Did we kinda bring this on ourselves? I’m digging deeper, but figured I’d throw it out here for other computer detectives like me 🤣

Interesting find scrolling FB a few min ago…

I'm doing a little research on the spread of pseudolegal beliefs, this time relating to Preston Bryan Knapp, the victim/disciple of Brandon Joe Williams. Knapp is the guy who just popped up with a new business asking for thousands of dollars from people to let him manage their "trusts" for them.

We knew that BJW was involved with Knapp's pseudolegal shenanigans, relating generally to a house he stopped paying the mortgage on. (Not clear if he was involved with Knapp's refusal to pay federal or state taxes, get the required insurance on the home, or a criminal case involving the mailing of underwear to his kid's daycare teacher in violation of a restraining order.) That cost Knapp $30k in sanctions, when the court ordered him to repay the defendants' legal costs incurred in the course of his frivolous litigation.

I'm reading some of the docs in the resulting bankruptcy, which ended when the bankruptcy court found that it was an abusive filing and dismissed it. The court's order clarifies that Knapp and his wife also paid BJW $139,000 in 2023 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnb.503618/gov.uscourts.mnb.503618.137.0.pdf at para. 14).

(People interested the pseudolegal/sovcit mindset can hear Mr. Knapp testify, but so far there's nothing all that interesting (I've got it on the background as I do other work and haven't finished yet). General testimony pretending to not understand what "income" or "citizenship" mean, that sort of thing.)

We already knew that BJW stole over $100k from a farmer in Texas, who paid him and a coconspirator for legal assistance in creating a bogus lawsuit that inevitably failed. That's from the victim's own complaints about BJW, which were posted here a while back.

In other words, BJW has stolen over a quarter of a million dollars from victims through his pseudolaw scam. We don't normally get that kind of information from these crooks, as they target victims who hate and fear the mainstream legal system and don't file complaints or go public very often.

It goes without saying, but obviously none of those victims got anything of value in exchange for the money they paid BJW. Every case failed disastrously.

This popped up on FB today.

Not my pic or post. But it belongs here.

First time I’ve seen these get posted by a PD themselves 😂

Saw this one on Facebook from the arresting agency’s page.

Seems not everyone learned why we relocated our Capitol/Capital back in the day…

BJW, for people who don't know, is one of the more vocal and obnoxious pseudolawyers out there today. One of the ways he became notorious was scamming people like the Knapp family, who apparently let him write/run a lawsuit for them. They sued their bank and realtor, IIRC, alleging that their real estate contract was a negotiable instrument. They got laughed out of court and sanctioned $30,000 because the court found that even pro ses (people without real attorneys) should have understood the case they filed was bogus.

People wondered for a while if Knapp was going to file any complaints against BJW, given that his terrible work and bogus legal theories led to such serious sanctions. But it looks like they're still tight; BJW is now helping Knapp promote a new business as a "private trust strategist."

https://www.privatetruststrategist.com/

The website doesn't have the usual pseudolegal verbiage; someone glancing at it might think this is just an amateur trying to sell wealth management services. There are a few yellow/red flags, like claiming to rely on common law instead of statutory trusts. But it seems inevitable that Knapp is fully into pseudolegal woo-woo land.

A couple of years ago, a Preston Byron Knapp--I'm assuming the same person, but I guess technically possible it's someone else with the exact same name--got a year's probation for harassment and violation of a restraining order.

You can find the complaint by searching PBK's name at https://publicaccess.courts.state.mn.us/CaseSearch - it's the 8/16/23 document in State of Minnesota v PBK. It details how the defendant sent multiple texts, written letters, and gifts to his kid's daycare teacher, despite her explicit and repeated and increasingly forceful requests that he not do that. She eventually got a restraining order against him. Undeterred, he sent her "seven pairs of women's underwear," leading to criminal charges against him.

(You can sort of see how this kind of personality would fall in with BJW, who writes about the United States of America as if she were a woman and in such a way that if she were, she'd be unwise to leave an uncovered drink in his presence.)

You can also find PBK's "Notice of Special Appearance & Foreign Actors Liability Motion/Mandate to Dismiss" in that same case, in which he identifies the defendant as a "Vessel Berthed 10/13/1989 CQV in Trust, a "No de Guerre at peace." It starts by plaintively complaining, "you deal in "person" a vessel, a dead entity, a foundling! You summon! a seance, your summoning the dead. You warrant! a War Rant." (Sic throughout.) It's thirty-odd pages of that.

So yeah, I think PBK's trust strategy service is a scam. Woof. Hurt people hurt people, I guess. He was clearly a victim of BJW's scam, and is paying it forwards. The only true victims here AFAICT are his spouse and his kid's poor daycare teacher.

Hard to tell to be honest. Doesn’t look like any real plate I am familiar with but it doesn’t have all the telltale markings either. On the border of Phoenix and Tempe.

This Wednesday I have my very first Federal case hearing down in Santa Ana (Orange County) if anyone wants to go.

Opposing counsel already got approval to appear virtually but, as always, I'll be there in person. [A government-issued ID is required to enter a Federal courthouse. I doubt a Pickletarian passport will be accepted. I wonder how that will play out.]

I highly doubt the hearing will be cancelled at this point.

DOUBLE CHECK HEARINGS ON OFFICIAL COURT WEBSITE PRIOR TO GOING TO ENSURE THE HEARING IS STILL HAPPENING

Case: 2:26-cv-08035-VBF-ADS (Federal - Case 15 on the Current and Previous Litigation page [on his law firm web site])

When: October 21, 2026, at 10:00 am

Where: Ronald Reagan Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, 411 West Fourth Street, Santa Ana, California 92701 (Courtroom 6B)

Now I'm not sure about other states, but here in Texas, unless something recently changed, driving a tractor on roadways (excluding interstate hwys) is fine and dandy. No license, registration, plates or any other such "contracts" with the government. This old dude across town got his license yanked for too many DWI's so he got a John Deere mid-size garden tractor, strapped a beer cooler to the rear, and used that for his beer runs. At least until he got busted for OUI on the tractor lol. When I was a kid, starting at like 9 years old, I drove a Kubota tractor all over my hometown, sometimes a Craftsman riding mower as well if I was trying to earn some $. The cops NEVER messed with me or my parents about it, even when I did sketchy stuff like chain a truckbed conversion trailer to the rear pivot wheel of the Kubotas's Bush Hog and plunder every conceivable kind of scrap metal not bolted to something town-wide. I was born into an agricultural family so learning to drive a tractor at 5 years old was normal.

Why don't sovcits do this? Still under the belief that the last time the cops busted their window and yanked them would actually be the last? They know, whether or not they believe their own bs, that the cops will always enforce law on them whether or not it applies to them in their private reality. Maybe the next lawsuit against the state for being denied travel rights under color of law is the one. There's probably all sorts of batshit reasons why not but seriously getting a tractor is the cheat code here. Even a big one with an interior and heat/AC is allowed, just not interstate highways.

Golden fringe!

A sovcit attempts to pay his debt to a bail bondsman using fake sovcit money, and the plaintiff uses this fact to prove the sovcit defendant acknowledges his debt and secures a summary judgment against him. He also comes to court with a sovcit guru whispering in his ear, who almost gets smacked with the unauthorized practice of law.

The fact that they haven’t pulled back this money is ridiculous. I have a hard time believing that someone in the CRA is not involved in helping getting these refunds passed through.

Mel Fletch (Melanie Fletcher of Keller, TX) lost in court again this week. She was sued by Larry Branch, the man who bought her house. Melanie continued to live in the house several months after she lost ownership. The case was handled by Tarrant County Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3 court. The judge was William "Bill" Brandt. Melanie has been trashing Brandt regularly on her Facebook page. Notes on FB post: I believe Melanie's reference to Larry Branch being indebted to her based on some "fee schedule" she sent him. Melanie claims to have a 'judgement' against Larry Branch and LB Construction. I believe this judgement is some sort of DIY sovcit nonsense and not the result of any legally valid proceeding.

Dred Scott v. Sandford was an 1857 Supreme Court decision that BJW considers one of the cornerstones of his “finding” that white people cannot be US citizens. That link takes you to the Wikipedia article. Dred Scott was an enslaved black man who sued for his freedom. From the article

Dred Scott v. Sandford,[a] 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that held that the United States Constitution did not extend American citizenship to people of black African descent, and therefore they could not enjoy the rights and privileges the Constitution conferred upon American citizens. The decision is widely considered the worst in the Supreme Court's history and is broadly denounced for its overt racism, judicial activism, and poor legal reasoning. It de facto nationalized slavery.

One of the most (in)famous statements in the decision is

[Negroes are inferior] and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.

BJW likes to cite that.

Although SCOTUS never explicitly overturned the decision, subsequent constitutional amendments, court cases, and laws have basically invalidated it. BJW begs to differ. Ellipses (…) are his.

i realized something shocking.

Dred Scott v. Sandford is actually not technically overturned.

The holding in that case is that negroes cannot be considered citizens of a State under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1.

To this day... that holding is still real. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment never changed that... it simply circumvented it.

So they say Dred Scott was "effectively" overturned by the 14th Amendment. Well i thought that too.

But no, that is incorrect. Dred Scott is still 100% active and completely live case law. Which is quite a wild discovery.

BJW is again cherry-picking things that support his conclusions. In this case, since the Civil Rights Act and the 14th Amendment didn’t specifically mention Dred Scott, the decision still stands. I guess you could say that, but it is now moot, not “live.”