Sovereign Citizen Told the Judge His Court Wasn't Real He Gave Her 30 Days to Think About It

Added: 2026-05-10

[00:00:00]We have a body of people. We would be happy to do that. We need a district court judge for the people to reinstate common law. The bar association has bought out the entire state of Michigan for the CCP. I know what that means. I know what your role in that means. And I believe redemption is for everyone.

[00:00:20]>> Come with me. Okay.

[00:00:21]>> You know guys, you need to arrest the judge for impersonating a public official.

[00:00:29]to arrest a judge for impersonating a public official.

[00:00:33]>> Are you [clears throat] concerned at all about what you're being asked to do?

[00:00:38]>> On November 30th, 2023, in Oceanana County, Michigan, a 19-year-old named Seth Flores walked into the courthouse for a routine arraignment. He'd been stopped by a deputy named Dakowski the night before. The charges were minor.

[00:00:51]His public defender was already there.

[00:00:53]He never spoke to that public defender because a woman he had never met, Beth Michelle Bridgemont, a former social studies teacher, a self-described living soul and free citizen of the land, approached him in the lobby and started talking. What she told him, what she put in his hands, and what she walked him out of that courthouse believing. That is the question at the center of this case. Under Michigan law, MCL 600.916, giving legal advice in a pending matter to someone you're not licensed to represent is the unauthorized practice of law. It is a crime. It is also when it happens inside a courthouse over a case a judge has just called, a contempt of court. Beth Bridgemond would spend the next seven weeks arguing that none of those laws applied to her, that she was a living soul, that the court had no jurisdiction, that the judge's oath of office was fraudulent, the judge was patient for a very long time. This is the full record of what happened.

[00:01:45]>> All right. Good morning. We are on the record in the 89th District Court for the County of Shboen. We're conducting the physical hearing upstairs in the circuit courtroom. He's being clerked uh by the 89th district court staff down in that courtroom. And we're here in the case of Enray Beth Bridgemond on contempt matter. It was filed in an underlying criminal case >> uh 23-0868 SD.

[00:02:13]Uh we are providing public access both in the courtroom in the circuit courtroom uh and also online. Council, you want to state your appearances, please?

[00:02:21]>> Good morning, your honor. Paige Miller.

[00:02:24]>> Attorney Glena appearing as a Raymond attorney on behalf of Beth Virgin.

[00:02:30]>> So I will represent myself. We'll get to that. I would like to say I'm here on special appearance.

[00:02:37]>> No, I think I have some rights here. I don't know.

[00:02:40]>> What does special appearance mean to you?

[00:02:42]>> It means in a common law that I'm a living soul. I am not the straw man of the all caps.

[00:02:50]>> And we you'll have an opportunity at at a later time. Please please just take a seat.

[00:02:54]>> I have never seen those opportunities come back around. Thank you. Okay.

[00:02:58]>> We'll get to that in a moment. waving the time. I am not waving any of my rights, >> ma'am. Okay. Thank you, M. You're free to stand or sit, whichever you're more comfortable with. [clears throat] >> I don't know how I would pull a chair up, so thank you.

[00:03:10]>> Well, then [laughter] you want to set that. I have no problem.

[00:03:15]All right.

[00:03:17]>> Thank you.

[00:03:17]>> All right. Well, Miss Miss Bridgeman, you're here for an arraignment on two allegations of contempt. So, I have to advise you of uh what those are.

[00:03:28]The first was an an order to show cause that I signed on December 13, 2023, [clears throat] which alleges that you are in criminal contempt of court for the unauthorized practice of law and for preventing the defendant Seth Flores from meeting with the Michigan Henent Defense Commission attorney prior to his arraignment.

[00:03:52]We scheduled that for a um show cause hearing on December 20th.

[00:04:02]You you did apparently uh appear in the courthouse that day and turned in a copy of the show cause cut into strips with the red lettering on it says your offer to contract is not accepted. and then you did not appear at that show cause hearing. So therefore, I signed a warrant for your arrest for that not appearance. So that warrant alleges that you are in criminal content for failing to appear at that show cause >> failing to appear for order show cause on Wednesday, December 20th, 2023 at 11:00 a.m. We're preventing defendant Seth Miguel Thomas Flores from meeting with MIDC attorney prior to his arraignment. So, those are the two contempt citations pending against you.

[00:04:51]You have the right to have a hearing on both of those allegations where your contempt would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. You have the right to present evidence in your own defense and cross-examine and challenge any evidence presented against you.

[00:05:07]You have the right to an attorney.

[00:05:09][clears throat] Uh, if you qualified and requested, you have the right to an attorney appointed at public expense.

[00:05:16]The MIDC provides an attorney for your arraignment uh today just as a as a current scheme as required by a stat Michigan indigent defense commission.

[00:05:27]>> Uh you also of course have a right to represent yourself.

[00:05:31]>> Um do you know well first do you uh do you comprehend the uh penalties? Oh I'm sorry I didn't tell you. So, so both those contempt citations, if you are found to be in contempt or you admit to being in contempt, you could be punished by up to 93 days in the county jail and or a fine of $7,500 or both. That's the fine. That's the maximum penalty for both of the contempt citations.

[00:05:59]Miss Bridgemond, do you comprehend the rights that you have that I outlined for you and the maximum penalties I outlined for you?

[00:06:05]>> I think that I would like to wait. I have a call into the um state trooper that your office or the prosecutor's office called to investigate something with me and um I was on the phone with her and told her I had received the show cause and she said he can't serve a show cause. I shot over a copy of of it. He can't serve a show cause because you're not under bond.

[00:06:31]This is from the state attorney general's office. I was still on the phone with her. I had filed the paperwork at 9:00. She called me at approximately 10:00. I was still on the phone with her till after 11:00 and she told me that you could not issue a show cause because I was not under bond. Now, I understand you have just precluded all of my common law rights by forcing me in the back door into your jurisdiction on this side of the court.

[00:06:58]And I know that this is not what was on the original document in its entirety. So you have amped up the charges based on [snorts] the fact that I failed to appear. But I believed she was going to let you know she was collecting information from me for you.

[00:07:16]>> Ma'am, did you just understand what the what the judge asked you regarding those two charges?

[00:07:21]>> Did you just understand that I think there's a bigger overriding issue? But but thank you.

[00:07:27]>> Thank you.

[00:07:27]>> I'm not going to have this.

[00:07:29]>> I'm I'm going to fire him actually. So, thank you very much because I will represent myself.

[00:07:35]>> Okay.

[00:07:36]>> So, you're telling me things in defense of the content citations and you'll definitely have an opportunity to present anything.

[00:07:42]>> No, because you already >> Hang on. Mr. Venus, please stop. I don't want to have this be an argument between you and Mr. >> I I just I guess I just like to, you know, state that >> Well, I think back it up. pleading not guilty to both of those and that she would like to request a hearing that she like to represent herself at that future hearing.

[00:07:59]>> No, that all of my rights were strongly impinged upon for even when I never failed to appear.

[00:08:07]>> Okay, [snorts] we're going to have a hearing where you >> She was working. Okay.

[00:08:10]>> Okay. Okay. You're going to get your way before you stop arguing with Miss Bridger.

[00:08:17]>> Okay. [clears throat] I mean, it's a pretty serious thing to have to spend the night in jail. Um, to be brought in in handcuffs and everything else when I was not being belligerent in that regard. She told me that it was not an authorized show cause.

[00:08:34]>> All right. If she told you that, she didn't have the authority to do so. But anyway, that that's for a little later hearing. So, >> she was investigating, but today's purpose is to advise you of the two contempt citations. So, do you comprehend the maximum penalty that those could carry and the rights that you have that I outlined for you?

[00:08:52]>> Now, can I ask what statutes or what law or what are you saying here are are the charges because this does not match.

[00:09:02]Sorry, I have cotton mouth so bad. This does not match what the previous document was that you sent to me. And I have a picture of it on my phone, but my phone's not with me. Okay.

[00:09:13]>> It does not say >> I've told you the charge. I don't have to answer further questions about that for you. Do you understand the rights that I listed for you in the penalties?

[00:09:22]>> Why have they changed answering that question?

[00:09:25]>> Can the prosecutor >> No.

[00:09:27]>> What?

[00:09:27]>> I need an answer to my question. Do you understand that? So, you said you want to represent yourself, right?

[00:09:33][clears throat] You you wish to represent yourself and not have an attorney representing you?

[00:09:38]>> Yes. I do. If you want to do that, I must establish that you know what the penalties are and what your rights are.

[00:09:48]And I have to establish that you're not going to be disruptive to the court. If you refuse, >> so are those >> If you refuse, then I'm going to appoint.

[00:09:58]>> Okay. Then I would appoint an attorney for you and you'd not be able to represent yourself.

[00:10:01]>> I know. I listened to that with Trevor's case. All right. So So I'm asking you and you saw what?

[00:10:08]So, I first have to make sure you know what the maximum penalties are and what your rights are. Do you not?

[00:10:17]>> Those maximum penalties are based on the charges and I'm wondering how you arrived at a change in the charges.

[00:10:24][clears throat] >> I'm not answering that question.

[00:10:29]>> You you know that you could face up to 93 days in jail and a $7,500 fine. You understand it?

[00:10:35]>> Up to that. Okay. But I don't even understand what the charges are.

[00:10:39]>> Okay. And do you have any questions for me about any of the rights that I listed that you have to have an attorney and have a hearing and present evidence? Any question about those rights?

[00:10:50]>> I have a whole question about the whole um context of everything today. Judge Goth here, >> it's really quite simple. But when you have an order to show up for court and you turn in a cut up piece of paper of it to say you're refusing to attend that this [clears throat] is what happens next. That's pretty simple.

[00:11:12]>> Oh, did that offend you?

[00:11:14]>> No, it did not offend me. It was just it was a contempt of court.

[00:11:18]>> It's not about anybody's personal feelings. It's about the authority of the court to compel appearances and you did not appear. So I do believe based upon your answers that you uh do understand the maximum penalties that you face and the rights that you have.

[00:11:33]So Miss Bridman uh Mr. Vill indicated that you wish to plead not guilty to those uh charges of contempt. I gather from your comments that you agree that you're not pleading. That's correct.

[00:11:45]Okay.

[00:11:45]>> All right. So we'll enter a not guilty plea on your behalf to both contempt citations.

[00:11:49]>> Let's slow down and address something Bridgemont keeps raising because it matters. She claims the court has no jurisdiction over her, that she is a living soul, not the straw man of her name in all caps, that her oath of office supersedes state statutes. These are the central arguments of what legal scholars call the sovereign citizen movement, a set of theories that have been rejected in every jurisdiction in the United States in hundreds of cases without exception. The argument goes like this. The government's authority derives from a secret contract written in your all capitalized legal name. If you reject the contract, cut up the show cause order. Write your offer to contract is not accepted. In red ink, the court loses power over you. Here is what Michigan law actually says. Article 6 of Michigan's Constitution vests judicial power in the Supreme Court and courts of record established by law.

[00:12:39]That power is not contingent on your consent to it. It is not dissolved by writing on a piece of paper. Michigan Compiled Laws section 600.1701 subsection H gives any court of record the power to hold in contempt anyone who interferes with the process or proceedings of any action pending before it. In plain English, if a judge tells you to show up, you show up. Bridgemont has the absolute first amendment right to believe everything she believes. She has the right to say it in public, to share it online, to teach it to whoever will listen. She does not have the right to apply it to Seth Flores's pending case in that courthouse on that day.

[00:13:14]That is the line. And this is the question the court is now being asked to decide. Did she cross it?

[00:13:19]>> Miss Bridgemond was uh the court issued a order to show cause why she should not be held in contempt for the unauthorized practice of law and also preventing defendant Flores from meeting with his attorney before his arraignment. I do see in the file a proof of service that she has been served with that. And in fact also in the file where Miss Bridgemond has returned the show cause cut into pieces with red writing on it stating your offer to contract is not accepted. It's not an offer. It's an order of court to show cause. She has now willfully not appeared.

[00:14:03]We'll call the matter in the matter of contempt of Beth Michelle Bridgeman. So, Miss Bridgeman, if you want to come forward to the table.

[00:14:11]>> I am unable to do that. I [clears throat] don't have a license to practice law in the bar arena and in the water. I am a woman on the land, under the law of the land, and under the one true God. I'm a living soul and okay offered a contract with Beth Michelle Bridgeman in all caps. That's I'm not that person. Anybody else in this room that person?

[00:14:34]>> Hey, hang on.

[00:14:37]>> So, Miss Miss Bridgeman um you're correct that the bar in the courtroom u people have to be licensed attorneys to cross the bar to represent other people. Uh of course people can and do as you have represented yourself on this side of the bar. [clears throat] So, you're welcome to sit at the table there, which would perhaps be more comfortable for you. If you would prefer to proceed from where you're standing or sitting, that's fine with me as well. Do you have a preference then?

[00:15:08]>> I'd like to stay right here.

[00:15:10]>> Okay. My honor, um I think the first matter I need to address is that um I have a copy of your swearing oath here and >> that's not relevant for today. Okay. So, Miss Bridgeman, you filed a motion for me to recuse myself. I'm going to deny that motion. It didn't present any basis for recusal. So, that motion is denied.

[00:15:33]And we're here for a contempt hearing you, which you've been arraigned on for your contempt for interfering with court process and the unauthorized practice of law and then failing to attend.

[00:15:43]>> This is true.

[00:15:44]>> So, Miss Miller, any opening statements?

[00:15:46]>> Yes, your honor. Um I will shout with you the evidence that Miss Bridgemond engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. Um that is contrary to MCL 600.916.

[00:16:01]Um she further prevented the defendant in the underlying case from meeting with his um MD MIDC attorney prior to his arraignment on November 30th, 2023. and she also failed to appear for her show cause on uh December 20th, 2023 at 11 a.m.

[00:16:20]>> All right. Do you wish any witnesses sequestered?

[00:16:23]>> Um I don't believe so.

[00:16:26]>> Okay. Mr. Bridgeman, uh now's the time [clears throat] you can make your opening statement to me. But first, um, do you wish to have any witnesses that'll be presented sequestered, meaning that they have to leave the courtroom and be instructed in >> contracted with this this [clears throat] uh hearing, this administrative hearing cannot be I cannot be adulterous to my own oath of office.

[00:16:48]>> I'm going to assume that you're put under a sequestration or no sequestration order. So, go ahead with your opening statement. law is um [clears throat] must be a contract.

[00:17:02]In the absence of in a valid contract, there is no law. Period. Which might be part of the problem that we have here.

[00:17:09]Now, >> I I I don't mean to interrupt you and and I'm not going to interrupt you often during your opening statement. I do want you to know that because of the way the video feed works, um from where you're standing, um it's not picking you up.

[00:17:24]And uh I assume that the audio is going to work through for the 89 for the district courtroom that's clipping it.

[00:17:30]Um but it's >> I'm content with all the state the people >> that are here reside on the land that most of us call Michigan.

[00:17:41]>> If that's who is bringing charges against me and there is no person injured, there's no property damage, there should be no case.

[00:17:51]So my statement is that how can I put myself in your jurisdiction except that you could do it by force and arrest me with four deputies with no due process and violate my unalenable rights to try to force me into your jurisdiction because your oath of office is a violation of section 5 United States Code 3001.

[00:18:16]You do not have an oathgiver. You have yourself that signed it and you have a notary. I just um did an oath with the people here today and they signed it. I signed it and we got a couple of them notorized. That's how it should be. This is not a valid oath. I cannot stand in this court and be brought up because in fact you are operating or masquerading as a lawful court but you're in fraud of the very oath that would give your court legitimacy.

[00:18:58]I have a remedy your honor. I have an oath here and if you would like to take it in the presence of the people and sign and notorized, we can move forward.

[00:19:10]Otherwise, I would be violating my very own oath of office and an oath I just took downstairs as well um to the United States of America's Constitution.

[00:19:24]>> All right. Does that conclude your opening remarks?

[00:19:29]Well, it concludes the fact that I see that you're not interested or care what the people and the truth of the lawful process of the people.

[00:19:39]I don't know if anybody else cares to say that. I there's no energy and there's no property damage. I do believe I withheld Mr. Gilbert from some money he was probably banking on that day. And I believe the court operates in commerce and is here to make a profit on all of their activities. So that is my violation. The state of Michigan would love hated that I blocked an attorney before Seth was arraigned.

[00:20:08]You cannot be bringing me in in the in the hallway downstairs and charging me and then tell me that you're the true judge of the 53rd Circuit Court when your oath is not properly even administered. I happen to know I believe. Did you take a bar association oath?

[00:20:29]>> I'm not answering questions. Are you done with your opening statement?

[00:20:33]I guess I don't really need to be here because this is not a legitimate court that I should be standing in and I will not violate my own oath by submitting myself to an authority that has not done the proper oath himself.

[00:20:48]>> Miss Miller, your first witness.

[00:20:51]>> Thank you, honorable call.

[00:20:52]>> Mr. You may not leave the courtroom. I know you have people that need to know that they are violating people's unalienable rights by picking them off off the street without a single piece of paperwork.

[00:21:04]>> Okay, Miss Miller, who's your first witness?

[00:21:06]>> Does anybody else have a problem with this?

[00:21:11]>> All right, hang on. There's going to be no outbursts in the courtroom or you'll have to be removed.

[00:21:17]>> All right, Mr. Bird, please raise your right hand. [cough] You cannot [clears throat] leave the courtroom.

[00:21:21]>> You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Okay.

[00:21:24]Yes, but >> I'd be happy to administer a legitimate >> Hang on. So, the court process works. I gave you both a chance for your opening statements.

[00:21:35]>> This is not a court I can submit to.

[00:21:38]>> Hold on. The process is going to be >> I know you like to look really regal up there and maintain a degree of authority and you have guys carrying guns.

[00:21:47]>> Miss Bridgeman, >> I'm fully aware of that. Where are their body cams and their vehicle cams?

[00:21:51]>> I can put you in a jail cell. You can watch it from there if you >> I know that's what you're hoping to do.

[00:21:56]>> So, Miss Miller is going to be given an opportunity to question the witness and then you'll be given an opportunity to question the witnesses. That's how court procedure operates. If you interfere with that procedure, you're going to be in direct contempt to court. Miss Miller, proceed with your question.

[00:22:11]>> I would have to be.

[00:22:14]>> Can you state your name for the record?

[00:22:15]>> I'm David B.

[00:22:18]>> And can you spell your last name?

[00:22:19]>> B E R G.

[00:22:20]>> And how [clears throat] are you employed? I'm the IT director for Splunk County.

[00:22:26][clears throat] >> And in that capacity, um, are you able to see and access the surveillance footage in the building?

[00:22:33]>> Yes, I am.

[00:22:33]>> And are you able to, um, pull portions of that video off the server?

[00:22:38]>> I am. [clears throat] >> And um, were you working that capacity on November 30th, 2023?

[00:22:44]>> Yes.

[00:22:45]>> And are you um, aware of uh, security footage that was pulled from the system for that date? Yes, I have.

[00:22:51]>> Do you know what um the time frame of that security that was pulled was?

[00:22:55]>> Uh 8 to 10.

[00:22:57]>> And do you know what part of the building was um pulled from the system for that time frame?

[00:23:02]>> There were about five game reviews. Um mainly downstairs in front of district court in the in [clears throat] the uh entryway.

[00:23:09]>> Okay. And did you review this um thumb drive prior to sitting here specified today?

[00:23:15]>> Yes, I did. And does everything on this thumb drive was that pulled from the system from November 30th May?

[00:23:22]>> Objection. This is all hearsay. Anything that is on that video is all hearsay.

[00:23:27]>> Uh, it hasn't been offered into evidence yet. So, hold on a sec.

[00:23:32]>> So, you're able to view everything on the thumb drive?

[00:23:34]>> Yes.

[00:23:35]>> And um was that all footage from those cameras from November 30th?

[00:23:40]>> Yes, it was.

[00:23:41]>> It hasn't been offered into evidence yet. And no, I know your presumptions are that if it's said in court and it's not objected, it becomes presumptive evidence.

[00:23:51][clears throat] >> All he said is that he reviewed it.

[00:23:53]Continue.

[00:23:54]>> And did it appear to be edited in any way?

[00:23:57]>> I'm sorry. What's that?

[00:23:58]>> Did it appear to be edited in any way?

[00:24:00]>> No. So software that we have is not allowed to edit.

[00:24:02]>> So it's the full um capture of that time frame.

[00:24:05]>> Yes.

[00:24:06]>> Okay. I'd move to admit people's exhibit one.

[00:24:08]>> Okay. Exhibit one has been offered for admission. Miss Britman, do you have an objection?

[00:24:12]I have an objection that anything in the hallway is going to be considered contempt of court.

[00:24:19]>> Okay. [snorts] It is I'm going to presume that that's an objection as to relevance. It is relevant. Uh objection over to the one submitted.

[00:24:27]>> Thank you.

[00:24:28]>> So my honor, can we move to settle this because I know your main objective is to get me into jail unconstitutionally. Again, >> Mr. Richmond, I assure you that it's not my objective today. If it is your objective, there's easy ways that you can make that happen by continuing to behave the way that you are. But I assure you that is not my intention today. All right. So, one's in.

[00:24:50]>> Thank you, your honor. Um, the time frame on the video is two hours. Um, I don't think the court wants to I don't want to show the full two-hour video.

[00:24:59]Um, if I would be allowed to present um various snippets of relevant time for the video.

[00:25:05]>> Okay. Go ahead. All right. So, Miss Bridgeman, Miss Miller's going to play portions of the security footage for the court. I'm not sure if you're able to see it from where you are standing.

[00:25:15]Again, I invite you, you're welcome to sit at the table where you can see the footage.

[00:25:19]>> I was there, your honor, and before the living God. I know what's on that video, and I have not violated or broken any laws. I have stood in the way of your commerce court. So, I understand that that's a contempt of court charge because you're a for-profit court.

[00:25:34][snorts] >> Go ahead. And for the record, my office did contact Miss Bertman to offer to give her a copy of the flash flash drive or have put on a flash drive for her and she indicated that she did not want a copy.

[00:25:44]>> Oh, go ahead.

[00:25:54]>> I'm not seeing anything.

[00:25:55]>> Yeah, the focus is right here.

[00:25:57]>> I can't see anything.

[00:25:59]>> Okay. Well, I can move TV closer to the >> Well, I don't know if that'll I mean, I see there's people down in the hall. I don't see how it would help me render a decision.

[00:26:13]>> Well, then I I can just reserve to show the clips in case we need to later on.

[00:26:18][clears throat] Then I have no further questions for um Mr. Burke.

[00:26:21]>> All right, Miss Bridgemond, do you have any questions for the witness? Steve B.

[00:26:28]>> When's the last time you were at Salvation Army with your daughter?

[00:26:31][laughter] >> Couple weeks.

[00:26:33]>> Sorry, I missed it.

[00:26:35]>> That's all I got.

[00:26:36]>> Thank you.

[00:26:38]Your next witness.

[00:26:39]>> Thank you, honor. board call um [clears throat] >> now your honor before you call the next witness I would love to be in honor [snorts] in your courtroom and I would ask that we would settle to save [clears throat] this young man we're in the middle of it here Mr. Would you please raise your right hand? You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth shall be God.

[00:27:08]>> Yes, sir.

[00:27:08]>> Okay.

[00:27:11]>> Can you state your name for the record?

[00:27:13]>> Uh, Seth Flores.

[00:27:15]>> And can you spell your last name?

[00:27:16]>> M L O R E S.

[00:27:19]>> Okay. Thank you. And were you uh present in this building on November 30th, 2023?

[00:27:24]>> Yes, I believe so.

[00:27:25]>> Why did you come to the building on that day?

[00:27:27]>> Uh, I had a court date for an arraignment.

[00:27:30]>> Okay. Do you remember what time you showed up at the court? I >> think around 10:00 maybe.

[00:27:36]>> And when you um came into the building, what happened?

[00:27:40]>> Um walked in, Beth approached me.

[00:27:47]Seemed like she she wanted to help me.

[00:27:50]Uh um she told me I didn't need a lawyer and uh the judge suggested that I should talk to one.

[00:28:00]>> Okay. Can I stop you for a minute? Um you said Beth approached you. Do you see Beth in the courtroom today?

[00:28:05]>> Yeah.

[00:28:06]>> What you wearing?

[00:28:10]>> I asked the court to uh for the record to reflect that Mr. Mr. Flores identified as Bridgemond [clears throat] >> and the uh the district court is clerking it and they're telling me they're having a hard time hearing the witness. Mr. Flores, can you speak up and use your outside voice?

[00:28:26][clears throat] >> Yeah.

[00:28:27]>> Should I repeat the question?

[00:28:29]>> No. No. Go ahead.

[00:28:30]>> Okay. And so before you walked into the building on the 30th, did you know um Beth?

[00:28:38]>> No.

[00:28:38]>> You just met her on that day?

[00:28:40]>> Yeah. And um when you went into the courtroom, did anyone go with you?

[00:28:45]>> No.

[00:28:46]>> You don't remember anyone being in the courtroom with you?

[00:28:48]>> Uh they didn't walk in with me or >> I guess I can clarify. Once you were in the building and then you went into the room where the judge is >> okay. Leading the witness. Come on.

[00:29:00]>> But that that's just laying over.

[00:29:03]>> Yeah.

[00:29:10]I thought you would have prepped him better than this page.

[00:29:13]>> Miss Bridgemond, that is not a proper objection. That's that's an interjection that's disorderly. Don't do that.

[00:29:19]>> I I I know you're you're you're an adult human being, so you're capable of controlling yourself. So, please do so.

[00:29:24]This is a a format that has to be dignified and follow proper procedures and be orderly. You just you just made my case, judge, because your oath is not properly in order.

[00:29:37]>> Mr. Flores, when you So, just to repeat, when you went into the room with the judge, I didn't go with you.

[00:29:43]>> Uh, just >> Okay. And, um, at some point when you were in the room, do you remember if that said anything to the judge?

[00:29:50]>> Uh, that I may need a lawyer.

[00:29:55]>> I didn't say that in the court.

[00:29:57]>> Hang on. You can'titness.

[00:29:59]You're putting words in his mouth.

[00:30:01][clears throat] >> You'll have an opportunity to ask questions, but you can't interject verbally.

[00:30:05]>> Well, I have to object.

[00:30:07]>> Okay.

[00:30:08]>> And then um at some point, did the judge tell you to do anything?

[00:30:13]>> Uh speak to a lawyer.

[00:30:15]>> Okay. Did you ever speak to a lawyer on that day?

[00:30:18]>> What's your objection?

[00:30:20]>> She's just leading. She's taking them through every step, which I can refute.

[00:30:24]And um she's telling them, "You should have done this prior, Paige. She should have had him in here earlier and prepped him.

[00:30:30]>> She asked him a question. Did this happen? And he said yes. That's perfect.

[00:30:34]>> That's leading. No, she should ask him what happened. [clears throat] >> Do you recall what happened when you tried to uh or when an attorney approached you in the hallway?

[00:30:45]>> Tried speaking to him and went to speak to him.

[00:30:50]>> Do you remember who that lawyer was?

[00:30:52]>> Uh Gilbert. And were you ever able to talk to Gilbert about your arraignment?

[00:30:57]>> Only after.

[00:31:00]>> After by only after >> like uh I don't think I did. Maybe like a couple days or a week after.

[00:31:06]>> Okay. But not on the 30th. Did you ever talk to Mr. Gilbert?

[00:31:09]>> Not on that day? No.

[00:31:10]>> And did um you ever give any paperwork back to the court that morning?

[00:31:16][clears throat] >> Yes, I did.

[00:31:18]>> Did you write anything on that paper?

[00:31:21]Can we ask him what he did?

[00:31:24]>> Objection.

[00:31:24]>> She She is overruled.

[00:31:26]>> No, she's not.

[00:31:27]>> Um [clears throat] >> not completely sure what I wrote on the ticket. Um something about it's my personal vehicle or it wasn't my personal vehicle and I wasn't driving.

[00:31:40]>> Why did you write that on your ticket?

[00:31:43]>> Um that suggested me to.

[00:31:47]>> And does that mean anything to you? What you wrote on the paper? Uh, not necessarily.

[00:31:52]>> So, you say that Beth suggested that you write that on your ticket?

[00:31:57]>> Yes.

[00:31:58]>> What did you do with the ticket after you wrote on it?

[00:32:00]>> Uh, think I turned into the civil court, >> but we don't have uh a transcriber. You have to keep all the notes yourself or is that >> So, Richmond, that's not proper objection. Stop misbehaving. You know how to behave. Behave.

[00:32:16]>> I'm not sure. I'm the only one in bad behavior, your honor. according to article two or article 3 section two court.

[00:32:25]>> Go ahead.

[00:32:26]>> You might be in bad behavior. [snorts] >> Your honor, may I approach the witness?

[00:32:33]>> Why don't you hand it to Bailey?

[00:32:36]>> Is that a copy of your ticket?

[00:32:40]>> And is that your handwriting on it?

[00:32:43]>> That is that what you turned into the court?

[00:32:46]>> I believe so. Your honor, I I guess I would ask the court to take judicial notice of the ticket. I believe it's in the court's file already on what Mr. Flores turned into the district window on November 30th.

[00:33:00]>> It is or not, but I'll I'll also take judicial notice of the court's own records. Do you have it marked as an exhibit?

[00:33:06]>> I do. What number is it?

[00:33:08]>> It's exhibit two.

[00:33:10]>> Two will be admitted. Thank you.

[00:33:17]And then after you gave your ticket to the window, what did you do next?

[00:33:21]>> Um I was advised to leave.

[00:33:23]>> Who advised you to leave?

[00:33:28]>> So um at that point, did you leave?

[00:33:31]>> Yeah.

[00:33:33]>> At any point in that morning, did you um address the court on your ticket?

[00:33:39]>> No, I did not.

[00:33:41]And after you initially were told to meet with with an attorney, did you ever go back into the courtroom?

[00:33:47]>> Uh, I think about a week later.

[00:33:50]>> Okay. But that day, did you ever go back?

[00:33:51]>> No.

[00:33:52]>> Following leaving the court room, what did you do after that?

[00:33:54]>> Just went out and cut some some lunch.

[00:33:58]>> Who did you do that with?

[00:34:01]>> You remember where that was?

[00:34:02]>> I'm not really sure. Maybe.

[00:34:05]>> Sorry, Mr. Flores. You're really going to have to use your outside voice.

[00:34:10]>> [snorts] [clears throat] >> And while you were at lunch, did uh Miss Bridger ever give you any money?

[00:34:15]>> No. Oh, for uh my phone? Yes.

[00:34:21]>> So, did she give you any money?

[00:34:23]>> Yeah.

[00:34:24]>> How much money did she give you?

[00:34:26]>> $60.

[00:34:28]>> And what was that? $60 in cash?

[00:34:31]>> Yes.

[00:34:33]And that occurred after the same day as the court uh arraignment in the morning >> I believe. So any more questions.

[00:34:43]>> All right. Mr. Richmond, do you have any questions for Mr. Floyd?

[00:34:46]>> Sure.

[00:34:47]>> Go ahead.

[00:34:48]>> Good to see you, sir. I'm sorry it's under these circumstances.

[00:34:53]Um, the way I recall it, uh, you were talking to some of my friends before we talked or we were talking and then we went out into the hallway. But, >> um, I guess I objected. That's not a question.

[00:35:05]>> Sure. You You'll have a chance to offer testimony on the oath if you want, but you just made a statement about your recollection.

[00:35:11]>> You can ask questions of this witness.

[00:35:13]>> Okay. Seth, let's see. Did I injure you in any way that day?

[00:35:17]>> No.

[00:35:19]Did I cause you to lose money in any way that day?

[00:35:25]>> No.

[00:35:27]>> Did you tell me about what Deputy Dowski had been saying to you on your two other MIPs?

[00:35:35]>> Yeah. Yes.

[00:35:37]Did I suggest or had, you know, offer some um information to you that you had willingly as a passenger in a vehicle surrendered all of your God-given rights and you did not need to do that?

[00:35:52]>> Yeah.

[00:35:53]>> And that you have the right to stand up under common law and not be placed through tyrannical police measures.

[00:36:06]Yes.

[00:36:07]>> Did you tell me what officer Dowski said when he pulled you over? What was the reason he pulled you over that night?

[00:36:15]>> He did not state the reason.

[00:36:16]>> Was it something about on Butler Road in the what I could recall?

[00:36:21]>> Uh believe he told us or my the driver, my friend, that he crossed the center line.

[00:36:30]>> I believe you had told me the white line. Yeah, >> a white line which is not the center line and there are no white lines out there on Butler when you turn off. How far did offer did deputy dowski follow you that night?

[00:36:42]>> I guess I'd object to the relevance of the question.

[00:36:45]>> Uh, I'll overrule it. Go ahead and answer your question.

[00:36:48]>> Uh, from Subway to uh Butler Road, they said that we crossed the line by uh subway, but I don't recall.

[00:37:00]>> Okay. I recall you and listen, I know this was a high stress environment for you. Okay. And um I have many friends in town who have gone through this >> same thing.

[00:37:13]>> I guess question.

[00:37:15]>> Well, I think she's laying the groundwork for a question because >> you have to end up at a question. If you've gone through three years of COVID in the schools and complied with everything, you're >> $60. That's how much Beth Bridgeman paid Seth Flores in cash at lunch on the same day she walked him out of the courthouse before his arraignment under MCL 616.

[00:37:34]Michigan's unauthorized practice of law statute. Payment is not a required element. You don't need to charge someone to cross the line. But payment matters here for one reason. It eliminates the most sympathetic version of this story. It is no longer a well-meaning stranger offering an opinion in a hallway. It is a transaction. Flores testified that he was 19, nervous around police, and didn't know who to trust. He said Bridgemont told him he didn't need a lawyer. She told him what to write on his court ticket. She physically interposed herself between him and James Gilbert three times. Every time Gilbert tried to approach, and then she drove him away. The MIDC, the Michigan Indigent Defense Commission, was created specifically to guarantee that people like Seth Flores, people who can't afford a lawyer, have one available at their arraignment. Under Michigan Court Rule 4.201, subsection G, subsection 2, that is not a courtesy. It is a right. Bridgemont didn't just interfere with Gilbert's access to his client. She interfered with Flores's access to the attorney the law was required to provide him. The question isn't whether she meant well.

[00:38:38]The question is what the record shows she actually did and the record has more to say.

[00:38:42]>> Very compliant. He did comply with me. I offered him liberty. You offered him maybe Dowski talked about taking his vehicle.

[00:38:53]>> Is that right? Aren't those the terms you had told me?

[00:38:55]>> Yes.

[00:38:56]>> Yeah.

[00:38:58]As a passenger, did you really have to surrender to all those things that you cooperated with them on?

[00:39:04]>> No.

[00:39:04]>> No.

[00:39:06]>> No. And so was I offering I know that this county doesn't like common law, but it's [clears throat] actually still on the books and it's a natural recourse.

[00:39:22]And there are plenty of laws that say if nobody's hurt and nobody was injured, there is no crime. So, I was suggesting that you stand up for your rights for once because I don't even know where you guys got the alcohol. Can you tell me where you got the alcohol?

[00:39:41]>> Ask questions.

[00:39:42]>> Can you tell me where you got the alcohol?

[00:39:43]>> Um, >> well, well, hold on. Hold on. I'm I'm not going to have [snorts] you ask Mr. with any more about the underlying substance of his case because he would have certain privilege rights against selfinccrimination.

[00:39:58]>> Okay.

[00:39:59]>> So, I'm not going to I'm not going to do that.

[00:40:01]>> You had just gotten off work, is that right?

[00:40:04]>> No.

[00:40:05]>> How long had you been off work?

[00:40:07]>> Um, probably a couple hours. I got off around 8.

[00:40:14]>> And it was what time you picked up >> again? I guess, you know, I will go back and sustain the earlier objection. What happened during the traffic stop with Mr. Flores is not relevant to the question of whether you unlawfully gave him legal advice at the courthouse or interfered with his arraignment uh or failed to appear for the show cause.

[00:40:36]>> So stay with me, your honor, because I believe there were some deals cut [clears throat] in order to target me.

[00:40:44]>> Well, ask him that. Ask knows of any deals. There are any deals made to keep somebody that you love from harm if you testified against me?

[00:40:54]>> No, I uh we [clears throat] had the court date and um the charges were dropped to civil two civil infractions.

[00:41:08]And then after um the court case, I was sent a letter in the mail to um be here today to contestify.

[00:41:24]>> So, were you charged with anything after they sent you the letter? Because I remember you called me that night.

[00:41:30]>> Um >> or you messaged me that night and said they sent you a letter in the mail. that was >> pull you back into their jurisdiction like they did me only they arrested me s so yes >> that was previous letters from the [clears throat] court um >> that had shown up but it worried you it worried you know it worried you what did I suggest that you do because I don't know how parents lead kids and the first thing kids should do is text their mom and dad get over here I got the cops pulling me over again in the middle of the night now you had told me that you were pulled over at 3:00 again. Is that right?

[00:42:05]>> I believe so. Yes.

[00:42:06]>> Again, I would object about the underlying case.

[00:42:08]>> Right. Again, the the facts and circumstances of his uh the stop are not relevant as >> I I don't believe that we're protecting somebody here, your honor. I think it is pertinent >> and I'm not afraid I'm not afraid to go down as the bad person even though I didn't harm Seth and I didn't cause him any property damage. Is that right, Seth? Do you have >> Well, that he he he did say that. I do I do want to ask you, Mr. Flores, you said that it was just dropped to two civil infractions. Was that uh conditioned in any way on your offering testimony in this matter?

[00:42:46]>> No.

[00:42:48]>> Go ahead and continue.

[00:42:50]>> Well, I know it's can be subtle, right, Seth? Would you say that when you're in authorities's presence, you are probably going through some form of high anxiety?

[00:43:03]>> Yes. I'm I'm nervous when I get pulled over.

[00:43:06]>> Yes.

[00:43:06]>> And do you know that people can completely forget? I've worked with atrisisk kids taking tests and everything else and they can completely forget what has occurred and they're open to suggest suggestions and I know how to calm kids down and I was was I not willing to stand with you if you were going to be pulled over did I not tell you if came at you for the fourth time >> to get a hold of me? Yeah, I felt more confident after that, but I I'm still nervous when cops pull me over, even when I'm not in the wrong.

[00:43:48]>> Is it possible because of your high anxiety around and this you're not alone in this, dude. I can show you a dozen people in this room at least who have high anxiety around this place and anything having to do with it and these gentlemen.

[00:44:04]Is it possible that some of your memory today is not exactly right?

[00:44:12]>> Maybe not 100%.

[00:44:14]>> Did I do you think I felt I needed to protect you and Gilbert because I knew what Gilbert was trying to do? He was trying to put you back in their jurisdiction there trying to make money off of you and I was present preventing that, right?

[00:44:26]>> Um I felt guided almost.

[00:44:29]>> You felt what?

[00:44:29]>> I felt guided almost because I nobody was really telling me what to do.

[00:44:34]So, there were a few details that I would I would say um I recollect differently, but I would no more put any of my friends in the jurisdiction of his authority and this court's authority and subpoenas and bonds and everything else to testify against you >> because I'm I don't care, your honor.

[00:44:53]I'm here to protect Seth and anybody else.

[00:44:56]>> Redirect.

[00:44:56]>> Um yes.

[00:44:58]>> Mr. Flores, do you recall when you came back to the court after that arraignment day?

[00:45:04]>> Uh, maybe a week after.

[00:45:06]>> Okay. At that point, do you recall if you um resolved your underlying case with civil infractions?

[00:45:12]>> Yes, we did that day.

[00:45:13]>> This was a use of battery this use of codes.

[00:45:16]>> Mr. You'll have to leave the court.

[00:45:18]>> I'm out of here. Thank you for your time.

[00:45:19]>> All right. Thank you, sir.

[00:45:21]>> Thank you, Dick.

[00:45:22]>> Ridiculous.

[00:45:23]>> So, you resolved your case of civil infractions, you said a week after.

[00:45:26]>> Yes. And then at some point did you um come for a did the court issue a show of cause against you?

[00:45:33]>> Um I can't recall.

[00:45:34]>> Okay. Do you remember if there was another hearing that was held after you >> Are we not just did I just substantiate?

[00:45:42]>> Hang on. The question people forget.

[00:45:45]>> Hang on. The objection was leading. That is a leading question sustained.

[00:45:49]>> I think after the >> hang on hang on the question there was an objection question. I sustained it.

[00:45:54]So we have to wait for another question.

[00:45:56]So a did you provide testimony in your underlying case at some other time other than today >> during the civil infractions when I got charged?

[00:46:11]>> Okay. Do you remember what the date was?

[00:46:13]>> I do not >> I do not know the date. I think it was uh December sometime December.

[00:46:23]>> Okay.

[00:46:25]But you don't remember why you were testifying >> um for I don't recall.

[00:46:33]>> And you said earlier that you felt guided um while you were dealing with Miss Bridgemond. Who who did you feel was guiding you?

[00:46:40]>> Uh Miss Bridgemond because nobody really directed me where to go and I it was one of my first experiences here so I didn't really know what was going on.

[00:46:52]Do you remember if the judge ever told you where to go?

[00:46:55]>> Uh, after we entered the courtroom, he advised that I should talk to a lawyer, >> but at that point, did you already feel guided?

[00:47:04]>> Um, I kind of felt I didn't know who to trust.

[00:47:07]>> I think this I kind of been asked to answer.

[00:47:09]>> I don't have any more questions, though.

[00:47:11]>> Mr. Flores, thank you for your testimony.

[00:47:16]Any >> additional witnesses? Yes, sir. Other people would call Mr. Gilbert.

[00:47:23]>> [snorts] >> This is part of the [clears throat] bar click. Let's do this. Jim, >> raise your right hand for me.

[00:47:33]The testimony you're about to do in this [clears throat] matter will be the truth.

[00:47:39]>> Can you say your name for the record?

[00:47:41]>> James Gilbert.

[00:47:41]>> And how are you employed?

[00:47:43]>> Um, primarily I am a public defender for Shoe and Frisk County. And um were you working in that capacity on November 30th, 2023?

[00:47:51]>> I was the MIDC arraignment attorney that day plus I had my own case lo.

[00:47:55]>> Do you are you familiar with Assess Flores?

[00:47:58]>> Yes, I met him.

[00:47:59]>> How are you?

[00:48:00]>> I met I knew him briefly that day because >> isn't this all >> his case got video? Oh, is he qualified bar association member?

[00:48:08]>> No, he's testifying from his personal knowledge. So that objection is overruled. Go ahead. And then I later met him on a one-on-one level after his mother brought him back into the county building a [clears throat] few days or a week later.

[00:48:21]>> Okay. So, back on the um the 30th, did did you ever meet with Mr. Flores?

[00:48:30]>> Not oneonone.

[00:48:32]>> Did you ever attempt to meet with Mr. Flores?

[00:48:34]>> I did.

[00:48:34]>> Can you tell me about that attempt?

[00:48:36]>> Uh yes. Uh I was in the courtroom and at some point in time his case was called and the and usually what happens is the people as they come in go look to our office on this on this floor and we meet with them there before their arraignment to tell them what's going to happen. I had not met with Mr. Florence. He he was in the courtroom. Uh Judge Viznaugh called his case and asked if he had met with the arraignment attorney. He said no and Judge Viznaugh told him that he should meet with me. Then what happened was um there was another gentleman in the room that made some comment about uh I wasn't going to represent him just to tell the court that I wasn't going to meet with them. I said I can't do that.

[00:49:17]I need to follow finish up with a couple of cases and I'd be out the hallway to meet with them. And a little bit later I attempted to do that.

[00:49:24]>> Wow. Can you tell me um about the attempt in the hallway?

[00:49:28]>> Yes. I walked out into the hallway and um Mr. Florence was there with the lady that's here in the courtroom and >> the woman the woman [clears throat] >> the living soul.

[00:49:39]>> Okay. Um but uh on three attempts I tried to talk to Mr. Florence and each time I was interrupted [clears throat] wasn't allowed to talk to him.

[00:49:50]>> And who interrupted you?

[00:49:51]>> Um the woman in in the courtroom in the green jacket her coat.

[00:49:57]>> Okay. Isn't this some kind of bar association star chamber thing we got going on here? Wow, >> Miss Bridgeman's testimony under oath and you'll have a chance for prose validated your oath.

[00:50:10]>> What is testimony under oath mean in this county?

[00:50:13]>> Miss Bridgemond, I mean, I've warned you repeatedly. I don't know if you're having some enjoyment out of that, but I really want you to participate in the courtroom fully from this. If you continue to disrupt it, I'll have you watch it from a jail cell over video and I'll mute you and you can just listen.

[00:50:29]But I don't want to do that. I want you to participate fully. Will you please cooperate with me in that and let the process go forward? I mean, we got to have a hearing. So, >> I see what I see.

[00:50:39]>> A star chamber is something that determines guilt without hearing.

[00:50:42]>> I'd like to see Gilbert's office >> question. I got yours.

[00:50:47]>> So, you said you were interrupted three times. Is that what you said?

[00:50:51]>> That's correct. Okay. At some point um or what did you do [clears throat] after that?

[00:50:55]>> Uh after that I I just uh I went back up to the our office and I at that time our [clears throat] there was like the the person that's in charge of gentleman Mr. Kio just reported what had happened. Uh and pretty much that was it. I learned later that Mr. Flores had left the building.

[00:51:14]>> So at any point did you assist Mr. Flores with an arignment on that day?

[00:51:18]>> I did not. And at any point were you able to go over the facts of his case and advise him of his rights?

[00:51:24]>> I was not. I I touched on three times and I don't remember the exact order. I at one point tried to explain in the hallway what my job was. Um the lady bridgeman interrupted me at one point in time and I said now his job is to scare the hell out of you. That was one time she interrupted. I tried again. I was to and I was told that Mr. Florence was not going to contract with me and I thought the two of them were together and then there was a third time I was interrupted and I they explicitly said I'm done >> and then um at some point later you met with Mr. Flores >> that a couple days later a couple days or possibly a week >> I don't remember exactly.

[00:52:04]>> Do you recall of any other hearings in his in his case?

[00:52:09]>> I was subpoenaed as I was today for a I believe a show cause hearing from Mr. Florence that I had to testify at and I believe that was in December.

[00:52:17]>> Do you remember what the underlying um show cause was >> for his failure to stay for the arraignment >> and that would have been the arraignment on the 30th?

[00:52:25]>> Correct.

[00:52:26]>> I don't have any questions for Mr. >> M. Richmond. The cross exam questions for Mr. Gilbert.

[00:52:32]>> Yes. So you take a kid who's anxious, gave away all of his inalienable rights when if they asked if he gave his driver's license, Dowski just violated the law. He was a passenger in the vehicle and he didn't give accurate testimony, but I'm not going to make him perjure himself. And everything you just said does not line up with people that I have here that were there.

[00:52:58]>> Do you want me to call witnesses, your honor?

[00:53:01]>> Okay. You haven't asked the witness a question. Okay. So, I'm going to assume you don't want to ask the witness question.

[00:53:05]>> Was okay.

[00:53:06]>> Was Seth really in the courtroom and arraigned and approached by you in the courtroom?

[00:53:12]>> He was never arraigned. He was in the courtroom and the judge advised that he needed to speak with me and I said I had two more matters. I'd be out out in the hallway and that's where you and him were waiting out in the hallway.

[00:53:26]>> I tried to approach Mr. Flores. Did Seth and I were we aware that the judge because was it perhaps that when Seth turned in the paperwork to the clerk of court that she let the judge know and the judge let you know go out there and get him and she's talking to him and you better go get him arraigned. You better go talk to him because I already had him out there and done before you were ever on the scene. You took all of his inalienable rights, violated due process for the kid, and then you're trying to make him your put him in your jurisdiction, and I was saving him from that because >> Do you have a question for Mr. Gilbert?

[00:54:03]>> Yes.

[00:54:04]>> Ask him.

[00:54:04]>> He Are you prepared to perjure yourself?

[00:54:09]Okay. It's nice that Oh, we have I'm glad I didn't answer question. I'm going to determine that Miss Bridgemond has is has elected that she doesn't want to answer. Let me ask >> She just wants to rail against him. Mr. Gilbert, you can sit down.

[00:54:21]>> Yeah. How do you ask questions of when you b cook this all up between yourselves?

[00:54:26]>> Miss Miller, your next question.

[00:54:28]>> Your honor, I don't have any further witnesses matter.

[00:54:31]>> Okay.

[00:54:33]>> And um the [clears throat] court will take judicial notice of its own files and the transcript of the arraignment on November 30th, the transcript of the order to show cause on December 21st, and the uh on the failing to appear. The court will take judicial notice of uh Miss Bridgemond's [clears throat] returning the order to show up. The order to appear uh cut into strips with the right to offer a contract is not accepted as well as the statements that she made at uh her arraignment on the bench warrant. All right. So, Miss Bridg, do you have any >> do you have any witnesses that you wish to present?

[00:55:12]>> James Gilbert testified that he tried three times to reach Seth Flores in that hallway. Three times Beth Bridgeman got in the way, not metaphorically, physically, and verbally intercepting every attempt. Her response at the hearing was not to deny this. It was to argue it didn't count. She argued that Gilbert's job was to put Seth back into the jurisdiction of the court. That the MIDC was about profit. That helping a 19-year-old believe he could refuse to engage with the legal process was not practicing law. It was practicing rights. Judge Guthier listened to all of it. He was about to give her something else. a definitive answer from Michigan's own Supreme Court on exactly where the line is between sharing beliefs and practicing law.

[00:55:52][snorts] >> I have to say that even being here today and and putting myself and submitting myself to your authority that has not been substantiated goes against the one and living God that I respond to.

[00:56:07]You cannot ask.

[00:56:09]>> Okay. So, I've given uh given you >> anybody want to go see on what happened that day, >> but I don't want anybody to enter your jurisdiction, your honor, because >> So, you're not my honor. Let's do it this way.

[00:56:21]>> Hang on. Hang on. So, you're you So, I've offered you an opportunity to call witnesses and you've elected not to.

[00:56:26]>> Closing arguments, Miss Miller.

[00:56:27]>> Your honor, I ask that the court find um Miss Bridgemond in contempt for the unauthor for interfering with Mr. Flores's arraignment from the MIDC and engaging in unauthorized practice of law. Um there was testimony that Mr. Flores didn't know Miss Bridge before he entered the courtroom on the or the courthouse on the 30th and that she approached him um that she was with him um when she was [clears throat] with him in the courtroom. Um she told him that he didn't need a lawyer. um she was providing legal advice to him, saying that um she didn't need he didn't need to um he was driving his personal vehicle and he didn't need to engage with the process. He testified that she told him what to write on the ticket to provide to the court and asked the court to take judicial notice of the ticket um with Mr. Flores's writing on it. Um he testified that once he turned it in, he was advised to leave the building by Miss Bridgemond before he um had his arraignment. Wow.

[00:57:33]>> Um so I would and then further the testimony of Mr. Gilbert that he was the arraignment attorney, that he was in the courtroom when the judge indicated that Mr. Flores should meet with him. Um he testified that Miss Bridgemond interrupted him three times um from >> from meeting with Mr. Flores that he tried to but wasn't able to. He wasn't able to advise him of his rights or to go over the ticket with him and further that um Mr. Flores left without being arraigned on the M.

[00:58:03]>> Is it still possible to object to all these presumptive evidences? You brought your own people in >> she well [laughter] >> who are on the county payable.

[00:58:12]>> It's closing argument. Go ahead. You have your chance. And I would ask the court um I I think it's clear that Miss Miss Bridgemond was interfering with Mr. Flores's meeting with the arraignment attorney by physically um preventing Mr. Gilbert from meeting with him. Um further telling him what to put on a piece of of a document to submit to the court on his behalf. Um would also uh that would also be engaging in um giving him legal advice. [clears throat] Um, so I find the court I've asked the court to find her contempt on that and I also asked the court to find her consent for failing to appear on um the show cause that was issued to her um on the 20th of December. Thank you.

[00:58:55]>> Thank you, Miss Richmond. Now is your opportunity to make any closing argument that you wish. Go ahead.

[00:59:00]>> I am not in this hearing situation. This has been conducted as what is called a star chamber. Um, as all of our founding fathers left because the bar association members are reigned against a witness and they have no due process. Has anybody here not witnessed a breach of public trust and due process?

[00:59:22]>> Yes.

[00:59:24]>> Well, [clears throat] people can judge for themselves. We've conducted a hearing. People can testify. It's >> not a hearing. It's a witch hunt.

[00:59:29]>> Hang on. Hang on. [clears throat] >> There was no CCP.

[00:59:34]>> All right. any further outbursts, you'll have to leave or you'll be taken into custody in order.

[00:59:42]>> So, practicing law, none of you have an actual license to practice law.

[00:59:48]You know that, right? A bar association membership is not a license. You're not registered on Lara, the state's licensing administration.

[00:59:58]You're not registered. Your primary oath is to the bar association. we know about your secret commitments to one another and not to follow the un unalenable rights of the people and due process the people's core. This is not. You have just set up a star chamber and you've got guys with guns ready to carry out whatever you want and you have not even taken enough care about the people and your your situation in the court to execute a proper oath. You should have had somebody swear that oath to you. You can't sign your own oath and have it notorized. You did that with the prosecutor. You have to have somebody who swore you in signing it and then a notary. It takes three people. I should not be submitted. If somebody is practicing law without a license, it's all of you bar association members.

[01:00:56]>> Yep.

[01:00:58]>> No, there is no license. It's a private membership.

[01:01:03]And I cannot subject myself as a living soul to an authority that violates my God-given unalenable rights. And if you gentlemen carry that out, have you any idea what you're doing? What you're being asked to do, you need to think about it because I can tell you right now, our military is watching every move you make right now.

[01:01:28]>> Absolutely. This is your opportunity to stand for the people and not for the people that are trying to steal every one of our rights as they did with Seth Flores. You should be ashamed of yourself, Deputy Dowski.

[01:01:42]You told him on his second NYP you were going to take his vehicle and he was going to have to pay $12,000 to get out of impound. Do you know how many friends I HAVE THAT CAN'T DRIVE A freaking car in this county up until the age of 35?

[01:01:58]I don't practice law. I practice rights.

[01:02:02]I practice people living free and supporting one another.

[01:02:07]So if your court finds me guilty, your court is finding every God-given right the universe has ever known to be a fraud.

[01:02:20]We would be happy to administer the real oath for you today, Judge Gothia.

[01:02:26]We have a body of people. We would be happy to do that. We need a district court judge for the people to reinstate common law. [clears throat] The bar association has bought out the entire state of Michigan for the CCP.

[01:02:43]I know what that means.

[01:02:45]I know what your role in that means. And I believe redemption is for everyone.

[01:02:50]And I could be your best friend to make I believe you know God's truth. I believe you want to do God's truth. And I believe you could be the man that we need.

[01:03:02]>> But we have to leave this process of the bar association. And you have to take an accurate oath.

[01:03:11]>> I'll witness it.

[01:03:12]>> I'll witness it too.

[01:03:14]>> All right. Thank you, Miss Bridger.

[01:03:17][clears throat] And now I'll make the ruling. Article six of Michigan's Constitution of 1963 bests the judicial power of the state of the state of Michigan in the Supreme Court and courts of record as established by law. It also gives the Supreme Court superintending control over all the lower courts. Michigan's Constitution also provides for the passage of public acts passed by the legislature and approved by the governor. these statutes. Uh despite bad information that people get online, we have the force of law.

[01:03:51]Michigan has a statutory system regulating the practice of law. Michigan prop law 600.901 through 949.

[01:04:00]Section 904 best the Supreme Court with the power over the state. Miss Richmond, you may not leave the courtroom.

[01:04:06]>> I'm going to talk to somebody. I'm not trying to get away. Dowski, you won't see me at 3:00 a.m. Bumbler Road. I'm giving my ruling here.

[01:04:15]>> Okay.

[01:04:16]>> Section 904 vest the Supreme Court with power over the state bar of Michigan, which under section 901 is a public body corporate consisting of all persons licensed to practice law in Michigan.

[01:04:27]Section 916 makes it illegal for anyone to practice law unless they're licensed to do so.

[01:04:33]>> You're not. Michigan Supreme Court in state Barbie Kramer 399 Mish 116 in 1976 noted that this statutory scheme merely recognizes the inherent authority of the courts at common law to control the practice of law dating back to the common law of England.

[01:04:53]When when so-called sovereign citizens complain about the common law, they neglect to notice that the common law was what courts said >> is the importance of protecting the public from the danger of unskilled persons practicing law. [clears throat] >> Oh my goodness.

[01:05:10]>> What constitutes the practice of law? In Dressel via Marbank, the Michigan Supreme Court in 2003 held that a person engages in the practice of law when he councils or assists another in matters that require the use [clears throat] of legal discretion and profound legal.

[01:05:25]>> So, your honor, where was that in my latest charges?

[01:05:29]>> Protect the right of people to espouse beliefs and to tell other people about those beliefs. Ryan.

[01:05:34]>> So, Miss Bridgeman has the free speech right to believe what she wants to about courts and government and to tell other people about that. This includes, of course, criticism of government and of the courts. But to give advice, guidance, and assistance to another person in their own legal matter at the courthouse to be applied to their particular case at that time crosses the line into the practice of law. At its heart, a practice of law is applying legal knowledge to a particular issue or problem. This unauthorized pract practice of law is a contempt of court.

[01:06:08]>> You had that written up earlier, didn't you?

[01:06:10]>> Additionally, interfering with someone meeting with their attorney is a disruption of the court process and is therefore also a contempt of court.

[01:06:17]>> He was not there.

[01:06:18]>> Primary purpose consent power is to preserve the effectiveness and sustain the power of the court. The power to hold a party in contempt is an important judiciary. Yet still the legislature has recognized this and codified it. This is merely a recognition of the common law contempt power courts. Among these statutes, section 600, section 11701H provides that any court of record may hold in contempt all persons for assuming to be and acting as officers, attorneys or counselors of any court without authority >> or for other unlawful interference with or resistance to the process or proceedings of inter in any action.

[01:07:00]So interfering with a person's consultation with an appointed attorney is directed by a judge interferes with that process in that court case and is contempt of court.

[01:07:10]>> Let's just pretend.

[01:07:11]>> There are two forms of contempt, civil and criminal. Civil contempt applies when someone refuses to obey a court order and the court coerces their compliance. So in civil contempt, the person can contempt by obeying the order. criminal contempt.

[01:07:26]>> You guys put hands on me today >> for failure to appear as a criminal content.

[01:07:33]>> Be careful.

[01:07:34]>> The uh court, Miss Bridgemond, >> you had your op.

[01:07:39]>> You are misbehaving. You had this prepared. You hooked it up with your witnesses.

[01:07:44]>> Come on now.

[01:07:45]>> Court of Appeals has specific.

[01:07:46]>> I was not practicing law. I was practicing rights. Common law in the Constitution is about rights, not law.

[01:07:52]So the court finds >> finds Miss Richmond in contempt of course for the unauthorized practice of law in giving Mr. Flores advice particular to his situation on what to write on his ticket as a lawful defense to disobey the court's direction to consult with the MIDC attorney which is required by law and to leave the codes and statutes was not authorized to do so >> and that resulted in harm to Mr. Flores.

[01:08:20]There was a he he was in jeopardy of contesting court by leaving uh without finishing the arraignment process by the bad advice of Miss Bridgemond.

[01:08:29]>> I am not wanting to court by practicing law. It's a contempt of court for the for interfering with the court process.

[01:08:37]Miss Bridgemond is also in contempt of court for failing to appear for the show cause hearing when she didn't show up for it, but she instead beforehand turned in the order cut up into little pieces with the statement, "Your offer to contract is not accepted.

[01:08:52]>> You trespassed on my yard."

[01:08:54]>> Had the inherent authority attendance and she is in contempt of court for for doing that. Uh, so Miss Bridgemond is in contempt of court uh for unauthorized practice of law and for the interfering with the court process on November 30th, 2023. She's also in contempt of court for failing to appear.

[01:09:19]>> Better be careful. I know some jiu-jitsu >> on uh >> scheduled for >> Oh, I on December 20 on uh I'm sorry.

[01:09:39]>> So, my honor, >> so she's in contempt of court for failing to appear on December 20th.

[01:09:46]All right, Miss Miller. uh any allocation as to sentence.

[01:09:51]>> Your honor, I just um it's concerning whenever a person is not able to um participate in the judicial process in accordance with their rights. Um so I think that's the the the biggest issue is that Mr. Flores um wasn't able to meet with MIDIC, left without being arraigned. Um so I just ask the court to to keep that.

[01:10:16]>> That's right. in its uh consideration when issuing sentence.

[01:10:19]>> All right, Miss Bridgemond, do you have anything you wish to say before the court pronounces sentence for the content >> under a common law which is the only true law because it's based comes from God's natural law and the constitution is based on that. The constitution is not about law, it's about rights. I was not talking to Mr. Flores about any legal thing because I'm not a bar association lawyer. I don't know about all your laws. I do know that the need to have a uh attorney at arraignment from what state trooper Brenda Caspersonson told me only started a year ago. That is codes and statutes. We are not [clears throat] bound by that. We are living beings. We are not the corporate dead entity of the court system.

[01:11:11]I did not practice law.

[01:11:14]I practiced his rights. Do you know there are a plenty of other counties in this state that accept that same documentation that I filed and had Seth file? I was hoping to make him unafraid of all of these. He has good things to say about a couple of your deputies.

[01:11:35]They're not all like that.

[01:11:38]This court is for profit. So standing in the way of that attorney. But that testimony, Mr. Gilbert, you should be ashamed of yourself. Was not truthful.

[01:11:50]>> You had never approached.

[01:11:51]>> But Mr. Richmond, this is your opportunity to tell me what what penalty I should give you.

[01:11:56]>> Was anybody harmed?

[01:11:58]>> Was there any other uh financial damage to Seth Flores? I know there was to Mr. Gilbert because he lost a client that day, but then he recovered that day.

[01:12:07]Good. Okay.

[01:12:11]Are we not allowed to talk to people in the the uh courthouse, not in the court room?

[01:12:19]Is that not a public space?

[01:12:22][snorts] Are we not allowed to help a fellow citizen understand that he doesn't have to lose everything in his life because he's just getting started?

[01:12:33]that he can have people stand with him and encourage him and coach him through maybe handle his drinking. I suggested that he stop drinking and he start to uh you know pay attention and we'll be there if he gets pulled over because he's afraid. [clears throat] I don't see where there has been any harm and if you can rule that is contempt.

[01:12:56]I have no longer any I see no ability to redeem anything in this courtroom. You refuse to address your oath and if you hold me in contempt of court, I think that's quite unbelievable.

[01:13:19]>> Absolutely.

[01:13:20]>> All right. Well, I've already So, >> I do have somebody who would like to make a statement on my behalf. No, that's not allowed. All right. So, um >> I have filed a >> judge. You you you've made all your statements. Uh I have filed an oath proper under the laws. I filed the constitutional oath required by article 1, section 11 of the state constitution.

[01:13:43]All these sovereign citizen folks who get these crazy arguments online that are frankly just wrong. I encourage you read the state constitution. you you'll find that all this stuff you're getting from seminars or whatever online is just false and Mr. Flores to his harm listened to it and almost got held in contempt.

[01:13:59]>> Miss Bridgemond has total disregard for the court's authority.

[01:14:04]>> And courts are the way that citizens have recourse to the law.

[01:14:08]>> In societies that don't have a court system, they don't have the rule of law.

[01:14:11]You end up with the rule of >> the bully and the court protects citizens from the government several times. There's important business to be had. There was important business to be had for Mr. Flores that day.

[01:14:25]>> Mr. Richmond interfered.

[01:14:27]>> Wow.

[01:14:27]>> And she totally refused to appear for court willfully.

[01:14:31]>> Her conduct today has been directly contenious >> and she has uh exhibited repeated disregard and frankly utter contempt for not only this court but for really any court. And so >> under the bar association, I believe so.

[01:14:48]you're not upholding anything to the constitution and the state constitution.

[01:14:52]>> I do need to give a a sentence that uh is proportionate uh but also is is enough to discourage Miss Bridgemond from this type of interference and also to discourage other people from following down a similar path. So Mr. ordered a 30 days jail force you come with me. Okay.

[01:15:11]>> You know guys, you need to arrest the judge for impersonating a public official.

[01:15:18]to arrest the judge for impersonating a public official.

[01:15:22]>> Are you [clears throat] concerned at all about what you're being asked to do?

[01:15:26]>> Beth Bridgemond was sentenced to 30 days in the Oceanana County Jail by Judge Aaron Jay Goier, Seth Flores's underlying case, the one he never got to arraign on November 30th, was eventually resolved as two civil infractions. He came back to court about a week later.

[01:15:41]He met with James Gilbert. He finished what the law required him to do. A footnote worth noting. The MIDC attorney who appeared at Bridgeman's arraignment described her to the court as a former social studies teacher, a disability recipient, and a politically active community member who had previously audited an election. That background explains something about how she arrived at this courthouse with a philosophy fully formed, a cut-up court order, and red ink. It explains less about why she chose Seth Flores as the person to practice it on. Here is what Judge Gothier got right and why it matters. He was careful, deliberately careful, to separate what Bridgemond believed from what she did. The First Amendment protects belief. It protects speech. It protects the right to stand outside that courthouse and hand out pamphlets about sovereign citizen theory to everyone who walks past. It does not protect applying that theory to a specific person in a specific case in a courthouse in a way that prevents that person from accessing the attorney. The state is legally required to provide them. The Michigan Supreme Court said it plainly in Drestle versus Amera Bankank in 2003. Practicing law is applying legal knowledge to a particular issue or problem. The moment Bridgemont told Seth Flores what to write on his ticket, she wasn't sharing a philosophy. She was practicing law without a license. The court didn't put Beth Bridgemont in jail for what she believed. It put her in jail for what she did to a 19-year-old kid who was scared and didn't know better. That's the difference, and it's worth understanding.