What happens if you don't stand when a judge enters court?

Most of us have been in court for one reason or another and no matter what your "offense", if it was an American court you will be commanded to "rise" for the honorable judge so-and-so. I'm just wondering, what happens if you refuse to rise? Personally, I don't consider any judge to be my superior in either stature or intellect and since nobody is required to stand in my presence, I think its silly to think I must rise in theirs. In no way would this be challenging their status as a judge, nor would it be an insult to the court, rather a gesture of our equal status in the minds of my peers and in regards to the Constitution. If you think about it, you don't have to rise in front of a General, Admiral, Congressman, the President or anyone else, so why do judges get such treatment? Time has proven many-a-judge to be less than honorable, and if I know nothing about the judge whose courtroom I'm in (as is always the case) what reason would compel me to do so?

Have you read this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Standing, or rather being seated when ordered, or saying "yes" to the question do you understand, means you stand under their corporate or Navy law rules.

This is a really interesting thread for those who wish to read up on Common Law and the Treasonous hijacking of courts by the fascists.

But its also a really tough route to go.

I agree that judges are not gods, although maybe a lot of judges would disagree.

I think you would be told that you were in contempt of court, and asked again.

Then if you still refused you would be fined and escorted out. Or maybe arrested.

reply to post by budaruskie


From your first sentence I get the impression you're asking what happens if the accused doesn't rise. The smart money is on a contempt of court ruling which can cost you money, time in jail, or both. Also, while the judge is trying to stay impartial, you have irritated the guy and he probably won't cut you any slack.

Just a quick answer. You can have more if you want it.

Originally posted by Unity_99
Standing, or rather being seated when ordered, or saying "yes" to the question do you understand, means you stand under their corporate or Navy law rules.

No it does notactually, just a silly conspiracy theory not based on any fact

There is NO penalty for not standing before someone that "we" do not feel is superior to ourselves. This is a myth. We have been so called governed by those that we have deemed as our "rulers" and we have not changed this status thus far.

We do not and never had rulers. Our oppressors have had there time, and now it is no longer.

Peace, NRE.

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by Unity_99
Standing, or rather being seated when ordered, or saying "yes" to the question do you understand, means you stand under their corporate or Navy law rules.

No it does notactually, just a silly conspiracy theory not based on any fact

Really. I used to think so. I just watched a video by a fellow Canadian in Guelph Ontario, and that was in court, no way to fake it. If the Freeman and Common Law is not true, and if our courts are not operating under the Admiral Law, then what transpired (and it DID transpire) could not have happened. That part is very clear.

When he declared the judge abandoned the courtroom and dismissed his own case, he would have been in contempt.

Case dismissed.

Originally posted by Unity_99
When he declared the judge abandoned the courtroom and dismissed his own case, he would have been in contempt.

Case dismissed

Wrong, very wrong.

www.guelphmercury.com...

"When the justice of the peace took a recess, during Thompson’s matter on Sept. 1, Thompson considered the case closed. However, the court later reconvened and adjourned his matter to Sept. 30.""

"Keith Thompson failed to show in Guelph’s provincial offences court Thursday but his trial proceeded in his absence. The court found him guilty of two offences of illegally parking a car outside a driveway or a legal off-street parking area. On each offence, Thompson was fined $130."

You really should believe nothing you read on a "freeman" site, or on David Icke's site!

The judge simply took a break, which they ARE ALLOWED TO DO!

reply to post by Unity_99


I've seen nothing more than a man who left a court that was in recess, with a grandiose statement. But he did nothing other than walk out of a recessed courtroom.

If you can find it, I would love to see his follow-up video where this man explains that he was not found against, by the court, in absentia. Because that is likely what occurred. In many cases you don't even need to bother with the antics to accomplish that end - simply don't show up at all. Same result. Both risk bench warrants being issued for failure to appear though.

~Heff

ETA: I typed slowly - read the above post.

It's just simply a sign of respect dude don't get all worked up about it... not to mention i don't think you have to do it anyways. But you're in his (or "his") court room with his rules to abide by. I mean or if you want you can fight the law! "He thinks he can tell ME what to do!? I'll show him!" That's when you start throwing over tables in protest of simply standing for a judge.

I think you need to take a look at martime law courts, which is what you enter when you enter court.
It's all rather shady and everyone should educate themselves with it.
There is a growing movement in the UK at the moment, Lawfull Rebellion being the main driving force.

www.admiraltylawguide.com...

home.iae.nl...

www.lawfulrebellion.org...

Originally posted by thethetheluis
It's just simply a sign of respect dude don't get all worked up about it... not to mention i don't think you have to do it anyways. But you're in his (or "his") court room with his rules to abide by. I mean or if you want you can fight the law! "He thinks he can tell ME what to do!? I'll show him!" That's when you start throwing over tables in protest of simply standing for a judge.

We are not in the courtrooms of anyone except the "people". We stand for the people and the rights of the people. Not someone that has a robe, or a so called status.

Peace, NRE.

Originally posted by Unity_99
Have you read this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Standing, or rather being seated when ordered, or saying "yes" to the question do you understand, means you stand under their corporate or Navy law rules.

This is a really interesting thread for those who wish to read up on Common Law and the Treasonous hijacking of courts by the fascists.

But its also a really tough route to go.

Yes I have. Actually, I was reading that thread when this question came to mind. I've been in court and stood for the judge on numerous occasions without ever thinking about it, but that thread inspired some thought in my mind.
As a side note, I met a "freeman" roughly back in 2004 when I was a banker. I thought he was crazy, as did my co-workers, because of course he signed everything in red ink without prejudice so-on and so-forth. He claimed then that he hadn't paid taxes since the mid '90's but when I asked how he would never give me any straight answers. Then one day, he started to open up, and it really got me interested. Soon after that, I found ATS and now all my hats are made of tinfoil. By the way, I saw him turn 10k into 33k in one month once. From time to time I still see him around and he claims that he still has paid no taxes.

I'm a human being and not a person, I know that, but the trick is forcing your authority as a freeman upon a judge/cop/(any apparent "authority" figure) without putting the living breathing human being in harms way because he happens to do something that a "PERSON" could be detained/questioned/beat for.

I'm definitely looking for some truth in this, I'm definitely going to watch this to see if anything develops.

reply to post by MallardDuck


Please don't tell me you think you're going to lose some rights by standing up. I stand up when a woman or a minister enters the room. Think of it as only a matter of politeness. If you decide you don't want to show politeness to the judge, it will be like throwing a beer in a biker bar. You're going to regret it.

Originally posted by NoRegretsEver

Originally posted by thethetheluis
It's just simply a sign of respect dude don't get all worked up about it... not to mention i don't think you have to do it anyways. But you're in his (or "his") court room with his rules to abide by. I mean or if you want you can fight the law! "He thinks he can tell ME what to do!? I'll show him!" That's when you start throwing over tables in protest of simply standing for a judge.

We are not in the courtrooms of anyone except the "people". We stand for the people and the rights of the people. Not someone that has a robe, or a so called status.

Peace, NRE.

Well whos the person who went to law school? I mean I wouldn't want some average american or english dumbass/prejudice/bias douche (or let alone a bunch of them) who doesn't know anything about the law judging me. I mean I honestly don't know hardly anything about this type of stuff but just in general there are so much more serious things wrong with the world to nag about then "ohhh why do i have to stand up when a judge enters the room! Who is HE to tell me what to do! I mean we're all human obviously he owes just as much respect to u as u do to him"

reply to post by dereks


- have you ever been in Court and what are you basing the statement that it is Conspiracy Theory?

FACT: The flag that is displayed in ALL Courts, and many banks, etc is an Admiralty (military) Flag....gold fringed.

reply to post by budaruskie


the "ORIGINAL" reason that people were instructed by the bailiff to ALL RISE, when a judge entered, was because he/she was carrying a Bible. Of course, that is not the case any more. I personally had a judge confirm this.
Now, it is because they seek power over and they desire to subjugate you. Treat you like a debtor, unless you do not consent.

When they ask if you "understand" the charges - that is the Court attempting to obtain jurisdiction - translation - "are you willing to submit and 'stand under' our authority"

reply to post by dereks


You are correct that when the Judge came back, he was found in contempt.

What this guy did wrong, was many things. He should have immediately objected to the Judge leaving. Should have never left when the judge said he was taking a recess. etc..etc.

This is what happens when going into a private commercial tribunal Court playground, without full knowledge.

I often give the analogy...you show up at Court expecting to play basketball that day, and they are playing tennis.
The next time you bring a racket, and they are playing volleyball. Tricky bunch those attorneys/judges.

Great prompt OP- I've never thought about this before, but being a libertarian (LIVE AND LET LIVE- what you do/believe in is your business as long as it's not infringing on someone else's same inalienable rights)- it's things like this that do get under my skin, because the only reason for it (today, that is) is a power play.
DAMN THE MAN