This opinion by the judge, is one of the best I have seen.
The case involves Sandra Lee Anderson (, a.k.a. i: woman: Sandra of the Anderson family, a.k.a. Sandra of
the Anderson family, a.k.a. Sandra Ann Anderson, Executor of the SANDRA ANN ANDERSON ESTATE).
They note she has an extensive record of sovereign citizen tactics and schemes and have given her many, many chances to change her ways and she never would. She refuses to accept Canadian legal or court authority.
She is a student of “pseudolaw guru Christopher James Pritchard, who himself has copied his ideas from a US Sovereign Citizen named Carl Rudolph Lentz. ” Pritchard operates the “A Warrior Calls” website.
She even retained a person who claims to be a lawyer, a “private sovran attorney general”, who operates “Angelic Law … ”
She teaches people how to “get of jail free.” She has recently also been utilizing “materials and correspondence from “Angelic Law”… that threatens Crown Prosecutors, judges, court officials, and CBSA staff with raids, financial penalties, and seizure of homes.”
“…Ms. Anderson repeatedly and persistently employs Strawman Theory concepts drawn from the teachings of from multiple OPCA gurus, despite Ms. Anderson having been repeatedly cautioned and explained that these ideas have no merit and are not recognized by any court, in any jurisdiction, worldwide.”
The judge understands what she did and is not letting her get away with it. If only all judges took sovereigns this seriously.
“I note that Ms. Anderson is no longer simply an OPCA litigant, a consumer of products sold by pseudolaw gurus. Ms. Anderson has now graduated to join those ranks as a guru herself. In December, 2021, Ms. Anderson appeared in “Angelic Law” Youtube videos, where she and Lozinik jointly instructed customers on pseudolaw subjects, and conducted question and answer sessions on how to (purportedly) avoid paying income tax via legally false and absurd schemes. Ms. Anderson is no longer simply a consumer and practitioner of pseudolaw. She is a scammer of others as well, and has joined a malevolent and harmful pseudolaw leadership, who I, in Meads v Meads at para 669, denounced as “evil counsellors” and “falsifiers.”
It goes without saying that she lost this case.
You must read this in its entirety.