Judgment Affirmed in Case of Ben W. Smith IV (AKA Ben William Bey) Moorish Sovereign Citizen

Spread the love

Ben W. Smith IV was convicted and sentenced by the Norwalk Municipal Court for seven motorist-related offenses, leading to fines totaling $880, court costs of $680, and 330 days in jail, with 270 days suspended and subject to a two-year probation period. The convictions arose from two separate incidents involving Smith driving with fictitious license plates, operating unsafe vehicles, and failing to comply with law enforcement.

In the first incident, on December 20, 2022, Smith was stopped by Willard police while driving a truck with a flat tire, an ice-obstructed windshield, and missing taillight. The truck displayed a license plate that was not registered in any official database. When approached by officers, Smith refused to identify himself, instead claiming he was a “Moorish National” and outside the jurisdiction of local law enforcement. The police eventually identified Smith through a debit card and employee badge bearing his name, as well as through the truck’s vehicle identification number (VIN). Smith was charged with driving under a suspended license, operating an unsafe vehicle, using a fictitious registration, and failing to disclose personal information.

The second incident occurred on January 15, 2023, when Smith, recognized from the first encounter, was stopped while driving another vehicle with fictitious plates. Smith again refused to comply with police orders, claiming the court had no jurisdiction over him and asserting his sovereign citizen beliefs. The police had to break his car window to arrest him. Smith faced additional charges for driving under suspension, using a fictitious registration, and failing to comply with police orders.

During the court proceedings, Ben W. Smith IV attempted to appear with an individual he referred to as his “counsel.” However, this person was not a licensed attorney but someone who shared Smith’s beliefs in the sovereign citizen ideology, specifically identifying as a “Moorish National.” At various points in the trial, this unlicensed “counsel” and Smith disrupted the proceedings by loudly reading from their Moorish National documents, which contained pseudo-legal jargon intended to argue against the court’s jurisdiction.

On January 18, when the trial began for the first set of charges, Smith’s “counsel” attempted to represent him, but the court did not recognize this individual as a legitimate attorney due to the lack of a legal license. Despite not being officially recognized, the “counsel” continued to participate in the trial, often interrupting with Moorish National rhetoric, asserting that both she and Smith were outside the jurisdiction of the court and not subject to its laws. She frequently proclaimed that the court had no authority over a “Moorish National” and tried to introduce documents and arguments based on this ideology, which the court dismissed as baseless and irrelevant to the legal proceedings.

During the second incident’s trial on February 7, Smith again appeared with the same “counsel.” Before the trial began, Smith and his “counsel” reiterated their claims about their status as Moorish Nationals. When called to testify, Smith’s “counsel” refused to take an oath, stating, “I don’t do that. I’m a Moorish National.” Despite this refusal, the court allowed her to provide unsworn testimony, during which she recounted being in communication with Smith during both police stops and attempted to argue that they were entitled to special rights and exemptions under their claimed Moorish National status.

Despite Smith’s objections, the court found sufficient evidence to convict him based on testimony from law enforcement and official records confirming his violations. Smith appealed the convictions, arguing improper admission of evidence and insufficient proof, but the appellate court upheld the trial court’s decisions, affirming that the evidence presented was both admissible and sufficient to support the verdicts.

Source: State of Ohio/City of Willard, Appellee v. Ben William Smith, IV, Appellant

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *