Shouldn’t that be “Fuck off, eh”?
A sovereign lawyer, ’ “i” a “human woman” ’ sues her neighbour using, not the legal system, but some magical natural law that other people just don’t understand. Then threatens to sue the CBC when they come to interview as she had agreed to.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-lawyer-pseudolegal-lawsuit-1.7025394
What’s really fucked up is that she’s an actual lawyer. She is employed in a legal firm. (For now at least, I wouldn’t be surprised if they dump her with this publicity; I sure wouldn’t want to use a legal firm with a total cuckoo on its roster.)
This isn’t a case of an ignorant person being tricked due to their lack of knowledge of how the legal system works. This is a person who has actual training who decided to abandon all of that and embrace bullshit. I’m extremely curious to learn how that came about.
After the Law Society of BC is done with her, I hope she is a former lawyer.
I just looked up her law firm. It consists of her, an associate and an assistant. If I were the associate or assistant, I’d be polishing my resume.
Substituting “In jail” for the time spent with the firm because it sounds better.
Ah, so it’s a “Better Call Saul” setup.
Cool Anne Elk explanation she offered:
…
The name of the name of the name is …
A big and stupid game.
My brain hurts!
I wonder if this will end up in the DSM VI in the future? Will it be its own diagnosis or an off shoot of some other disorder?
So, yesterday at my job I had to go into the office to process physical checks that customers have mailed in. Someone returned a payment coupon sans check, but they had written on the front of the coupon as if it was a check. Confusing – but they also affixed a stamp to it and the penny dropped for me – oh, this is that “I’m a Postmaster” bullshit. They also wrote on the check “Without recourse,” which is idiotese for “don’t blame me if this check bounces.”
I noted their account with, “If customer phones in wanting to know why they still have a balance, please let them know that’s not how checks work, and what they sent in has been shredded, not accepted.”
The most shocking part of your story was the didn’t write “Accepted for value”
I perused the whole document very carefully, looking for that. We’ve received note that before (with the same result - shredded!), but nothing like this little production number.
Why are you shredding that stuff? IIRC, when I worked as a clerk at a collection agency, the agency kept whatever correspondence, no matter how nonsensical, to be used as proof the debtor was not making good faith effort in repayment.
Just a few days ago, I watched on Youtube a Canadian sovcit getting himself arrested for pulling that “I don’t need identification” nonsense on a Canadian border agent. After the sovcit got arrested, the agent pointed out to another agent that, although said sovcit said he refused to “make any contract with the government”, it turns out his fake license plate had the sovcit’s Canadian passport number on it. And you have to love this: the passport was not only valid and current, but the dude was using it. Thus the “discussion” with the border agent.
I really wish those loony sovcits would come over here to the People’s Republic of China and try their theories on the Chinese police and courts.
At a guess, from when I worked insurance claims, all documents get scanned into the system and kept as a digital copy, while the physical copies were shredded (except for certain correspondence that had to be kept for a legally mandated number of years).
Some of the company records were taking up warehouses worth of space, and the old hands spoke of having to send requests to archives to pull up documents with intense reverse nostalgia - we were told we had no idea how easy we had it. 
As a programmer, I will say that this is a two edged sword. Yeah, we have the original, umm… somewhere. If it’s digital, it can also be lost to the sands of time and updates. Sad, but true.
Oh, no question. But trust me, the sheer volume of documents going both ways for even a simple claim is huge. There were some documents as I stated, that had to be kept as hard copies for a period of years, but things that were themselves copies of something else (police reports especially) are not in and of themselves super important to protect against every possible loss.
And I cannot stress enough how nice it was to have it all in one place as it were. But, you’re 100% right, with new media and storage, there’s always new risks.
Anyway, enough of the sidetrack, was just speculating as to why @Daithi_Lacha may have been shredding the documents after inspection.