Sunday, March 18, 2018

The Baby Holm Case Is Not A Legitimate Sub-discipline Of Hovindology

The Baby Holm case seems to have taken a hold on Hovindologists.  I have followed it pretty lightly.  It is not a tax case which at however a removed level is the proper subject of this blog.  A recent post by Danielle Holm that she asks to be circulated really intrigues me, though.  It strikes me that the Holms are coming from a space that is quite different from the likes of Hovind and his merry band.

Danielle's piece is rather long and I feel the necessity of a bit of background for readers who may be entirely new to all these matters, so there may be some things you can skip.

Kent Hovind

Kent Hovind is an independent Baptist minister.  He holds the Young Earth Creationist view - a hyper literal reading of the Book of Genesis which when you are done summing up all those begats and tacking on seven days implies the world is about 6,000 years ago.

Hovind argues that there is scientific support for the YEC view and ran a theme park of sorts that focused on the implication in YEC that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. After a long prison sentence on tax related charges he is opening Dinosaur Adventure Land in Lenox, AL.

Doctor Dino, as he calls himself, seems to have never encountered a conspiracy theory he didn't like at least a little.  YEC requires the existence of a pretty vast conspiracy, since it flies in the face of "establishment science" in many areas most notably in denying evolution, but the cosmologists, physicists, geologists and astronomers will also have issues with it.

Hovind's tax troubles are rooted in another conspiracy theory which traces back to Irwin Schiff  and others who argue that the income tax is actually very narrow in its application.  Hovind weaves in a lot more than that.  If you have three hours to spare you can check out The Dangers of Evolution, which is as close as you will get to tying it all together.


Hovindologist is a term I have coined to describe the odd group of people who find Hovind both fascinating and appalling.  This distinguishes them from Hovind's fairly rabid supporters whom I dubbed Hovindicators.

In 2014-2015, Hovind faced a new set of charges as he was nearing release on his 2006 conviction.  He became a figure in the right wing conspiracy bubble, making it all the way to Alex Jones, but never making the leap to Fox, much to my chagrin, as I might have made some money if that had happened.

At any rate, first among Hovondoligists is retired IRS appeals officer, Robert Baty, who runs a Hovind dedicated Facebook site.  His focus tends to be on Hovind's "false legal narrative".  Hovind continue to maintain his innocence on the original charges that he served time for and people believe him.

The Baby Holm Case

The bare bones version of the Baby Holm case is that Christian and Danielle Holm were living off-the-grid.  Danielle was pregnant and when it came time to give birth in October 2016, they decided to go a hospital The Alabama Department of Human Resources took the child on the basis that the Holm's could not care for him properly.  This US District Court decision in December 2016 is a handy summary.

The Hovind Holm Connection

Christian and Danielle found themselves receiving encouragement from some Hovind supporters, most notably Brady Byrum.  Brady Byrum is an autodidact legal researcher. in the tradition of Irwin Schiff who is responsible for the latest Hovindication effort.

It is a little murky, but based on Robert Baty's research it appears that Brady Byrum also offered his legal assistance to the Holms.

So now Christian and Danielle besides being blessed or cursed with the support of some Hovindicators find themselves under the scrutiny of Hovindoligist in chief Robert Baty, who has another facebook site that he dedicates to them.

The Sovereign Citizen Connection

Connecting Kent Hovind to the Sovereign Citizen movement is a reasonable step.  In the United States anyway, the sovereign citizens tend to accept some sort of historical legitimacy of the United States and have some point where it went wrong.  Hovind, who is not really that systematic a thinker, will apparently support numerous versions.

A classic sovereign narrative though is that it was all good until - the fourteenth amendment, the federal reserve, going off the gold standard, the sixteenth amendment, whatever.  From there they can create a parallel legal system that runs the way they think it should - Paul John Hansen's "court of record" is an example.  Ed Brown styles himself a "constitutional ranger".

The Holms Are Different

The reason I am reproducing Danielle's statement is that it convinces me that Christian and Danielle are coming from an entirely different space.  To the extent that you can legitimately place people with fringe views on a left/right continuum, they strike me as much more left than right.  Their Hovind connection appears to be one of those random things that crop up from time to time.  With that said here is Danielle's statement.  Any emphasis have been added by me.

Danielle Holm Statement

I still truly do not know what self-proclaimed "sovereign citizens" believe in. We have been called that by those trying to oppose us, but we have never considered ourselves that, nor did we even know what that was until after our baby was kidnapped and people started flocking to us, telling us they could help us, etc...Being in a vulnerable position after having our baby kidnapped, and never being involved with law or courtrooms EVER, we were at first accepting of what we thought was "love" of others wanting to help us. Some of them had the tactics of sovereign citizens. We did not know this at the time. We were simply learning all while having the pressure of our baby being held, hostage. Some of these people may truly have been trying to help, while others may have been trying to hurt. We may never know. We do not judge anyone, and we love all. However, if anyone has told anyone, that we are "sovereign citizens", and think we are better than anyone, you are being lied to. Again, we have nothing against ANYONE, no matter what they want to call themselves, and we do not even 100% know what this term means all the way, however we do know they stand for the artificial system, still with possessions, technology and devices, while we simply just want to live in Creation free of all of that. There is a major difference. We realized throughout this entire process, that NONE of that matters, and that the only thing that matters is SERVING LIFE within CREATION and NEVER breaking the ULTIMATE law which is LOVE/DO NO HARM. This is why we are NOT "sovereign citizens". They are fighting laws within the system. We do not wish to fight at all. About laws or anything. We simply just stand for creation and not destroying life.
However, what I can say is that we do not classify ourselves in ANY group. ANY "movement" or any herd at all. This is why we stay away from religion, politics, and anything else that forces one to "choose a side". We do not choose sides. We love all. It is literally THIS SIMPLE. We wish to LOVE all of CREATION. Done. That's it. It cannot be explained more than that. We do not have one specific belief over another, within the system of lies.
We do not feel one way is better than another way in the system of lies. We feel the entire system is a system of lies, and we feel if those people have the free will, to be WITHIN the system of lies, who are we to judge? We are not here to judge. We are not here to condemn. We are not here to take away the addictions of others and/or possessions, technology or devices. We are simply here to live our lives, speaking what we feel to be true, and allowing free will for others to decide what they want in their lives. All we are asking, is why do WE not have the free will if we so choose, to return to a more sustainable way of life, flowing within creation, flowing with the organic ground, growing our foods, near clean water, building our own tiny little shelter, and living our lives back to basics without the need for profit? Why can we not, go back to this way, without being labelled as a "sovereign citizen" or even a "danger to society" or a "terrorist?" We have not harmed anyone. We have not thought about harming anyone. We never would harm anyone. It literally could not be more simple. We just want to love all of creation and serve and protect life. We simply want to LIVE and LOVE without harming anything or anyone. Why is this impossible? In other words, why do those of you who oppose us, MAKE this impossible? Because on such a large planet, full of land and water, this SHOULDN'T be impossible. It is that the people who choose to remain in their way of life, are ON PURPOSE making it impossible for us, all while trapping us, and stripping away OUR free will.

Laws in general are for possessions. Laws are for those who wish to live within the artificial way of life, with technology, devices and possessions. We do NOT wish to live in this. We are trapped right now because everyone else is enslaved in this mentality. We dropped the technology when we were travelling and walking. We did not need it other than a simple phone for emergency because of HAVING to be forced back into the system of lies for absolute needs because there is nowhere to go, because people do not allow it because of their own desires for selfishness and greed. We dropped the artificial almost all the way. We only got pulled back in, because our baby was stolen for us wanting to live simply, and show people a way back to Creation. The people who defend those who trap us, set up a trap, when you walk away from the trap, they then invade your life, force you back in the trap, and then call you a hypocrite for being in the trap, they are forcing you into! how is this love? How is this FREE WILL? They trap you, and when they don't allow you to leave the trap, they call YOU a hypocrite for still being in the TRAP!! All while holding your own created organic being, that you created with LOVE hostage as leverage for staying IN the TRAP!

Where is the free will? Why are we not free to simply be within creation growing foods, getting clean water from streams, rivers, creeks, a well, like they used to? making our own clothes by hand? Washing and drying clothes by hand? Building our own shelter by hand? Living self sustainably? Why is this seen as crazy now? Just because man and woman have created technology means that we MUST be a part of that? Laws exist because they need to govern the possession way of life. What about those of us, who are mature enough to flow within creation and simply want to live that way of life? The only law in creation is to love one another and do no harm. We are mature enough to do that. So, this simply becomes a group of people forcing us into their religion, into their way of life, and stealing our child and using him as leverage for their purposes. It is nothing more than this. If not, why can't we simply just LIVE in Creation, in a tiny little home, like the olden days, with our baby boy? Why is this FREE WILL NOT allowed? Because of other people's addictions? So, our baby suffers without his father and mother because people are addicted to possessions?

How is this love? Where is the free will? Where is the place for those of us to go, who do not need to rely on the system of lies for our needs? Where is this place where we can be free, and safe from harm, and protect and love one another without the need of profit if one so chooses? Why is PROFIT mandatory in a world where we are supposed to have free will? How are we FREE if we MUST be a slave to survive and eat and drink water? Where is the place for us to be able to go once we decide and awaken and realize we have the free will to CHOOSE to pay for our food and water, or truly serve creation by tilling the earth and growing foods for ourselves and our neighbours? Where is this option for those who supposedly have the free will to do so? Or is there no more free will on this planet? If not, who is taking away our free will when the Creator gives 100% free will at all times? Why are we allowing our free will to be TAKEN from us? For those of you, who insist on taking away OUR free will, how would YOU feel, if we took away YOUR possessions? here is the difference, we wouldn't. Because we believe in true love. And we believe in FREE WILL. Forcing someone into your way, and taking away THINGS of others, is NOT love, let alone their CHILDREN.
People then say, you CAN do that, you just need to make a whole lot of money and continue to pay property/land taxes to do so. This is exactly my point. Why? This Earth is NOT a possession. This is land, the Creator gave us ALL to be FREE to be shepherds and stewards of. We are not asking anyone to lose all of their possessions and addictions that are destroying the planet. We are only asking why cant WE do that? Why does everyone else have free will to be addicted to their false comforts, luxuries, etc...but we do NOT have the free will to return back to creation? How will ANY of us return back to creation, if you do not allow those who WISH to, to do so?
Then they say, " they are lazy. They do not want to do anything." Another lie of those addicted to their way. We are absolutely not lazy. in fact, building your own shelter, growing your own foods, tending to your animals, living without possessions, but MAKING what is needed, learning to heal, naturally and effectively, being a midwife, etc..etc..etc... is HARD work. However, very much worth it when you realize just how much willpower and strength you gain in flowing with creation, rather than against it. We do not lack WILL POWER nor do we lack a WILLINGNESS to SERVE ALL DAY EVERYDAY OUR CREATOR And all of creation. What we LACK is the FREE WILL which has been taken by our brothers and sisters, to go find a place to do this, without having to be a SLAVE of PROFIT. This is what we lack. I say it again. We do NOT lack the WILL. We LACK the FREE WILL to do so. The Creator gave us free will. Man and woman have taken this away from us, and many others who wish to do the same.
Then people say, "well you went to the hospital, to have your baby, so you wanted help from the artificial system of lies then." without knowing the BACK story of how we were being TRAPPED OUTSIDE of the hospital by a group of PEOPLE so that we had NO other choice but to enter the 2 lesser of evil traps we were being forced into!! Without the PLACE TO GO for those who wish to simply live off the land within creation which is the very thing this post is about, it becomes nothing but traps everywhere because of the selfish and greedy hearts of all who wish to be within their OWN possessions. All we are asking for is for those of you to have the free will to live how YOU want, why do we not have the free will to live how WE want, without being TRAPPED by others, as long as we are not harming anyone, especially when the way WE want to live, is the way the Creator always originally intended for us to live, in service to ALL LIFE without destroying it? Everything is so backwards.
Look at how weak the human race has become? We are allowing technology and devices to live for us, rather than us live within our own willpower to serve all life. We have become weak, dumbed down, and selfish, lacking love for all of life. This is why most people do not care about what I am writing here. And this is why ALL empires FALL. They FALL because an EMPIRE on a foundation of LIES and selfishness separate from Creation creates greed, power tripping people, hierarchies and destruction of all resources given to us by the Creator.
There is NOT a population problem here on this planet! There is a selfishness problem on this planet. A greed problem on this planet, and if it were not for all of the artificial cities, that cause pollution, and all of the manmade problems, we would be living in ABUNDANCE. Instead of limiting their artificial addictions, they would rather take out the LIFE the Creator made, and destroy creation....where do they think they are going to get their artificial addictions when there is NO MORE LIFE and even they will cease to exist, from their own destruction?
People would rather defend, and stand up for artificial buildings and profitable ventures that destroy creation than stand up for LIFE. And they say "we" are a "danger"?? Do you see us, ripping children away from other people who are destroying creation? Do you see us kidnapping children from those who truly are dangerous to the planet? Who is truly dangerous? The ones actively seeking to limit the food and clean water on this planet for us to be able to eat and drink? Or the ones trying to find that path for those who CHOOSE to do so, to be able to do so, with their own free will?
We are simply seeking this path, and not asking anyone else to do anything more, or give up anything else. We are simply asking for the free will to go back to Creation without being harassed, having our family invaded and our child stolen because of choosing to live a closer to creation way of life. We are simply looking for a little corner of a place on this MASSIVE PLANET in which we can do so, and simply LIVE without bothering anyone, all while hopefully being able to HELP others. That's IT.
Why do we NOT have free will? This is the ULTIMATE gift from the Creator. Life will be destroyed for ALL without this gift. Not by US. BY those who steal our free will, they are only stealing the free will of ANYONE who wishes to return back to creation to be shepherds and stewards of. Overtime, the more people who wish to do so, who are not ALLOWED to, who are enslaved and entrapped by those still addicted to false pleasures and luxuries....overtime, there will be NO ONE left to serve and protect the planet that even gives them LIFE while here focused on oppressing others from returning to creation. Instead of oppressing others, maybe they should be spending their time, seeking a way, or a corner of the earth somewhere in which people like us can CHOOSE to go to, to serve creation, rather than living for PROFIT. Where is that CHOICE? Where is this corner of the earth, to return back to with our free will? Why are we oppressed? We will gladly go away, and live in this corner, and serve Creation and never harm a fly, if only given that free will to do so without being harassed, jailed, our children kidnapped and possibly even violated and/or assaulted further, for simply wanting to live within creation.
End Danielle's statment

The best historic analysis that would fit in with Danielle's view is that put out by Deep Green Resistance. Their answer to where we went wrong is civilization. 

  • Industrial civilization is killing all life on our planet, driving to extinction 200 species per day, and it won't stop voluntarily.
  • Global warming is happening now, at an astounding speed. The only honest solution is to stop industrial civilization from burning fossil fuels.
  • Most consumption is based on violence against people (human and non-human) and on degrading landbases across the planet.
  • Life on Earth is more important than this insane, temporary culture based on hyper-exploitation of finite resources. This culture needs to be destroyed before it consumes all life on this planet.
  • Humanity is not the same as civilization. Humans have developed many sane and sustainable cultures, themselves at risk from civilization.
  • Most people know this culture is insane and needs radical change, but don't see any way to bring the change about.
  • Unlike most environmental and social justice organizations, Deep Green Resistance questions the existence and necessity of civilization itself. DGR asks "What if we do away with civilization altogether?"
  • Unlike most environmental and social justice organizations, DGR asks "What must we do to be effective?", not "What will those in power allow us to do?"
  • DGR offers organized, reliable ways to promote sane ways of living and surviving the ongoing crisis.
DGR has a different answer than Danielle - Decisive Ecological Warfare

There is an odd concurrence in views between those who are with Kent Hovind and DGR.  The point at with YEC thinks the world began is the point at which DGR thinks it went wrong - civilization.

The other thing you will find in DGR is a strong rejection of patriarchy and an embrace of radical feminism.  And Hovindicators are nothing if not patriarchal.


Of course, if we get back into the middle, none of this has anything to do with what is in the best interests of the child.  It is tough to know whether the kid is better off wandering around with Danielle and Christian in search of a place where they can safely live a subsistence lifestyle or within the foster care system. 

Regardless, they would not be drawn to Kent Hovind's work camp/gulag/amusement park where you can ride three-wheelers and their theology is very much at odds with evangelical Christianity.  I think they might have done a little better if they had brushed with the system in an area of the country with more hippies and fewer fundamentalists.

I have issues with their world-view, but they have much more of my sympathy than the Hovindicators.

Peter J Reilly probably should not be spending time on this during tax season, but so it goes.


  1. Thanks for the coverage, Peter.

    Lots might be discussed, but in reading your article the following first caught my attention for purposes of commenting here.

    You wrote, in part:

    - "The bare bones version of the Baby
    - Holm case is that Christian and Danielle
    - Holm were living off-the-grid."

    I don't believe that is an accurate representation of what they were doing, and I don't think we will ever get the full details of what they were doing.

    From what I have read, they were traveling, into the grid the whole way except for, just maybe, having camped out a few nights without running water and electricity (which they fully utilized when it was near).

    Maybe I will have more to say later.

  2. Peter, reflecting on your admitted and limited view of the technical details involved in the Baby Holm custody issue, you wrote, in part:

    - "It is tough to know whether the kid
    - is better off wandering around with
    - Danielle and Christian in search of
    - a place where they can safely live
    - a subsistence lifestyle or within
    - the foster care system."

    That might be what is labeled a "false dichotomy".

    The facts and the law, I propose, are clear that Baby Holm was taken into State custody for good reason and has remained therein for about 17 months now, also for good reason, under the provisions of Alabama Code Sections 12-15-306 and 12-15-102.

    From the beginning, C. Clarke & Danielle Holm have espoused and promoted anti-government, sovcit theology, with the help of not only Brady Byrum but others of his sort, many of which have yet to be named.

    Even now, due to C. Clarke and Danielle Holm's refusal to work in good faith for the return of the child to their custody, it may be reasonably assumed that termination of parental rights has occurred or is in the process of occuring. The parents have, in recent days, been asked repeatedly to address the status of their case and they have refused to address it.

    It appears that, maybe sooner rather than later, Baby Holm will have a permanent adoptive family and that will be better for him and for his parents, C. Clarke & Danielle, who appear to have already moved on (except for the whining) and may be looking for someone to hand them all the free stuff they claim to desire.

    1. Essentially Christian and Danielle have an issue with civilization. They want to live in a world where we can free gather the abundance of nature, which, in their view, would be there for the taking were it not for all the greed, pollution etc.

      Then there is civilized society with its good points and bad points. We might tend to view Christian and Danielle as whacky misfits. And it is possible the kid might be better off with whacky misfits than he would be in foster care. It is kind of unknowable.

    2. I have myself said at times, Peter, that life is risky and that there are no guarantees.

      C. Clarke & Danielle had their opportunity and clearly demonstrated they don't want to parent Baby Holm. C. Clarke already was successful in getting out of parenting his older son. C. Clarke signed away his parental rights for him, and he should have been honorable enough to do the same for Baby Holm.

      They can whine away.
      They have a ready audience for their anti-government rhetoric clothed in religious rantings and mental illness.

      And whenever something negative comes Baby Holm's way, they will be set up to whine and complain ranting "I told you so".

      They might well have been able to convince the State of Alabama Baby Holm would be better off with them, but they were having none of that; it was their way or no way, and we see where that has gotten them (just where they may have wanted to be to begin with).

      Personally, I think their "back to nature" theology is all an act.

      They have lived and are living the good life.
      Danielle has walked away from her student loans.
      They travel.
      They got stuff.
      They are getting attention.

      As has been recently noticed, they wasted no time bailing C. Clarke out of jail in Maine when they through a sovcit fit before law enforcement (something about having a sovcit tag on their vehicle) and he got thrown in jail. They had a plan not to do that, but then, allegedly, C. Clarke got concerned about the dogs they kept with them that were left on the street with Danielle (who had called friends to come pick her up) and couldn't stand to stay in jail and made bail. Compare that to what they have said about the State of Alabama and its DHR system/workers and their willingness, if they were right, to let Baby Holm stay in the system.

      It would be laughable if the life of a baby were not at stake, and that is what makes the Baby Holm case a step above so many others who quibble over driver's licenses and birth certificates.

      Shame on C. Clarke & Danielle Holm and the lot of their promoters (i.e., Kent's Brady Byrum and Ernie Land and Rudy Davis, for example).

    3. I have the Holms' Maine incident and analysis archived at:


  3. I was unsuccessful in my attempts to get Danielle and/or C. Clarke Holm to discuss their case here, but Danielle has posted the following version of her false narrative. You can go to the link to the thread on her page for additional, subsequent posts from me and her and others.

    My immediate response is shown in the screenshot below. Go to link to find additional postings since; until such time as they may be archived here.

    (Begin quote.)

    From: Danielle Holm
    Date: March 18, 2018
    TIme: 6:55 PM MT

    We love Brady Byrum as a brother and will not veer away from our love for our brother, the same way we love all of our brothers.

    However, our "beliefs" if you will, have evolved since the kidnapping of our baby.

    It started off with us knowing something felt wrong our entire lives, but not 100% knowing why.

    We lived our lives.

    I have never been involved with courts, arrested, never been in trouble. Anytime I was pulled over it was thrown out. I have no record. Christian was arrested as a youngster a few times over stupid things just like any other teenager, but everything was always thrown out, therefore he too has no history or record.

    We had NO experience with courts, law, nothing. when your baby gets kidnapped and you are falsely accused and set up and people come to you saying they CAN and will help, and you are VULNERABLE, and the laws brought forth were CLEARLY broken by these people and WE KNOW because we LIVED it, that we were set up and assaulted, then obviously we are going to trust what someone says who knows law very well and how they operate and how things were originally "supposed" to be in regards to this country.

    After awakening more in our experiences in the court room, we realized 100% on our own that it is ALL fraud. therefore, we surpassed the need for these so called "codes" and belief systems of others (including "sov cit"), because we realized that we were being dragged onto a stage to play a game of fraud that does not exist to the Creator.

    We now adamantly tell you, NONE of these things you keep trying to drag us into matter to us or the Creator.

    Does this mean we have broken even mans laws?
    Does it mean we will?
    Does it mean that we will fight them on their laws?

    It just means we simply want to live our lives, as the Creator gave us to live, while being shepherds and stewards of the planet, and we will not infringe on anyone else.

    Why are we continuing to be infringed upon?

    (End quote.)

    1. Disregard my sentence below the URL(link) in the above message. That inclusion was unintended.

  4. As far as Kent hovind is concerned the state went out of its way to prosecute this man for alleged crimes that he never committed. The judge for sale is a self-proclaimed atheist there for having a slighted View and obviously having her own agenda is not able to judge fairly in this case. She should have removed herself from the case as she was not fit to judge it. I am from Pensacola Florida and I know about this case the state players involved should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law as they have gone against the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

    1. Check out the Dangers of Evolution number six (not five although that is also interesting), Hovind was preaching tax defiance, which he also practiced. It was perfectly reasonable for him to be the subject of investigation. They really didn't have to go out of their way.

    2. @ Anonymous

      Among others, Kent Hovind repeatedly committed the crime of "structuring" which he denies based on his false description of what "structuring" is, and that was related to his decades long crime of personal income tax evasion which he also denies based on his false legal notions.

      My challenge to Kent remains outstanding an unanswered:


  5. Oops! Posted this in your latest on Hovind, Peter, but I guess it "works" in both places. So, I'll repeat it here.


    Just another bit of trivia, but I think it goes to the subject of your article.

    Today, in the "Understanding the Baby Holm Case" FaceBook group, in addition to recent sightings of the Holms being reported from the Heflin, AL area, one of the informed locals has indicated that Kent Hovind's man Brady Byrum, was on location (having been staying at Kent's place near Lenox, AL for some time working on his "Hovind Is Innocent" DVD Series) with the Holms and one of their local promoters, Jonathan Payton, right after the birth of Baby Holm.

    Brady, of course, would go on to help the Holms promoter their sovcit, anti-government, anti-child welfare cause instead of working to get the baby back; and it worked like a charm.

    Brady and the bunch have a lot of secrets about all of that came to be, and the speculation continues as to just how it was the Holms came to be where they were come birthing time and how it was they took the course they did with so many sovcit sorts in tow and helping them display their wares and insure they would never have to parent Baby Holm.

    We may never know.

    Peter, have you ever tried to get Ernie Land, who first, to my knowledge, advised the world that Brady was secretly working to help the Holms and was planning to go nationwide with his anti-child welfare antics, to reveal to you what he really knows about all of that?