Time: Tue Jul 22 12:09:30 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA21205
for [address in tool bar]; Tue, 22 Jul 1997 12:09:30 -0700 (MST)
by usr01.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA06509;
Tue, 22 Jul 1997 11:52:11 -0700 (MST)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 11:51:40 -0700
To: <romans@gate.net>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Manufacturer's Statement of Origin ("MSO") (fwd)
Dear David,
Thanks so much for your precision insights here.
I have taken the liberty of forwarding your comments
to all clients of the Supreme Law School. In the
future, if you want your messages to remain private,
please let me know, somewhere in the heading or
subject line. You are such a public figure now,
we automatically put your comments in the public
domain, so you must let us know if and when this
presumption of ours is incorrect, or inappropriate.
And, keep it comin'!!
Best regards,
/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com
<snip>
>
>Subject: Re: SLS: Manufacturer's Statement of Origin ("MSO")
>
>Paul:
>
>While you are correct as to the ownership of titled motor vehicles, there
>is also the legislative intent which attaches to the proper application of
>of the statutes. The title statutes are anti-theft provisions enacted to
>deal with that problem. Their use in any manner inconsistent is perfidy.
>It also constitutes theft by deception, fraudulent conveyance, and
>counterfeiting [just to name a few]. The fact that this is multi-state
>and an on-going criminal enterprise makes the entire mess ripe for a civil
>RICO action by any injured party [necessary for standing].
>
>Under the property rights protected by the Constitution and the
>requirements of an adversarial court system, the state has no jurisdiction
>to interfere in the conduct of a citizen [or whatever you call it] unless
>upon proper complaint of an injured party. When the state has an
>incidence of ownership, then it can protect that property interest
>notwithstanding that there is no injured party.
>
>I have heard claims that unless the police had the authority to stop
>motorists and haul them off to jail and/or court, then there would be caos
>on the roads, our courts would be jammed, and our prisons would be full.
>It's a good thing we built a lot more facilities so this wouldn't happen
>in America.
>
>One parting note: When the high mucky-mucks were engineering the law to
>make this scheme possible throughout the land, at least one of the Supreme
>Court Justices visited bar associations and bragged about how this "new
>system" would more than tripple the work for judges and lawyers; and how
>they would all make lots of money. Now, that kidnapping and extortion are
>legal for those with the proper license, does this conduct resemble the
>common definition of "organized crime"?
>
>/David
>
>P.S. In case you are wondering, it was Justice Clark who did the
>boasting. The effectiveness of these anti-theft provisions is
>self-evident. Consider the possibility of busting the largest auto theft
>ring in history as truly revolutionary.
========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine
tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best
Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone
Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
========================================================================
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail