian Master of Deception
Posts: 1542
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 3:00 am
Location: Sanhoudalistan

Re: Subway man Jared Fogle

Post by Quixote » Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:58 am

Fogle's argument was not by any stretch of the imagination a sovcit argument. The judge saw the word "sovereign", used with its standard meaning by the way, embedded in an argument too sophisticated for Pate to pull off, and didn't bother to read the rest of the motion.

The argument was that the federal court lacked subject matter jurisdiction with regard to the statutory rape charge because, at least as Pate interprets the statute, Fogle had to have crossed state lines for the sole purpose of engaging in sex with a minor. Fogle crossed that state line for a variety of reasons. Having sex with a minor might not even have been one of them. If Pate's interpretation is correct, Fogle could have been charged with a a state crime, but not a federal one, related to sex with an underage prostitute. The argument has several flaws, but it is not a sovcit argument or even frivolous.

The court's decision was correct, but for the wrong reasons.
"Here is a fundamental question to ask yourself- what is the goal of the income tax scam? I think it is a means to extract wealth from the masses and give it to a parasite class." Skankbeat