NOTICE OF REFUSAL FOR CAUSES,
TO: Ms. Sherri R. Carter
312 North Spring Street, Suite G-8
Los Angeles 90012
FROM: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General and Damaged Party
DATE: November 4, 2004 A.D.
SUBJECT: false statements in your letter dated Nov. 2, 2004 A.D.
Greetings Ms. Carter:
Your letter dated November 2, 2004 A.D. is hereby refused for reasons including, but not limited to, the following:
(1) the federal statute at 5 U.S.C. 2906 very clearly identifies the “court” as the legal custodian of the OPM Form 61 Appointment Affidavits required of all federal justices, judges, district clerks and deputy district clerks by 5 U.S.C. 3331;
(2) the Administrative Office of the United States Courts is not a “court;
(3) a proper and lawful SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE was served upon that Administrative Office on August 6, 2004 A.D. (see pertinent copies attached);
(4) that Administrative Office has now failed timely to answer said SUBPOENA in any manner whatsoever;
(5) that Administrative Office is now in contempt of court for having failed timely to answer said SUBPOENA;
(6) as a direct consequence of that failure to answer by the Administrative Office, the Oath required of anyone claiming to occupy your office also assumes facts that are not now in evidence.
NOTICE OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION
Accordingly, I regret to inform you that, as a consequence of the above facts which are expressly verified below, you are now under formal investigation on suspicion of committing fraud, mail fraud, impersonation, obstruction of justice and conspiracy to engage in a pattern of racketeering activities. See Title 18, U.S. Code.
Pursuant to the holdings of the U.S. Supreme Court in Counselman v. Hitchcock, 142 U.S. 547, 563 (1892), McCarthy v. Arndstein, 266 U.S. 34, 40 (1924), George Smith v. U.S., 337 U.S. 137 (1949), and Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), formal NOTICE is hereby given to you that you have the Right to remain silent, under the Fifth Amendment; you have the Right to assistance of Counsel, under the Sixth Amendment; and, any thing which you say, or do, from this point forward, can and will be held against you in the District Court of the United States and/or in the Superior Court of California. See the federal statute at 18 U.S.C. 3231 (DCUS) and Tafflin v. Levitt. Statutes conferring original jurisdiction must be strictly construed [cites omitted here].
I, Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., Sui Juris, Private Attorney General and Damaged Party, hereby verify under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without the “United States” (federal government), that the above statement of facts and laws is true and correct, according to the best of my current information, knowledge and belief, so help me God, pursuant to the federal statute at 28 U.S.C. 1746(1). (The Constitution, Laws and Treaties of the United States are all the supreme Law of the Land.)
Dated: November 4, 2004 A.D.
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Damaged Party, Superior Court of California #GIC807057
Copies: Preferred Services, Long Beach, California
U.S. Marshals (various cities)
Administrative Office of the United States Courts