Courts are busy and serious places, and judges are busy people
Courts are busy and serious places, and judges are busy people
Man rebuked for claiming to be ‘fictional entity’ in court
2:11 PM Wednesday Jul 1, 2015
A man who fell off a moped and said his identity was a fiction created by the State has been rebuked for trying to be “funny” in an unusual court judgement.
Malcolm France fell off his moped in Auckland and refused to give his name and address to police, who later found out he had no licence and was banned from driving.
Following a lengthy court battle, in which he appeared in court claiming to be someone else who was acting on his behalf, France was rebuked by judges who were unimpressed by his “frivolous behaviour”, and described it as a “mischievous attempt to avoid or overturn a conviction”, in a Court of Appeal decision released today.
….
Following the moped incident, France was charged with driving while forbidden and failing to provide information. He was convicted, fined and ordered to pay court costs in October 2013.
The Court of Appeal said France had filed an affidavit, apparently claiming he was Malcolm Freeman, possessing “a right of attorney, someone to represent Mr France”.
…
It’s understood France supported the Freeman-on-the-Land movement. Such a ‘Freeman’ can be someone in a common law jurisdiction who refused to give consent to be governed and said no statutory obligations applied to them, according to one Freeman’s website.
France was declined a re-hearing in the District Court and filed a notice of appeal in the High Court.
“Mr France appeared in support of both appeals, but claiming he was Malcolm-Daniel, the man acting for Mr France,” the Court of Appeal said.
“He contended Mr France was a fictional entity, created by the state. He claimed Mr France was neither driving nor travelling on the moped (he called it the ‘travelling apparatus’) involved in the incident on 29 June 2013.”
Justice Brendan Brown dismissed France’s first appeal.
“He was unable to detect, in the nonsensical argument Mr France had put to him on appeal, any question of law of sufficient general or public importance to warrant a second appeal,” the Court of Appeal said.
….
The Court of Appeal said France offered an incomprehensible explanation for the delay. It said France appeared to be drawing a distinction between himself and the affiant (affidavit-maker) who was referred to as “Malcolm Daniel AR”.
“…This matter was appealed not by Mr France but by the Affiant, — the living man — in the form of leave of court/writ of error to be taken to a common law court,” France told the Court of Appeal.
The Court of Appeal judges were unimpressed.
“The courts are vexed by the occasional person who pretends not to be who he — or she — is. Some of these people may have a genuine identity crisis, but more usually they are engaged in a mischievous attempt to avoid or overturn a conviction. These people may think they are funny or clever, but they are not,” the court said in a newly-released judgement.
“Courts are busy and serious places, and judges are busy people. This sort of frivolous behaviour is not wanted in courts.”
France could not immediately be reached for comment.
– NZME.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I have often warned men that caught$ only harm people who take them seriously ie expect them to do their job.
It is good to see a citizen showing them up for all they really are!
The men who have a sensible ride through caught experiences, have protected their existence, many years prior to being dragged through the caught$.
I was amused by the claim that “judges” are busy people.
I have so often seen “judges” extend hearings, by wasting time themselves and many times. failing to manage legal workers wasting time in front of them.
I guess this is to put unethical pressure onto the Government, to appoint more “judges” and by so doing, to manipulate the supply and demand for legal workers, for their joint advantage.
I have seen “judges” ignore what looked to me to be an open and shut case of illegal legal worker’s aid fraud, thus taking personal advantage themselves, of the open Government chequebook within their reach.
Anyway, even if they aren’t much social use as judges, at least they are giving citizens a little entertainment.
The Right Hon. Benjamin Moreland Easton certainly showed up the legal “system” for what it is. WCC claimed that he had cost them more than $350,000 of ratepayer’s money.
I would have said that their lack of managing their legal worker’s cost $350,000. This might have been more than Ben had ever earned in his lifetime? Such casual squandering of ratepayer’s money, leaves open the question, were the council officer’s responsible for managing legal costs receiving backhanders from the benefited legal workers?
WCC gives a good example of why it is wise to learn the skills, to manage your legal worker costs. If you might ever be forced to deal with the causht$, then this is a skill well worth learning, dammit.
