Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Procedure Self Representation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge Hayward admonishes defendant who claimed to represent a trust and rejected legal counsel
Summary
During the Feb. 11 arraignment, Judge Hayward sharply challenged a defendant’s claim that he would represent his ‘trust’ rather than accept a lawyer, calling online ‘trust’ and sovereign‑citizen theories ineffective and warning of consequences for self-representation.
During the Feb. 11 arraignment calendar in Courtroom 304, Judge Hayward admonished a defendant who announced he would represent himself and claimed to act “for my trust,” telling him the court would not accept internet-sourced legal theories as a substitute for counsel.
The exchange began when the defendant, Lamech (spelled in the transcript as Lamech/Lamech Thomas), stated he would represent himself and invoked trust-based language and claims of lacking jurisdiction. Judge Hayward told him she would permit self-representation but warned of the risks and limitations: "Professionals work for years to learn this, to be able to represent people. You wouldn't walk into a hospital and... do your own surgery because you did some research," the judge said. She explicitly rejected arguments based on maritime or Uniform Commercial Code theories, saying, "Maritime law is for the ocean," and calling reliance on online 'trust' schemes "esoteric foolishness."
The judge gave the defendant a formal Faretta-style admonition (on the record), explaining that by representing himself he would face the full consequences of unfamiliarity with court procedures and law. She warned that if the defendant’s self-representation led to an unfavorable result he could not later complain that he lacked counsel. The judge also declined to entertain the defendant’s sovereign-citizen-style arguments in court and said the court would follow statutes, precedent and constitutional law.
Prosecutors and defense counsel in the courtroom confirmed the charges and discussed discovery for the defendant’s separate obstruction case; the judge advised the defendant on practical next steps for obtaining discovery from the solicitor-general’s office if he chose to proceed without counsel.
The court then proceeded with other matters on the calendar; Judge Hayward later entered a not-guilty plea on the defendant’s behalf for the traffic matter after the defendant declined further engagement in the virtual plea process. The judge told the defendant she would place him on a trial calendar if he wanted to proceed to trial in person.
Ending: The admonition was an unmistakable rebuke to online self-help legal claims; Judge Hayward told the defendant, "I'm not playing your game," and urged him to follow established legal procedures or accept counsel.
