Categorized | Articles, Video

Update on Gerald Wilhelm Complaint – Logical Fallacy from Patrick R. Burns

Posted on February 11th, 2014 by Marc Stevens

Predictably, the Minnesota Bar Association has rejected my complaint against Gerald Wilhelm.  It is laughable, they used a logical fallacy as grounds.  The old strawman.  Raise an argument I didn’t make so that they can easily reject it.

It’s not just wrong, but it’s insulting and is further evidence of bad faith.  This Patrick R. Burns must think I’m so burnsstupid I’d buy this free pass he’s given to Wilhelm.  Speaking from personal experience, lawyers tend to think non-lawyers are morons who can’t recognize when lawyers are lying.

I go through more detail in the video below.   But apparently Burns’s job is protecting dishonest lawyers and using logical fallacies.  I doubt he will take the time to confirm Wilhelm filed only a prayer for relief, not a valid cause of action where the court could acquire standing.  I think there is no chance of him asking about evidence the constitution and code apply either.  We already know that is a sacred cow and we shall not investigate.

I’ll post any responses from Burns or other lawyer from the bar.

 

              

14 Comments For This Post

  1. bruce sloane Says:

    Heh …
    I just had an Attorney complain to the Judge that I had filed against him some 6 times, and it was a scheme to strike him from the Case like the last Attorney …
    Next time he schedules a Motions hearing, I hope he advises the Clerk so it is actually on the Docket
    I am seeking $2800 in compensation

  2. mitchell moffett Says:

    it would de nice if thay just say rite up frontthat this mistemener is going to couts you 5 grand or better.i ges thay cant do it that way because thay would get no bizz lol.if thay had told me that I would have walked out.smarmy basterds lol

  3. Bobby G Says:

    The New Testament clearly states that we are all subject to laws. Read the following, and then give your reply.

    “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.” (Romans 13:1-7) ALSO “Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work.” Titus 3:1 ESV

  4. Incubus Says:

    So as evidence that we are subject to the writings of men you offer more writings of men?

  5. pop de adam Says:

    Some might think it strange these newly minted Christians who were formally pagan Romans, spent much of their time ignoring and destroying local authorities everywhere in favor of their own authority, through apathy or disrespect allowed their future savior to be crucified. Perhaps this passage is meant to show the hypocrisy of the Romans and their ways.

    Do you suppose someone in Rome might have said or thought: “This man Christ and his followers are a threat to us Romans, lets subvert it, enmesh ourselves within it so we might guide and control it”. As I understand it these chapters concerning Romans are a later addition to the bible.

    The playright William Shakespear is by many considered to be the foremost authority on the subject of the playwright William Shakespear. Can an authority be the author of its own authority?

  6. PatriotOne Says:

    To Bobby G:

    amen to Incubus…

    “”For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.”” & “”Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good.””

    so Bobby, if the so-called ‘authorities’ are liars or thieves or rapist or murderers, are the people supposed to submit to such trespasses in order to please the GODZ?

    Are you, Bobby, saying the ‘authorities’ “is God’s servant for your good”?

    If I were to believe what you believe, Bobby, I suppose God saved Noah because the ‘authorities’ were good?

  7. Jeff Evans Says:

    I just got to talk to Marc on the phone. I revere him as an authority more than I do any bureaucrat. You see Bobby G. I have never had an “authority” assist me when I am wronged by his fellow bureaucrat. So Bobby I guess when cops shoot young kids because they have “shiny objects” like visible cell phones or break into people’s cars because of a broken tag light, there the good guy, the “authority God was talking about? Incubus made a valid and truthful point. It is not good to throw out arbitrary Bible verses just like throwing out case law. We need to do interpretive research first. God has nothing to do with government or money changers from my interpretation. Thank you Marc for your time, dedication and unsurpassed wisdom. Bobby G need to watch the video “Delusions” a few times.

  8. Bobby G Says:

    Jeff E. I agree that most bureaucrats are dishonest when it comes to the “law”, but don’t we at some point have to give in and admit that most traffic laws are there for a good purpose? If nobody was subject, can you even imagine what the streets would be like with all the drunk driving speedsters witout insurance? It would be a frigging nightmare. If the speed limit says 35, what the hell is it gonna hurt to just stay within that limit? Some people don’t and when they get busted, they whine and moan like a little baby, then try every trick in the book to get out of paying for their mistake! What a bunch of cry babies. Those people think they are above the law and then try to use those very laws to keep from paying. Sounds like to me to be a bit hypocritcal, don’t you think?

    If you knowingly violate a traffic law, man-up. Admit you got caught and pay the fine. If you were unaware that you broke the law, then by all means “fight it” tooth and nail. Demand it go to a jury and let a group of people (not just a single judge) determine if you willfully broke the law. If the facts show you did willfully violate the statute… then pay the bill. Odds are, the court will never let it go to a jury trial in the first place and simply dismiss it, but let the system work. Go for the due process of law.

  9. J David Says:

    Whenever laws are enacted which contradict God’s law, civil disobedience becomes a Christian duty

    When God delegates His supreme authority to human rulers, they have no liberty to use it in order to justify tyranny. In fact, there are quite remarkable examples in the Holy Scriptures where God explicitly commands civil disobedience against the state. For example, Egyptian midwives refused to obey the Pharaoh’s order to kill Hebrew babies. As the Bible says, ‘[they] feared God and did not do what the king of Egypt told them to do’ (Exod 1:17).

    Likewise, three Hebrews did not obey Babylon’s King Nebuchadnezzar, when he commanded everyone to bow down and worship his golden image (Dan 6). Daniel also refused to obey a decree enacted by King Darius, which forced everyone not to pray to any god or men except to himself.

    In the New Testament, we have the example of the first Apostles’ attitude towards the Sanhedrin, a Jewish council of priests and teachers of the law. The council ordered them not to preach in the name of Christ Jesus. However, the Book of Acts says that the Apostles refused to obey their decision, and, as the Apostle Peter boldly declared, ‘We must obey God rather than human authority’ (Acts 5:29). In fact, the zeal of the Apostles for the Lord was so great that they refused to be silenced by unfair rulers, even if such a refusal resulted in arrest and/or execution. They considered themselves bound by God’s Law in the first place, and kept on preaching the Gospel as if it were no legal prohibition. To be obeyed, therefore, civil authorities have firstly to obey God and the law. ‘If the state commands what God forbids, or forbids what God commands, then our plain Christian duty is to resist, not to submit, to disobey the state in order to obey God … Whenever laws are enacted which contradict God’s law, civil disobedience becomes a Christian duty.

    Although the first Apostles regarded it as totally lawful to disobey ungodly legislation, today’s followers of Christ like to quote from chapter 13 of Paul’s letter to the Romans in order to justify their compliance with immoral rules of positive law. However, Paul argues here that we obey the civil authority because it holds no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong’ (Rom 13:3). If the person who holds the state power abuses his or her God-given power, ‘our duty is not to submit, but to resist’.

    A more accurate interpretation of this passage would clearly indicate that ‘the state is to be an agent of justice, to restrain evil by punishing the wrongdoer, and to protect the good in society. When it does the reverse, it has not proper authority. It is then a usurped authority and as such it becomes lawless and is tyranny.

  10. PatriotOne Says:

    @ Bobby G:

    “”If you knowingly violate a traffic law, man-up. Admit you got caught and pay the fine.””

    Hey Bobby, you can also listen to Eddie Craig at http://www.RuleOfLawRadio.com on Monday nights at 9:pm (cst). Eddie digs into the LAW (whereas Marc simply demands that GovCo prove jurisdiction in the first place) and proves that the TRAFFIC LAWS do not apply to non-commercial activities.

    But you seem to like believing in GovCo as your master. Enjoy your self imposed “man-up’d’ slavery.

  11. Jeff Evans Says:

    Marc,

    I think you pointed out in your book that the Supreme Court held this bastard has immunity to withhold evidence, lie and prosecutorial misconduct if I am not mistaken. On page 110 in Govt. Indicted, You have a citing Henzel v Gerstein 608 F. 2nd 634 (1979) and Imber v Pachman. If so, what to do to squash this parasite?

  12. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Jeff, best we have is to file a claim against the insurance and complaint with the bar. Publicize it, put his face on a flyer and website, pass the flyers out to everyone going into the court he is working in.

  13. Jeff Evans Says:

    Bobby, it is a worn out argument and really does not have anything to do with no injury, no damages, no evidence of a COMPLAINING party. You are talking about crimes that consist of an injured party or a drunk driver who is threatening lives with a 3000 to 6000 lbs weapon called a car. that is what govt. is limited to my friend. I don’t wear seatbelts unless I choose to, I go as fast as I want traffic permitting, I don’t come to a full stop at stop signs and roll through if there is no traffic and I don’t wear out my signals if there are no car’s 100′ behind or ahead of me depending on my MPH. I don’t pay parking or traffic moving violation tickets and have studied Marc’s scientific method since 2006. I don’t studder or stammer when I question these clowns in costumes and fake nobility or give them a chance to shut me up when I am exposing them on the RECORD, so I can use it against them upon appeal. They are word wizards and I always call the judge a wisdom master when he tried the ole I’m not here to give you legal advice. You need to go on You Tube and look at some history doc’s and do a little research. You need to query Lysander Spooner as Marc suggested. You need to educate yourself for you and no one else. If you do not agree with Marc’s methods then do waste your time on this information. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to get this just a hour or two each evening and listening to the podcast at bedtime instead of watching Duck Dynasty Lol. Just a joke Bobby G. I pray you live in your own reality and make decisions that work for you!

  14. Jeff Evans Says:

    Please don’t misrepresent what Marc is doing here! He is teaching “Effective Damage Control” Not advocating getting out of violent crimes or crimes that can and do result in harming others.
    I don’t have an advance university degree, but I been on this planet for 53 years and bureaucrats are scumbags when they are in the role of a super-bureaucrats. Many don’t have a clue as to what their doing and see it as a job. They are not even proficient at what they were hire to do and many time it has to be pointed out to them in a respectful manner at first. Marc has helped my mental health because I don’t get bent out of shape having to straighten out and calm down the adults with a 7 year olds mentality when you ask them simple questions. Good night

4 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP - Feb 15, 2014 - Co-host: Calvin and Guest: Delilah | MarcStevens.netMarcStevens.net Says:

    […] Update on Gerald Wilhelm Complaint – Logical Fallacy from Patrick R. Burns. […]

  2. NSP - Apr 19, 2014 - Co-host: JT and Guest: John from MN | MarcStevens.netMarcStevens.net Says:

    […] 1st update on Marc’s correspondence with Gerald Wilhelm and future plans to […]

  3. NSP - Sept 6, 2014 - Co-host: Calvin - [UPDATE: FULL PODCAST] - MarcStevens.net Says:

    […] who’ll actually respond to the issues raised <> and more circular logic and strawman logical fallacies when questioning the applicability of the law is conflated and mischaracterized as […]

  4. NSP - Feb 7, 2015 - MarcStevens.net Says:

    […] More details behind the sociopath Gerald Wilhelm. […]

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

Saturday, 4-7pm EST: Tune-in to the LIVE No STATE Project broadcast as we report on the weekly happenings in legal-land and current events. You may call-in to the show at (218) 632-9399, or Skype-in, with your thoughts on tickets, tyrants, assessments, activism, anarchy, agorism, or, of course; any and all criticisms. If you are being attacked by those with arbitrary titles and shiny badges, or if you have an interesting observation or criticism; then feel free to call-in to the LIVE show at (218) 632-9399, or you'll need to contact Marc on Skype by searching for username: frankrizzo3, and we can also add you to the NSP skype group chat where you can engage in some courtroom role-play exercises to refine your litigation skills and boost your confidence if you have a court hearing coming up. Also, here is a comprehensive list of the many ways you can interact with the No STATE Project broadcast and community.

Wednesday, 6-7pm EST: Tune-in to the new No STATE Project midweek commercial-free video-stream broadcast via Ustream.tv. You can join Marc live, or contact Marc to ask a question if you cannot make it on live. You can find archives of the Wednesday broadcast here on the website and on YouTube.

If you want to join the forum, you must email me a username so I can create the account. This is to stop the flood of spambots.





Contact update: If you email me a wall of text, then I probably will not read it. If you email me telling me to call you right away I won't. You'll have to set up a phone consult so we can set an appointment.

Mailing address has changed as of 1 October 2016. The new mailing address is: G.M. or Occupant 1496 N. Higley Rd., Suite 102-37 Gilbert, Arizona 85234.






Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter


Advertise Here