Image Credit: Shutterstock

KAMLOOPS - A man who claims he's been unfairly classified as a Freeman-on-the-land has had the appeal of his conviction tossed.

Dale Jacobi was convicted by a provincial court judge of resisting a peace officer, but Jacobi appealed that conviction saying he was unfairly classified as a Freeman-on-the-land and that it influenced the judge's duty to be impartial.

Followers of the so-called Freemen-on-the-land movement believe they're freeing themselves from an overbearing government which has overstepped its bounds.

In a written decision earlier this month, Kamloops Supreme Court judge Dev Dley dismissed the application, saying the trial judge made no error in law and that Jacobi received a fair trial.

"Simply because a trial judge does not agree with a litigant’s personal views of the applicability of this country’s laws does not give rise to an unfair or unjust result," Dley said.

Jacobi's conviction stemmed from an incident with a police officer at a traffic stop in Merritt on Dec. 10, 2015. The officer asked Jacobi for his licence, registration and insurance, to which Jacobi asked if the officer had any authority to make those requests.

Because of the conversation, the officer was concerned Jacobi didn't have insurance and that he might leave the scene. But Jacobi refused to pull to the side of the road which led to him being arrested for obstruction.

He refused to get out of the car or give his name, so more officers arrived on scene and eventually Jacobi was physically restrained. He had an expired Alberta driver's licence along with other identity documents.

On Jan. 19, 2016, Jacobi was arraigned on his charge after a bizarre exchange with a provincial court judge, who asked if Jacobi had a lawyer.

"Are you talking to me?" Jacobi asked.

"I am, yes," the judge responded.

"I just – that is not my name," Jacobi said. "I don’t recognize that name, and I don’t consent to be identified by that name. I object to the proceedings in this court. This court has no jurisdiction. You have not proved jurisdiction. Jurisdiction has been challenged. It must be answered."

Jacobi then told the court he didn't have or need a lawyer, and that he objected to being arraigned on the charge, saying the Crown had "alleged facts and terms which are not in evidence before this court."

He said if the court wanted to proceed without any evidence that proved a crime had been committed, then the judge would be "committing barratry on the bench, malfeasance and misfeasance of office."

Jacobi said he "objected" several times during the hearing, and didn't allow the judge to read the charge he was facing in order for him to enter a plea.

"All right. Now, you, sir, stand charged that on or about the 10th of..." the judge said.

"I don’t stand for anything," Jacobi responded. "I am innocent. I will not enter any other plea."

Eventually, the case went to trial in March 2016 and the judge gave her decision the following month. Crown had asked for a 30-day sentence of time served, but the judge said she took issue with that because the only reason Jacobi was in custody was because he refused to sign the bail documents.

"Everything that the (Crown) has said is hearsay," Jacobi said before the judge gave her decision. "There has been no evidence presented that I was a driver. There was no evidence presented that..."

"I’m not talking about my decision. I’m talking about the sentence," the judge said.

"I don’t accept your decision, and I don’t accept any sentence that you may give," Jacobi said.

"Thirty days, time served. You have victim fine surcharges payable in 60 days. Thank you," the judge responded.

In his appeal, Jacobi alleged that the trial judge committed barratrous acts by denying his right to due process through "selective discrimnation, blatant partiality," and violated the "Federal Court of Canada Ruling against 'Noble Cause Corruption" on behalf of her employer.

Jacobi said the judge's employer benefits from her denial of due process to him, in order to maintain an administration of law which doesn't conform to precedent and Charter rights, "all in furtherance of the Crown's position while accepting salary, commissions and other emoluments and bribes" from the provincial government to rule in their favour.

"I have reviewed the transcript of the trial and conclude that the trial judge was patient and listened to Mr. Jacobi’s arguments, even though many of the arguments had no relevance to the issues before the court," Dley said in his decision. "Mr. Jacobi received a fair hearing."

To contact a reporter for this story, email Ashley Legassic or call 250-319-7494 or email the editor. You can also submit photos, videos or news tips to the newsroom and be entered to win a monthly prize draw.

We welcome your comments and opinions on our stories but play nice. We won't censor or delete comments unless they contain off-topic statements or links, unnecessary vulgarity, false facts, spam or obviously fake profiles. If you have any concerns about what you see in comments, email the editor in the link above. 

News from © iNFOnews, 2017