"Sovereign Citizen" Walks Out of Court... Judge Sentences Him to 25 Days

A Colorado man cited as a "sovereign citizen" walks out of his own traffic trial mid-hearing, claiming the court has no jurisdiction — and the judge doesn't let it slide. 📍 THE CASE: What started as a routine traffic citation (speeding 25-39 over on Riverside Parkway, back in 2023) escalated when the defendant, Mr. Forenza, refused to approach the bench during his own trial. After repeated warnings from the judge to come forward and participate, he told the court it had "no jurisdiction," walked out of the courtroom — and out of the building entirely, while 30 jurors and witnesses waited. ⚖️ THE CONTEMPT RULING: The judge cites Colorado Rule 407 (Rules of Civil Procedure) on direct contempt — conduct occurring in the court's presence that's "so extreme no warning is necessary." The judge walks through the full legal standard on record before offering Mr. Forenza the right to counsel, which he declines, choosing to represent himself. 🗣️ THE ARGUMENT: Forenza invokes classic sovereign-citizen language — claiming status as a "secured party creditor" and an "attorney in fact representing the estate," arguing the case should be "set off and discharged." The prosecution (Mr. McCall) pushes back, noting Colorado traffic law applies regardless, while still leaving the door open for a plea deal on the underlying citation. 🔨 THE SENTENCE: The judge finds no good faith in the defendant's conduct and hands down 25 days in jail for direct contempt — separate from the underlying traffic case, which now has a new trial date set for July 8th, 2026. This is real, unedited US courtroom footage sourced directly from official court channels — no dramatization, no reenactment. Just what actually happened, start to finish. #courtroom #sovereigncitizen #contempt #judge #realcourt 🔔 Subscribe to Bench Talk for more real US courtroom footage — sovereign citizens, contempt hearings, and courtroom drama every week. ⚖️ LEGAL DISCLAIMER / FAIR USE: This video is for educational, commentary, and news-reporting purposes only. The footage used is protected under the Fair Use guidelines of Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976, which allows for the use of copyrighted material for purposes such as criticism, comment, and news reporting. I do not claim ownership of the original courtroom or police footage. All rights remain with the respective copyright holders. This content is intended to provide critical analysis and insight into the events shown. No legal advice is provided, and this channel is for entertainment/educational purposes only.