Policeman tries to arrest judge in courtroom

  • 14 January 2016
Justice Gillen

Lord Justice Gillen – pictured.

A policeman who allegedly approached one of Northern Ireland’s most senior judges and threatened to arrest him is to go on trial for contempt of court.

Thomas Anthony Carlin was dressed in uniform as he attended Belfast’s Royal Courts of Justice again on Thursday.

He declined to apologise for his actions at an earlier hearing.

He also rejected an offer of legal representation and asked to have a jury decide on his behaviour towards Lord Justice Gillen.

But another judge refused his request, instead listing the case to be heard by him next week.

Mr Justice Horner said: “I’m going to arrange for a trial to take place on this issue of whether or not there has been contempt in the face of the court.

“I will hear it, there will not be a jury.”

He also warned the policeman that, if found guilty, he could be fined or sent to prison.

Mr Carlin’s alleged outburst came at the end of a ruling in a house repossession case in the High Court on Tuesday.

‘Threat to arrest judge’

The 43-year-old had been representing himself in the legal battle with Santander bank over a property in County Antrim.

At the end of the hearing, he allegedly got up and moved towards the bench, claiming he was going to arrest Lord Justice Gillen.

Security and court staff intervened before he was led from the courtroom.

He was arrested on suspicion of two counts of common assault, but subsequently released without charge.

The Police Ombudsman was also notified.

Mr Carlin is alleged to have interrupted proceedings without justification, refused to resume his seat, approached the presiding judge, threatened to arrest him without lawful excuse and physically interfered with a court tipstaff.

He had been given until Thursday to secure a lawyer, apologise and provide an explanation for his behaviour.

Refusal to apologise

But shortly after entering the courtroom again, Mr Carlin made his position clear.

He told Mr Justice Horner: “I believe for me to apologise to the court would be abandoning my defence.”

The offer of legal assistance from a law firm that deals with the Police Federation was also turned down.

Mr Carlin further said: “I acted in my capacity as a police officer, I believed a crime had been committed (and) it was outrageous in nature.

“I believe the tipstaff and court staff who intervened… obstructed me in the execution of my duty.”

At one stage Mr Justice Horner asked if he denied the alleged behaviour set out in writing.

“I completely dispute those facts,” the officer replied.

The judge then cautioned him: “You realise that should you be found guilty of contempt in the face of the court you will be liable for a number of penalties including imprisonment.”

Mr Carlin responded that he would comply with the findings of a jury.

However, he was told to turn up on Monday for a trial to be decided by Mr Justice Horner alone.


23 Responses to “Policeman tries to arrest judge in courtroom”

  1. sovereigntea says:

    Welcome to Cameron’s legal dictatorship.

    The so called judge is clearly worried that a jury would likely throw the case out. Who appoints these clowns and why do the powers that be want to answer that question ?

    Right to a Jury Trial
    What is a Jury Trial

    At the foundation of the UK law is the notion that anyone who is accused of a crime should have the right to be tried in front of their peers. Essentially it is a process whereby 12 individuals randomly selected are put in the court environment to determine the facts of the case and to decide, either unanimously or by majority of 10 people whether the accused individual is guilty or not of the alleged crimes.
    Reasons for a Jury Trial

    Jury trials happen where cases are heard in crown court and are not used as part of a magistrate’s trial. In civil trials juries may be used in certain limited cases such as fraud or defamation where public perceptions are relevant. It is commonly thought that jury trials are there as a way to provide a check and balance on state power and in order to ensure that an individual is being tested based on the reasonable standards of the public and not those of the legal profession.

  2. sovereigntea says:

    should read

    why do the powers that be not want to answer that question ?

  3. salty says:

    *at the end of a ruling in a house repossession case

    the legal battle with Santander bank over a property

    “I acted in my capacity as a police officer, I believed a crime had been committed*

    What crime is this legal genius talking about ????????

  4. salty says:

    Was he talking about the crime of mortgage repayments?

    • beLIEve says:

      I am assuming but, do not know for sure, that the crime is, as you say……..mortgage repayments……made in respect of…….NO MONEY HAVING BEEN LENT.

      The ….RENTIER SCUM…….receive regular funds/income for …….FAKE LOANS.
      “Money” that was “finger clicked” into existence; a digital entry on a balance sheet.

      The sovereigns of the planes of Earth are expected to attend work and surrender their hard earned income, to SCUM who roll RAT-PAPER off the printing presses of the paper mills.

      There was NO LOAN.
      No money was LENT.

      The EL-iteS SATANIC-i’ll thieve everything SCUM ….STEAL their INCOMES…from the masses.

      The EL-iteS ….also…..PRINT …their “monetary” requirements.

      The sovereigns of the planes of Earth have to go to work….in order to ….PAY RENT to the SERPENT PeOPlE……in order to….. OCCUPY LANDS OWNED by themselves; the Sovereigns of Earth.

      I have long held the belief that the “khazars” origin is either, the bowels of the Earth or, another planet, as suggested by Michael Tsarion.

      The SCUM-bag “khazars” are the antithesis of all traits, that characterize mankind.
      I can only assume THEY came from elsewhere.

    • beLIEve says:


      I haven’t got a clue about student loans or, any other loans for that matter.

      I believe the baseline question is……whose money was loaned ? ?

      If, no name is forthcoming i.e. it is…. NODDY MONEY….the sort children PLAYING SHOP use, it means……..NO AUTHENTIC MONEY was “LOANED”.

      If, no authentic money was “loaned”….no authentic money needs to be repaid.

      ONLY an IDIOT REPAYS a NON-EXISTENT ….”loan” ….apparently ! !

      Should you not wish to succumb to the fraudulent demands for COuN-cil tax……


      Council Tax Beaten ! – the holy grail found 😀

      Another general site on fraudulent demands for repayment of non-existent loans is……………..


      • salty says:

        *If, no authentic money was “loaned”….no authentic money needs to be repaid*

        The hole in this argument:

        A loan has to be signed for. It’s an agreement written on paper.

        It’s the “Terms of Service” of the financial world.

        You agree to repay. The TYPE of repayment is written on paper.

        That is what you signed. That is what you agreed.

  5. Nollidge says:

    I’m sure I posted earlier today on this thread asking for anyone who knew the details of this case to inform us all.My request seems to have disappeared down a black hole.Or was it perhaps “fracked”?.
    P.S. My request was in no way controversial & broke no posting guidelines.So what happened to it?.
    It should have been the first post.

  6. Aldous says:

    I suspect that this case is (also) about Thomas Anthony Carlin refusing to acknowledge his Legal Fiction/Fictional Identity/STRAWMAN THOMAS ANTHONY CARLIN created when his birth was registered.
    The real, living and human Thomas Anthony Carlin most certainly is NOT the STRAWMAN created to deceive him from BIRTH REGISTRATION to GRAVE into paying his STRAWMAN’S (illegal) taxes, fines, vehicle registration, etc.

    Combine this irrefutable fact with that of the mortgage/loan scams, where nothing is ever lent but merely created as new credit AND moreover, the interest to pay for this new credit is never in circulation – ensuring default by many – the real and human Thomas Anthony Carlin has a strong case, seeing as he and his STRAWMAN are not one and the same and the Central Banks are running a criminal scam and enterprise.

    Meet Your Strawman!

    Your straw man (Strawman) is an artificial person created by law at the of your birth, the inscription of an ALL-CAPITAL LETTERS NAME on your birth certificate/document, which is a document of title and a negotiable instrument. Your lawful, Christian name of birthright was replaced with a legal, corporate name of deceit and fraud. Your name in upper and lower case letters (Jane Mary Doe) has been answering when the legal person, your name in ALL-CAPTIAL LETTERS (JANE MARY DOE), is addressed, and therefore the two have been recognized as being one and the same. When, you Jane Mary Doe, the lawful being distinguish yourself as another party than the legal person, the two will be separated.

    Legally, since your birth your artificial person, has been considered a slave or indentured servant to the various federal, provincial and municipal governments via your STATE-issued, STATE-created birth certificate in the name of your all-caps person. Your birth certificate was issued so that the issuer could claim “exclusive” title to the legal person created. This was further compounded when you voluntarily obtained a driver’s license and a SSN (Social Security Number). The state even owns your personal and private life through your STATE-issued marriage license/certificate issued in the all-caps names. You have had no rights in birth, marriage, nor will you have them even in death unless you re-capture your straw man. (The names on tombstones in cemeteries are in all-caps.) The STATE holds the title to your legal person it created via your birth certificate, until Jane Mary Doe, the rightful owner, the holder in due course of the instrument, that is yourself, reclaims/redeems it.

    Your straw man (Strawman) is an artificial person


    Mortgage Fraud Exposed – WHO OWNS YOUR HOUSE? 5:47




    The Great British Mortgage Swindle – Trailer


  7. salty says:

    Was he talking about the crime of “R” being painted on his right boot, and “L” being painted on his left boot?

  8. Aldous says:

    @ salty 1:13 pm

    Hi salty, you need to think and reason outside of the box on this one, as thinking/reasoning inside of it will get you nowhere.

    First of all, you (the real you) NEVER takes out a loan or mortgage which is the sole domain of your STRAWMAN/LEGAL FICTION/FICTIONAL IDENTITY, as living entities/human beings are not permitted to and are incapable of borrowing or repaying money, even if it was real money – which it most certainly is not in the case of conjured into existence loans (new credit) that are not depositors’ money of any kind.

    There is NO contract of any kind with a bank loan or mortgage – and the banks know it. This has also always been the case with Rates or Council Tax, where many refuse to be mugged for a service/product they have not asked for and return such ‘demands for payment’ unopened with NO CONTRACT – RETURN TO SENDER written on them. The said demand is all in CAPITALS anyway, indicating that it is addressed to the Legal Fiction and not the Living Entity. Anything addressed to your house ALL IN CAPITALS is not for the living you but your STRAWMAN which you are duped into believing is the same thing.

    Banks and Bankers have stolen most of the world with this scam where fictitious money(sic) is loaned to a fictitious entity and the banks just sit back and wait (or usually engineer) an economic downturn or depression to seize genuine wealth (assets/real estate) that were procured with their funny money – where the interest to repay these funny money loans is never put into circulation, so is impossible to be repaid by everyone – as intended.

    If that isn’t a criminal enterprise, then I don’t know what is. They used to execute such parasites for usury where making money from lending money – even when the money was real – was considered the Cardinal Sin, which it definitely is as only misery ever comes of it. 🙂

    • pete fairhurst says:

      This is spot on Aldous. And it is even worse.

      Firstly there is only one signature on a mortgage agreement: the “borrowers”. The bank never sign anything because the “borrower” is in fact creating the money by the act of borrowing. No prior existing money is involved. The “borrower” is technically signing a Promissory Note which creates the money. Your promise to pay creates the money! It is YOUR money not the banks. There is no actual contract and therefore no counter party to sign. There is no contract! The bank never signs anything!

      Further the courts know this but still act as though a contract does exist. The bailiffs know this too and always partially hide their paperwork because it is not lawful.

      The law applies to you as a human being. The legal system applies to your CAPITALISED strawman. It is a “hidden in plain sight” con which most people are unaware of.

      Your strawman is not you the human. It is a “legal fiction” invented at your birth by your birth certificate and used to con you for the whole of your life. It is so clever and most people just cannot get their heads round it. They trust the powers that be!

      It would be funny if it wasn’t so serious.

    • salty says:

      The USURY argument is a good one to follow up.

      Christian civilization had a lot to say about this at one time.

      • salty says:

        * If that isn’t a criminal enterprise, then I don’t know what is. They used to execute such parasites for usury where making money from lending money – even when the money was real – was considered the Cardinal Sin, which it definitely is as only misery ever comes o

  9. Nollidge says:

    Tap – I was a very early commenter on here.I asked if anyone had more information on this case to make it more understandable,but my comment appears to have been “fracked”.Why?.

    • Tapestry says:

      I plead not guilty, Nollidge. Are the gremlins working on this thread?

    • Aldous says:

      Hi Nollidge, any chance of just re-posting said lost in cyberspace comment, which appears to have been superseded by your subsequent comments – which seem to cover it – and others’ comments including myself? Peace! – and a Zionist Free World.

  10. Aldous says:

    @ pete fairhurst at 5:11 pm and salty at 6:29 pm

    I’ve borrowed money from family (usually) and friends when times were tight but they have never wanted more back than they have lent.
    Over half a century later, I’ve lent money to family and friends on the same proviso and in some cases, knowing full well that I’m unlikely to ever get it back.

    It’s fair to say that over the years, money owed by friends and loved ones disappears into the ether. The debt (as it were) has been repaid in so many other ways as to become irrelevant.

    If only the usual suspects could see life in such a way. Highly unlikely.

  11. Lynn says:

    Conmen at work…their system is illegal and they should be arrested and tried with a Jury…hmm guilty as Sin. Send them down for fraud.

  12. Dublinmick says:



    Give me the sons your mum got and fear not, for God will protect Ireland from the queen 🙂

    What is the world coming to when policeman can’t even arrest iluminati judges any more?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.