When I ask for evidence supporting your claim, what I want is, say, binding legal sources that suggest your theories actually do describe the operation of the law as it stands. I have asked a number of your adherents for such, and yet the response is always the same.
Here’s me at Captain Ranty’s
Can you, or can you not, present evidence of the applicability of Freeman legal theories to the English legal system?
The response from CR:
I don’t need to. I only need to prove that the courts lack legitimacy. Now I can.
I don’t need anything other than that.
So, uh, apparently the burden of proof does not rest with Freemen. Right.
And on twitter, I was told:
Hard to face, but your LLM is just legal brainwashing funded by the Rockefellers to undermine the Magna Carta 1215 & bill of Rights
And now, via a commenter at Wh00ps:
Just because some one does not complete a course or gain a ‘Degree’ in LAW doesn’t mean they have no understanding of the LAW or may not comment on the LAW as many ‘would be’ lawyers and libertarians claim. As I understand things the Common Law, the ancient charters and the Constitution were created to defend the rights and Freedoms of ‘all’ the people of these islands, statutes especially over the past 100 years are created only to remove property and wealth from the people, to trample over their rights and force them to be governed by an unelected foreign power.
I’ve no doubt you will put me right when you have gained the Law Degree.
I hate to break it to you guys, but: If you’re gonna make a claim as to how the English legal system operates, it’s up to you to demonstrate it. Stop trying to divert attention to your legal ignorance, stop trying to pass the burden of proof onto others, and if you seriously think you have a legal claim to, I dunno, withdraw from statute or whatever it is you want, go and make your case, properly. Because right now, you’re taking the exact same course regular old conspiracy theorists do.