Litigant tries to arrest judge in court

It didn’t work out well for the litigant in this case from Northern Ireland, but then the tactic seldom works out well anywhere, even when as here the litigant happens to be a police officer [In re Carlin, Northern Ireland Queen’s Bench 2016]


  • [14] The final preliminary point raised by the respondent was that there is a difference between his natural self and the fiction to which reference is made in his birth certificate and in the proceedings as issued. This is a nonsense apparently developed in other common law jurisdictions which has made its way here and misled a number of personal litigants into thinking that it provides a defensive cloak behind which they can hide. There is nothing to it. It is a legal nonsense. There is only one Thomas Anthony Carlin and there is no fictional alternative. Nor is there anything to the suggestion that the respondent should have been referred to by way of his police number and name. None of these preliminary matters are of any substance.

    I see the sovcits are spreading to Ireland now. And this one’s also a police officer? Shameful.

    • We’ve had our own version of Sovereign citizens for a while.
      There generally called “Freemen on the land” over here.

      Like the US version, they think they can pick and choose which bits of the law they like and which they dont like, and therefore dont need to bother with.

      Generally over here, they are considered amusement rather than threat, but that may be in part that they generally dont have guns. A Policemen in Northern Ireland may be an exception to that though as they are more likely to be armed than most UK citizens.

      • Yes, we have plenty of Sovereign Citizen nonsense here in the US. However, I don’t think we’ve ever had a case where an actual police officer tried it.

    • Yet the law (in the US, at any rate, not sure about Ireland) perpetuates that by allowing people to change facts on their birth certificates later, adding adoptive parents as their birth parents, or allowing people to change their gender at birth, as if the birth certificate is a living document that can be amended.

      • What a blessing for adoptive families that such documents, which after all are legal artifices serving a variety of goals of convenience, should be allowed to reflect actual family relationships. (The change should also make it easier, rather than harder, for later investigators in many circumstances to track heirs or detect identity theft.) Not sure what the Northern Ireland case has to do with this phenomenon, or what purpose is served by the freelance birtherism of assailing perfect strangers’ documents (“Those weren’t *really* your original parents! Admit it!”)

  • Sorry, but I always get a kick watching a sovereign citizen video on YouTube about the time they’re getting arrested and start yelling “I do not consent” over and over. Like that is going to do them any good. How many people actually consent to being arrested?

    By the end of the video though I’m tired of their dumb assery and just want to dope slap them for being so stupid.