Texas Woman Sentenced After Serving Judge With Papers To Appear Before The Courts Of The “Republic of Texas”

668px-Seal_of_the_Republic_of_Texas_(colorized).svgA Texas woman, Susan Cammack, has been fined $500 and sentenced to two years of probation for her role in serving bogus court orders on a judge and lawyer involved in a foreclosure case against her. Comic claims to be a representative of the sovereign nation of Texas was convicted of issuing fraudulent court papers ordering a judge and lawyer to appear before an “international common law court.” What is interesting about this case is that Cammack received a two year sentence of probation for serving what were clearly meaningless and ineffectual papers. She was little more menacing than someone speaking to herself on a subway platform. Yet, her punishment is roughly the same as former Ohio prosecutor Jason Phillabaum of Cincinnati who was given no jail time and had his law license suspended for just a year for filing a false indictment in an actual criminal case. As I said earlier, the treatment of Phillabaum was shockingly light in comparison to what non-lawyers face in less serious cases. It is not that Cammack’s sentence was excessive. The question is how we deal with the most serious forms of prosecutorial misconduct.

A jury northwest of San Antonio found Susan Cammack guilty Wednesday of simulating a legal process after a co-defendant pleaded guilty in August and testified against her. They were part of a group called the Republic of Texas who believe Texas never legally became part of the U.S. and remains a separate nation. The papers came in a foreclosure case against Cammack where the judge and a prosecutor were called to appear before the group’s court, held at a VFW hall in Bryan, Texas. Obviously, those papers (unlike Phillabaum’s false papers) did not have any legal meaning or even presumed legal meaning for the recipients. The group was raided by a joint force from the sheriff’s office, the FBI and other agencies where their computers were seized in addition to various other items from the 20 or so people in attendance.

Republic of Texas “President” John Jarnecke testified at the trial and explained that they view these common law courts as real and added “Like it or not, we’re living in two different worlds . . . The free and independent nation of Texas, where we want to be … and the corporate world of Texas and the United States.”

jchristopherwhite2I understand the need to prosecute Cammack and I am glad that she was not given jail time for this bizarre act. However, the case stuck me as an interesting comparison to the Ohio case where Phillabaum added a charge to a criminal indictment and then signed the document. The prosecutor responsible for the case refused to sign the indictment. Even a secretary had balked at adding the count. However, even with both objecting to the clearly unethical conduct, Phillabaum persisted and ultimately signed the false indictment himself. Unlike Cammack, these papers would have resulted in the conviction of a citizen on unapproved allegations and the denial of the most basic protections of our criminal law system. Yet, Phillabaum will be practicing in less than a year and was given no jail time for his actions.

As for Cammack, she has every right to fight for her belief in the “Republic of Texas” but she will have to refrain from issuing notices from the common law court at the VFW hall.

The “Republic of Texas” continues to have a website with “legal forms” as well as coinage While most of the positions in the House of Representatives still remain “vacant” Cammack is still listed as a member of that body.

14 thoughts on “Texas Woman Sentenced After Serving Judge With Papers To Appear Before The Courts Of The “Republic of Texas””

  1. Jonathan Turley has seceded from the proper use of the English language. He said, “She was little more menacing than someone speaking to themselves on a subway platform.” Or maybe the “someone” was Siamese twins—strike that, in the name of political correctness—conjoined twins.

  2. There is absolutely no difference between this act of “serving bogus court orders” and the SCOTUS issuing

    bogus decisions, such as Obamacare being a “tax,” not a nullifying violation of the “commerce clause,”

    and the deliberate, cavalier commingling of the definitions of the words “state” and “federal” regarding

    ACA “exchanges.”

    The former was prosecuted. The egregious nature of the latter was ignored.

    Constitutional scholars might consider the judicial branch as “overreaching” as the executive.

    Why are they silent?


    U.S. Constitution
    Article 2, Section 4

    “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on
    impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High crimes and Misdemeanors.”

    1. forgotwhoIam – The gun is currently mightier then the sword, people are to afraid or cowardly to stand up for the rights, most don’t know what rights are and /or people are willing to acquiesce their rights under an illusionary perception of security and protection?
      Did I get the answer right?

  3. I have argued that our current system of government is not warranted at being classified as a lawfully constituted Republic, as it (those in positions of power) no longer abide by the constitutional intent or protect the Bill of Rights and have in fact unlawfully abrogated the Constitution so many times, past and present, that our foundation of the rule of law has been compromised to a great enough percentage the rule of law is now really a law by those who rule.

    One could argue that Texans should have gone ahead and lawfully Constituted a new Republic and as such now are legally in power. Oh that’s right, according to the Vittel’s Law of Nations, adopted by our Constitution, we are bound by current government until such time as it is overthrown by force before it’s authority can be criminalized.

    Of course Vittel wrote this book in 1751 when the Monarchs were still in power and imperialism was the rule of law. Oh that’s right it still is.

  4. Do you ever get the feeling we’ve lost our country? Brave people, whom many are led by the nose to call crazies, are trying to get it back by legal means. You may end up owing your very life to them and their efforts. Stories that highlight this monumental issue:


    Defendant overcame and nullified the hoax of Federal jurisdiction

    Because all branches of government are incorporated as private, for profit corporations, three men petitioned the West Virginia Government for return to the rule of law thus honoring their oaths that they be government servants of, by, and for the people, not of, by, and for corporations.

  5. JT, isn’t this an attack on free speech, the freedom to express oneself regardless of the issue? The only difference between France and the US is that in France the issues kind of make sense, are serious, and on the cusp of actual problem solving. Only in the US, and perhaps a few dozen other nut case countries, can the representative of an imaginary country get into trouble.

    I guess I won’t be holding any more elections for my new country. Anyway I have been elected President the last six times. It seems that nobody wants to run against me. I may be sending out some subpoenas shortly.

  6. We had a strong Posse Comitatus group in Shawano County, WI. back in the 80’s. And, we’ve had similar groups as this Texas one. My news readings are the courts always take it serious when you screw w/ their authority. You might think they’re a bit insecure!

  7. Texas is one of those pirate territories annexed into the United States way back when we did not call the Mexicans, Friggin Mexicans. Of course this dog does not call them that and if I did I would get bit up by a chiwawa.

  8. (music)
    The eyes of Texas are upon you!
    All the live long day!

    The eyes of Texas are upon you.
    Just to pass the time away.

    Don’t you hear the whistle blowing….


  9. When a private citizen treats a 6-yr-old child as an adult and, say, has consensual sex with them we tend not to forgive them. When a DA does the legal-system equivalent by charging a 6-yr-old child with a felony it is completely ignored.*

    People in the in-crowd are treated differently. There is a class system in judicial matters. Blue-collar crime and no-collar crime are treated harshly. But those who are within the system (collar-of-authority crime), those fighters for law and order, those on our side, well, they are to be treated as recalcitrant children needing only a gentle prod to get them back in line.

    *A Wisconsin DA filed felony charges against a 6-yr-old. Her bizarre act was totally approved by the courts. It was “corrected” only after forcing that child to a preliminary hearing where the “charges” were testified to in court. http://jonathanturley.org/2011/11/25/family-sues-wisconsin-prosecutor-after-she-charges-6-year-old-boy-with-first-degree-sexual-assault-after-playing-doctor/

Comments are closed.