Here’s a 5 minute video of a Canadian “sovereign” bumping heads with a local judge. The judge ultimately abandoned his bench and the “accused” seems to have won. But whether a seeming victory in one hearing is a final victory, remains to be seen. It’s entirely possible that the judge was simply flustered and “panicked”. It’s likely that the judge was slightly intimidated because the accused was not only fearless and knowledgeable, but that he was accompanied by six to ten “court watchers”.
I’ve seen it for years. If you’re in court by yourself, the judges are confident, arrogant, even openly contemptuous of your arguments and defenses. But when you bring a group of court watchers, and the judge knows they’re with you, his whole attitude changes. Bringing court watchers won’t guarantee that you win your case, but it will tend to compel the judge to treat you with respect. Once the judge is intimidated and loses his habitual arrogance, he’ll be “off his game” and more likely to “panic” and/or make fundamental mistakes.
The only thing this system fears is public exposure. When the “public” shows up to watch a particular case, the judges–being politicians–lose their inclination to bully the defendants and instead suffer some heightened anxiety.
There’s a reason for this. I don’t know what the law is in Canada, but I’m told that in the US, if you go to court and later testify that the judge said “F— you!” and the judge denies it, the system will take the judge’s word over yours. If you have one witness to corroborate your testimonry that the judge said “F— you!,” the system wil take the judge’s word over yours. But I’m told that if you have two or more witnesses with you–who are openly taking notes of the proceedings–and the judge says “F— you!” or commits any other abuse of his power or authority, your own testimony plus that of two or more witnesses will overcome the judge’s solitary denial of having violated your rights or having exceeded his own authority. In that case, the judge may be liable for civil or even criminal penalty.
Again, I’m only told that this consequence of bring two or more witnesses to your trial is valid. I don’t know it to be absolutely true. But it sounds plausible, and it would explain why judge’s tend to become “respectful” whenever a belligerent defendant is accompanied by a group of court-watchers.
The video clearly illustrates that the Canadian natives are becoming “restless”.
5:00 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-WED2FilM0&NR=1 In fact, this first link was terminated about a day after I published this article. I commented on that termination in the “replies” below.
But on October 6th, one of my readers (Jethro; thanks again) found another live link to the same video at:
For now, use this second link.