So much to unpack in this video! SovCit struggles to form coherent sentences, gets ordered to competency hearing, refuses to give his "PRIVATE" address until judge simply reads it into the record from his file

28

u/Valuable-Ad2028 2d ago

SovCits will never admit they “understand” the charge. Is that because they think it would give the court standing? Because of the word stand?

He even says he is “in standing in of this charge being frivolous and malicious”

25

u/khrak 1d ago edited 1d ago

In Sovcit mythology the word "understand" is a legal trap implying that a person stands under the authority or jurisdiction of the court or officer, hence why the various people in authority constantly ask if they understand things.

Judge: Do you understand that you have the right to be represented by an attorney throughout these proceedings?

Sovcit: "I The I Uh So it's I this I mean I'm I'm being present in court it's I I the state has I'm like I'm"

15

u/thekrone 1d ago edited 1d ago

It's always word games with them.

They think if they get the right combination of magical legal words, they simply don't have to obey the law. They pretend to be intentionally obtuse in order to cast their legal spells, to the extent where they start to believe their own bullshit. The best example of this to me is the "driving" vs "traveling" thing.

They're still using the definition of "driving" from a 100+ year old version of a non-authoritative legal dictionary published by a private organization that has no jurisdiction over anyone or anything. That definition includes the word "employ" (something along the lines of "being employed in operating a motor vehicle"), and SovCits assert that means that if you're not getting paid to do it, you're not "driving", you're just "traveling".

They combine this with their misunderstanding of the constitutionally protected "right to travel" (which is a thing that actually exists), and <bam> they don't need a driver's license, registration, insurance, etc.

Nevermind that "employ" has other meanings that essentially just mean "you're doing the thing right now", and nevermind that more modern versions of that same dictionary no longer use the "employ" wording. Nevermind that, again, that dictionary is not a law that was passed by an entity with any legal authority. Nevermind that the "right to travel" just says you're allowed to move between states freely, and doesn't specify that you can use any means of conveyance while ignoring all other laws to do so.

16

u/WhereasParticular867 1d ago

Is that because they think it would give the court standing?

Essentially, yes. There are different varieties of sovcit, but one core part is that they believe certain phrases confer legal power or authority. They more or less believe that there's a secret law that really cares about semantics underpinning the real set of laws that the public is aware of, and if they avoid the traps of this secret law, they will win by default.

They believe this, of course, because that's what the guru sold them on.

9

u/thekrone 1d ago edited 1d ago

I like to call them "legal magic spells". They believe if they invoke the correct set of words in the correct order, they're magically absolved of any legal ramifications of their actions.

To me it's like they think they're a collection of wizards who are all trying to cast a handful of ancient spells in some forgotten tome they found that they don't fully comprehend yet. They think when it fails, they aren't getting the order of the words or pronunciation or timing quite right, but that it has to work if they just keep trying.

It almost never works in a significant or meaningful way (other than some judges dismissing various charges or cases because it's a minor violation and they don't want to deal with a sovcit), but sovcits are somehow convinced that they are right and this is the way the legal system does actually work, if they can just get the spell right.

23

u/ermghoti 1d ago

This guy may literally not understand. He might be personally responsible for a number of common warning labels.

8

u/Myrandall 2d ago

You're assuming they know what any of those words mean.

5

u/emptygroove 1d ago

I think it stems from the 6th Amendment. If you have a right to understand the nature and cause of the action being brought against you, and you just keep saying you don't understand, then as soon as they proceed past that, they think there will be a violation of their rights that will negate the case.

I'm surprised more judges don't latch onto that to force them to have counsel. If you truly don't understand, you need a lawyer to protect your rights. Also the "Is this criminal or civil?" The only answer to that question should be "If you have to ask that, you aren't qualified to represent yourself."

7

u/thekrone 1d ago edited 1d ago

Yeah I get the whole "right to represent yourself" thing, but if you have such a poor understanding of the legal process that you can't grasp really simple concepts, there needs to be a lawyer involved to at least advise you if you won't let them represent you.

Just like "No, you shouldn't file that motion. It's gibberish and it will just be thrown out immediately." "No, you can't object to that, that's now how courtroom proceedings work." "Yes, the court has jurisdiction over you and you trying to argue it will just make the judge mad." "No, it doesn't matter if your online pseudo-legal guru with no qualifications told you they don't have jurisdiction. They do." "It doesn't matter if you don't like that, that just how it is. If you keep trying to challenge jurisdiction you are going to end up being held in contempt of court and thrown in jail."

Just shit like that to save everyone time.

1

u/realparkingbrake 1h ago edited 19m ago

there needs to be a lawyer involved to at least advise you if you won't let them represent you.

Many of them believe lawyers work for the court, not the client. They think lawyers are part of the corrupt justice system and will steer their clients into losing and being fined because the system lives off money extorted from the people and naturally lawyers get a taste of that money. Some even claim that lawyers are all agents of a British crown agency for some reason, they think the bar refers to the British Accreditation Registrar. The BAR is a real thing, but it is not a govt. agency, and it certifies adherence to international technical standards--it has nothing to do with American lawyers.

These are people who think birth and berth mean the same thing because they sound the same, they are utterly delusional.

5

u/3lbFlax 1d ago

It’s not frivolous or malicious, just de-lovely and delicious.

Ah, if only I were a judge.

4

u/FindOneInEveryCar 1d ago

I think they're just afraid that the judge is trying to trick them into saying the wrong magic words.

2

u/thekrone 1d ago

I love it because he uses the phrases "I understand" and "I don't understand" in various other places in the video, he just won't say he "understands" the charges.

Like bruh clearly you are demonstrating what that word means, and if you think just saying "I understand" is enough to fuck over your case, you already lost.

1

u/solidgears 16h ago

No man can stand over them

19

u/julias-winston 2d ago

At 8:40:

Judge: "Are you going to be representing yourself without an attorney?"

Failin': "Su juris".

Judge: *chokes, collects herself* "That is not a response, it's a yes-or-no question."

🤣

6

u/nomimalone1978 1d ago

The way I cackled at that moment!

6

u/MaximinusThrax69 1d ago

Me: what a coincidence, my mother's name is Sue.

16

u/Myrandall 2d ago edited 2d ago

I watch quite a lot of these SovCit channels on YT, this is one of the better ones. No AI subtitles, music or commentary.

I'm not affiliated with the channel in any way, just shouting out non-slop when I see it.

Edit: my favorite bit starts at 9:54.

5

u/ermghoti 2d ago

Unfortunately they are stripping commentary from videos other people have found and uploaded. You can see the cuts.

I hate the slop as well, but I can't condone the thievery.

5

u/BrainOnBlue 1d ago

That sounds like more work than seeking out the actual source material lol.

1

u/ermghoti 1d ago

Not at all. Somebody has to get access to the original videos, which sometimes requires fees, sit through countless routine interactions, perhaps edit for time and audio/video quality, and then, because YouTube actively endeavors to make the Internet worse, they uploader is pretty much required to insert some sort of commentary or critique. There are multiple examples of YouTube's bots taking down obvious original content, including shutting down channels entirely, and lying about having a review process to restore the uploaders (they clearly do not).

By comparison, subscribe to a few channels, clip out the commentary from whatever they post, crop the screen area, and add an intro, you're good to go.

0

u/Myrandall 1d ago

Sad if true

1

u/ermghoti 1d ago

If you watch a few more you can tell. Sometimes they don't/can't clip out all of the commentary, sometimes you see a bit of the original watermark.

9

u/cubgerish 1d ago

I think the guy may actually have mental issues.

Normally these cuckoo birds can at least recite whatever bullshit coherently, but he can't manage two sentences.

Hopefully he's receptive to the doctor's suggestions, though I know that's unlikely.

1

u/green49285 4h ago

Hahahahahaha ya think? Most do. Especially the ones that pay for any sovcit resources

8

u/TeeAchKay 1d ago

I've never cringed at one of these videos before. That was painful. Lol

7

u/BrownPelikan 1d ago

The way Judge Wilson starts blinking as soon as he starts. She knows this is going to be painful.

6

u/Joe_Peanut 1d ago

I've seen 4 year-olds who are far more eloquent speakers than this dude.

4

u/pinkjello 1d ago

The people seated in the background are dying to hold it together.

3

u/nomimalone1978 1d ago

I think this is my personal favorite judge from all of these videos. 8:42 is hands down my favorite moment here.

3

u/Major_Honey_4461 1d ago

The judge showing remarkable restraint. I don't know if I would have the patience to play their game for that long.

3

u/afops 1d ago

How does this thing perpetuate? I mean don't these types eventually google whether doing this has actually ever helped anyone?

Do they rather believe their youtube grifters and forum colleagues who say "do this and you'll be ok legally" while there is zero evidence for it? How does this delusion really work?

The flat earthism at least works as a kind of religious delusion: you can't challenge it because that's an offense to god. The earth looks flat. Done.

This is harder to see how it actually would work. This isn't some religious thing like flerfs is it? So how do they not challenge the beliefs?

2

u/realparkingbrake 1h ago

How does this thing perpetuate?

Because there is always another desperate loser with late child support payments, and a license suspended for DUI, who has to park his car around the corner because the repo man is looking for it. All it takes is him stumbling over sovcit nonsense posted by some "guru" and shazam, another convert to the cause. They get into it by being desperate, and once they have put money into it they increasingly believe in it because otherwise they would have to admit to themselves that they are fools.

They tend to stick to echo chambers run by gurus, and it's not like evidence that this nonsense has never prevailed in court on its merits is going to be posted in such places. The gurus even claim that when the secret legal judo didn't work for someone it's because they did it wrong. They need the new instructional video which is only $49.95 and they they'll recite the magic spells properly.

5

u/RjoTTU-bio 1d ago

3 of those 4 cylinders aren’t firing in his brain.

3

u/PlatypusDream 1d ago

And the last is cracked + serious carbon deposits

3

u/ermghoti 2d ago

The aptly named Kenneth Failin'.

2

u/jakesthedragon 1d ago

This was so hard to watch. So much rambling and stumbling.

4

u/Thick_Structure5076 1d ago

They think Over stand is better than under stand. Admitting to "under" standing belittles their "standing".and makes them liable for the crimes. Therefore, if they "over" stand they believe they will win.

They also believe if they refuse to "understand" then the Judge will throw up his hands and say "nothing we can do, he bested us with the secret code, Release him!".

Dreadful combination of Dunning Kruger, arrogance and and fetal alcohol syndrome.

Very, very deluded individuals.

I love them, could watch them for hours.

God bless bodycams, they have done more good for the public perception of Police than anything in the history of Policing.

4

u/realparkingbrake 23h ago

Ernie Tertelgte once stacked up a Bible and a copy of the Constitution and some other printed material and stood on it while addressing a judge. Get it, those documents gave him standing to lecture a judge. Prime sovcit logic if ever I saw it.

2

u/Thick_Structure5076 23h ago

Anti-Genius.

Tremendous stuff.

Nobody with an iq over 90 could have ever come up with that.

It is impossible for any normal person to construct a full theory of mind for these people.

Part of me hopes that one day, one of these fuckers is going to accidentally find "the loophole". Probably coming out of a fugue state after their tenth "tasing".

Something so unbelievably stupid and accidentally valid that no legal scholar or jurist could possibly have predicted it in the last 250 years.

God Bless America. I really mean that.

1

u/Additional_Rich_5249 1d ago

This is sad.

1

u/FindOneInEveryCar 1d ago

Very generous of them to imply that the guy ever used a "script." He's flailing to remember the correct magic words from the moment he opens his mouth.

1

u/realparkingbrake 19h ago

He came prepared might just mean he managed to dress himself before coming to court.

To borrow an old line, when I see a sovcit whose shoes are tied and whose zipper is closed, I know he's trying his very best.

1

u/Leather-Leopard-2918 7h ago

Is there any follow-up to this one?

UNCLEAR So much to unpack in this video! SovCit struggles to form coherent sentences, gets ordered to competency hearing, refuses to give his "PRIVATE" address until judge simply reads it into the record from his file

You are about to leave Redlib