Other Testimonies of Court Experiences

Gideon Caleb: Gordon

Gordon from New Zealand

[The following is a testimony from a brother from New Zealand, who goes by the name of Gordon]
We had a very interesting experience helping a friend in COURT a couple weeks ago. Based on my experience and that of others, I counselled him how to handle things. He was very open and took my advice to heart. Further, I actually stood next to him in the lion's den and conselled him during the hearing. The basis for what we did was our position as Ambassadors. Rather than proclaim diplomatic immunity, we simply acted as if we had it. This had amazing power with the COURT.

What we are doing is taking the teaching on your web site to the next level. We are still in the middle of testing several issues, so I cannot be sure that everything works as I have reason to believe it does. But in this last COURT hearing, things went exactly as I predicted they would, so things are looking very promising.

Using a number of clues, one day the Spirit showed me that there had to be a lawful court in New Zealand. I am confident I have now found that court, though I have not yet used it (thereby proving its existence). A lawful (real) man can only been seen and heard in a lawful court.

What happens when the POLICE arrest you is that they drag you into a fictional COURT. Everything in that COURT is spelled in ALL CAPS, given fair notice that such is the case. If you make any attempt to be seen or heard in that COURT, you are presumed to be a FICTION, since they can only see and hear FICTIONS. So we went into COURT with only one request - that the hearing be moved to a real court.

Pat was charged with "driving while forbidden" because he has no driver's license. He had already been dragged before the COURT before and had a plea entered "on your behalf". He had served an abatement, but not served the default timely, thus he had been arrested and signed a bail notice to get out. So he was appearing in COURT while not in chains.

I told him several things:

  1. Do not argue "the name". Simply don't respond to it.
  2. Behave as a diplomat - know that you have immunity.
  3. The JUDGE's attitude will directly reflect your own.
  4. Take your time responding. Consult me if you have any doubts.
The COURTs here allow what they call a "MacKenzie friend" (named after some COURT decision). This is someone who advises you in COURT even though he is not a lawyer. However, I have heard of others being thrown out of COURT when the JUDGE perceived that the accused would be easy prey without their advisor.

What we did prevented all this, as I understand things. Since the JUDGE could never get jurisdiction over Pat, and he was doing all the speaking, she never had a chance to address me. Had Pat given her jurisdiction, she could have questioned me and tried to throw me out of "her" COURT. Since we were just on the gangplank, and not on "her" ship, she had no authority to tell either of us what we could or could not do.

When "the name" was called we both went forth, but did not sit down. The JUDGE's first question was "Are you MISTER FICTION?" Pat had an opening statement prepared which he read at that point. She tried to get him to respond to "the name" two more times. On the third time he mentioned the abatement. She thanked him. The only thing we didn't know how to do at that point was hold her feet to the fire (politely) that the POLICE had not responded to the abatement and that we were in the wrong court. They conceded both points, but she did not simply dismiss the case.

She continued to carry on the benefit of discussion with Pat, but he held his ground, never giving her jurisdiction. About half the time I would whisper a hint in his ear about what he should say next. She never asked me who I was or if I was qualified to offer "legal" advice.

About half way through the hearing the prosecutor was getting quite frustrated. He was sitting in front of us. Stood up, turned around and asked me who I was. I said I was "counsel" for the accused. He asked if I was a "lawyer" and I repeated that I was his counsel. He then yelled (which all the COURTROOM could hear) "Are you a lawyer?!!!" I said lightheartedly, "No, I'm not a lawyer." He then yelled even louder, "Then go sit in the back of the room!!!!!!" He turned back around and sat down. I looked at the JUDGE. Her countenance had not changed. She continued speaking to Pat as if nothing had happened. As he continued to be gracious towards her, she responded in kind.

In the end, she scheduled another hearing (to try again to gain jurisdiction) but she did not invite Pat to it! I have been in COURT when JUDGE's either continued the bail conditions or issued a summons. She did neither. Pat was there because of signing a bail notice, yet she did not mention it. She knew and respected that she had no jurisdiction over the lawful man standing in front of her. She only claimed jurisdiction to continue their fictional process that Pat had given life to by not handling things properly in previous hearings.

While the conversation between Pat and the JUDGE was cordial at all times, our friends sitting in back told us afterwards that it was obvious to everyone in the COURTROOM that mountains were being moved.

The next step is that now we are sending tickets and charges back to the POLICE and other agencies with a notice saying that if they want to try us, they can only do so in a lawful court. In another few weeks or months we will find out if this is enough to get them to drop the charges. If they then drag us into a fictional COURT, the only thing we will discuss is the fact that we are in the wrong court. I am told that we can force the JUDGE to bring closure after making this point by stating, "There is an unopposed claim in this COURT. The prosecution has defaulted. I ask for the order of this COURT, or call the next case." The JUDGE then must either rule in your favor (since the claim in unopposed) or use their favorite out of moving on as if no case existed.

One key thing we proved was that simply walking forward when "the name" was called was not sufficient to give her jurisdiction. Pat was not there in chains. He had even signed a contract with them - a bail notice. None of this seemed to matter. It was an uplifting experience for certain.

Once we have a bit more experience under our belt I'll probably write another article describing all that we've learned.

arrow Return to Christ's Lawful Assembly

Translation arrow

  Home     Greetings     Who We Are     Helpful Info     Rest Room     Search     Contact Us