Judge Leighton Finally Has Enough of Leaming’s Filings
Posted by ASDUpdates on February 13th, 2013
It was bound to happen, I am just surprised it took this long. Judge Leighton should be commended for his patience. He finally had enough of Leaming’s improvised “legal” filings, and had this to say:
Defendant has filed yet another document entitled “Mandatory Judicial Notice.” (See Dkts. #99, 86, 66, 59, 58.) The “Mandatory Judicial Notice” notifies the Court that Defendant “relies in good faith on the public/commercial REGISTRY entries as published at www.peoplestrust1776.org, inclusive of Universal Law Ordinance, UCC #2012096074 . . . .” For lack of a better term, this is gobbledygook. The Court is unsure of the document’s purpose, and given its undecipherable nature, no response is expected from the Government.
Defendant is apparently a member of a group loosely styled “sovereign citizens.” The Court has deduced this from a number of Defendant’s peculiar habits. First, like Mr. Leaming, sovereign citizens are fascinated by capitalization. They appear to believe that capitalizing names has some sort of legal effect. For example, Defendant writes that “the REGISTERED FACTS appearing in the above Paragraph evidence the uncontroverted and uncontrovertible FACTS that the SLAVERY SYSTEMS operated in the names UNITED STATES, United States, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and United States of America . . . are terminated nunc pro tunc by public policy, U.C.C. 1-103 . . . .” (Def.’s Mandatory Jud. Not. at 2.) He appears to believe that by capitalizing “United States,” he is referring to a different entity than the federal government. For better or for worse, it’s the same country.
Second, sovereign citizens, like Mr. Leaming, love grandiose legalese. “COMES NOW, Kenneth Wayne, born free to the family Leaming, 20 December 1955, constituent to The People of the State of Washington constituted 1878 and admitted to the union 22 February 1889 by Act of Congress, a Man, “State of Body” competent to be a witness and having First Hand Knowledge of The FACTS . . . .” (Def.’s Mandatory Jud. Not. at 1.)
Third, Defendant evinces, like all sovereign citizens, a belief that the federal government is not real and that he does not have to follow the law. Thus, Defendant argues that as a result of the “REGISTERED FACTS,” the “states of body, persons, actors and other parties perpetuating the above captioned transaction(s) [i.e., the Court and prosecutors] are engaged . . . in acts of TREASON, and if unknowingly as victims of TREASON and FRAUD . . . .” (Def.’s Mandatory Jud. Not. at 2.)
The Court therefore feels some measure of responsibility to inform Defendant that all the fancy legal-sounding things he has read on the internet are make-believe. Defendant can call himself a “public minister” and “private attorney general,” he may file “mandatory judicial notices” citing all his favorite websites, he can even address mail to the “Washington Republic.” But at the end of the day, while sovereign citizens and Defendant cite things like “Universal Law Ordinances,” they are subject to both state and federal laws, just like everyone else.
For the reasons stated above, no response is required by the Government.
DATED this 12th day of February, 2013
Ronald B. Leighton
United States District Judge
I feel fairly confident that this will not dissuade Leaming from continuing with his usual filings. I would expect little else from him, as a “Private Attorney General”.
One sentence short of declaring Leaming mentally defective.
In consideration of “non-compos mentis” in USC 1 section 1… Does he have to?
USC 1 section 1 is useful in determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, but it is not actually relevant here. No Judge (including Robert B Leighton) has the power to unilaterally declare a person incompetent, insane, an idiot, or non-compos mentis (even though they are equivalent terms under USC 1 Section 1.)
The judge can certainly opine that the defendant’s filings are legal gobbledygook, for a judge is professionally qualified to evaluate the law but he can go no further than his qualifications allow.
By the way Gobbledygook is not a word delineated in USC 1 Section 1 but if it were there would be many equivalent and even more colorful terms the judge might have used.
We are left to decide for ourselves whether legal “gobbledygook” is run of the mill baloney, unmitigated bullsh%$t, the ravings of madman, or a cagey legal strategy employed by a superior mind.
Hoss,
I agree with the first three possibilities; the last one has been disproven on a number of occasions.
Which is to say that you have reached your own conclusion.
You forgot one other alternative that the judiciary and the legal system are so bloody corrupt that they really don’t give a shit they are out to enforce their make believe laws regardless
Jenni,
So you get your legal theories at the same website as Leaming? I hate to tell you this, but those are the “make believe” legal theories. The UCC is not the law of the land nor is the ILO. No one individual is above anyone else here, sovereign, space lizard (NESARA), or any other form of “state of being”. We are all Americans and if that doesn’t suit you, I am certain other countries would find your views entertaining.
P.S. I like your use of punctuation.
Jenni,
How do you distinguish make believe laws from non-make believe laws?
I dont think these “sovereign citizens” are aware that they 1. have no subjects 2. are not “a people” because they are not one of the original signers to the contract 3. are using legal fictions just as the courts do, making their whole argument moot 4. may have never studied Peter J. Smith, Lon Fuller, and Jeremy Bentham