A B.C. family’s attempt to trade in their birth certificates for access to mythic, secret bank accounts containing untold riches has prompted a scathing decision from a judge, who called their claims “incoherent, unintelligible nonsense.”
Jason and Nadia Zimmer, residents of Abbotsford, B.C. — a city about 70 kilometres southeast of Vancouver — along with their daughter Taliyah, filed a petition in B.C. Supreme Court earlier this year, arguing that they were each “promised heir to the kingdom” at birth, but they have been unfairly denied their rightful property by government officials.
Their claim appears to draw on a decades-old pseudolegal scheme promoted by leaders in the Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument (OPCA) world, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Gary Weatherill said in a judgment posted online this week, describing it as completely devoid of any merit.
“It is nothing but incoherent, unintelligible nonsense devoid of any viable claim or cause of action known to the law. It is supported by equally incoherent and unintelligible affidavits. It is, by any measure, frivolous and vexatious to the extent that it can be struck without further analysis,” Weatherill wrote.
The Zimmers were self-represented in court. They have not responded to requests for comment.
During a hearing, Jason Zimmer spoke on behalf of the family and told the judge, “We are here to get our property vested,” according to the judgment.
The family claim they have never consented to being governed and were asking for access to securities allegedly earmarked for them since birth.
A ‘conspiratorial and demon-haunted shadow world’
To understand exactly what the Zimmers wanted, Weatherill turned to a famous decision from the Court of Queen’s Bench in Alberta that carefully catalogued a range of OPCA arguments that have been repeatedly tested and rejected in Canadian courts.
In the 736-paragraph Meads v. Meads decision, Justice John Rooke outlined what he described as a “money for nothing” scheme, specifically known as “Accept for Value” or A4V.
“The mythology behind the ‘A4V’ scheme is extremely peculiar, and requires travel into the conspiratorial and demon-haunted shadow world of the OPCA community,” Rooke wrote.
“As I understand it, A4V’s … promoters claim that each person is associated with a secret government bank account which contains millions of dollars.”
That bank account, according to Rooke, is usually linked to some sort of government ID, whether it’s a social insurance number or a birth certificate.
“A4V proponents claim that the government maintain these bank accounts to monetize the state after it abandoned the gold standard. Put another way, the theory, as I understand it, is that people are property of the state that it uses to secure its currency. This is often expressed as some form of ‘slavery,'” he wrote.
Rooke went on to say that, “It is very unfortunate that any person would be so gullible as to believe that free money can be obtained by these theatrics, but nevertheless some … appear unable to resist the temptation of wealth without obligation.”
The Zimmers’ March 2023 petition to the court echoes the reasoning of these A4V schemes.
“When we, the petitioners were born, a Christian title was created that evidence that we were a promised heir to the kingdom in the form ‘Statement of Birth,'” it reads.
It suggests that a “security instrument” was deposited with the Bank of Canada on their behalf when they were born, and their birth certificates could be used to redeem it when they reached the age of majority.
The Zimmers claim they have redeemed their “entitlement certificates” with federal Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, and notified her B.C. counterpart and the lieutenant-governor of their entitlements.
“There has been no response,” the petition says, going on to allege that these government officials are “causing irreparable harm” by refusing to acknowledge their responsibilities.
Listed among the legal authorities the Zimmers are relying on to advance these claims is the King James Bible of 1611.
It names various officials of the B.C. and Canadian governments as respondents. In dismissing the petition, Weatherill wrote that the Zimmers should pay those parties their full legal costs.
Phoney legal theories based on fanciful interpretations of the law popular with groups like the Freemen on the Land have seen a resurgence since the COVID-19 pandemic began. Followers of these ideas have unsuccessfully tried to use these theories to argue against everything from travel restrictions to vaccine mandates.
Just this month, fans of anti-vaccine activist Daniel Nagase filed into a Vancouver courtroom and attempted to declare themselves a “common-law grand jury under the Magna Carta” in Nagase’s $66.6-million lawsuit over the vaccination of his children. An application to dismiss that claim will be heard in August.