Time: Sun Mar 16 15:47:21 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA10930;
	Sun, 16 Mar 1997 15:29:58 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 1997 15:30:23 -0800
To: conchr-l@xc.org
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: JUROR WARNING
References: <3.0.1.16.19970316065405.295f9d34@mailhost.primenet.com>

Dear Lane et al., 

I would have to agree, at least in part,
with your reservations about jury competence.

Our research has proven, beyond any doubt,
that the federal Jury Selection and Service
Act is demonstrably unconstitutional for
exhibiting prohibited class discrimination
against Citizens of the several States who
are not also citizens of the United States.
Confer at "Federal citizenship" in Black's
Law Dictionary.  

The same problem with the federal JSSA does 
also exist with the jury selection processes 
of the several States, if not ALL of them.
  
Our challenge is meant to force a thorough review 
of the entire jury selection and service process, 
including, of course, the evidence now available
proving widespread kick-backs to federal officers 
who come in contact with federal juries, both
grand and trial ("petit"), in any way.  After all,
indictments and convictions are their "score cards,"
no?  

Thus, federal prosecutors will need to answer 
our key questions concerning the "awards" which 
Mr. Zolton has admitted, in writing, are being
paid in cash -- yes, CASH! -- for federal grand
jury indictments which are issued against the
President's political "enemies" (read "illegal
tax protesters").  Now, THERE is an oxymoron
if there ever was one.  Protest has NEVER been
illegal in America, rendering this phrase a
telling admission that the "tax is illegal",
not the protest, and certainly not the 
protesters!  

I do not know why Kriho has not taken up these 
challenges, since Colorado's voter registration 
affidavit tells the whole story (as do lots of 
other states' voter registration practices). 
 
For more details, see the voting rights essays 
in the Supreme Law Library at URL:

  http://www.supremelaw.com

On the issue of O.J., juries are under no *obligation*
to convict a defendant whom they regard as guilty,
particularly if there has been gross prosecutorial
misconduct.  More justice may be done by reining in
a "criminal" prosecutor (read "prosecutor who is a 
criminal"), so as to prevent the worst kind of justice 
-- convicting the innocent in the future, and making
a "practice" of it.  See the published writings of
Gary Wean (sp?) for some background on the O.J. trial,
which never made it (and never WILL make it) into the
mainstream (medieval) media.

/s/ Paul Mitchell

p.s.  Letter from Mark L. Zolton now follows:
 
                   Department of the Treasury
                    Internal Revenue Service
                     Washington, D.C. 20224
                                
                                
                       September 12, 1996
                                
Mr. Paul A. Mitchell                           Person to Contact:
2509 North Campbell - #1776                    M. Zolton
Tucson, AZ 85719                               Telephone Number:
                                               (202) 622-6250
                                               Refer Reply to:
                                               96-1911

Dear Mr. Mitchell:

     This is in reponse to your July 26, 1996, Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) request for all financial records of the
Performance Management and Recognition System (PMRS).  Your
request was forwarded to us by the Office of Disclosure Services,
Department of the Treasury, so that we can respond to you
directly.  We apologize for the delay in responding.

     Unfortunately, your request is not specific enough to allow
us to conduct a search for the records that are of interest to
you.  For example, you have not stated the years for which you
are interested in obtaining records.  Please be advised that the
PMRS has not existed for the last 3 years.  In addition, it is
our understanding that awards made under PMRS took the form of   <--!! PM
cash payments or quality step in-grade promotions.  Therefore,   <--!! PM
the types of financial records associated with awards made under
PMRS did not include the kinds of records mentioned in your
request.  It would be helpful if you could be more specific in
descibing the desired records.

     Accordingly, you may wish to reformulate your request to
assist us in finding the responsive material.  If you decide to
do so, your perfected request will receive our close attention.

                                               Sincerely yours,

                                               /s/ Mark L. Zolton

                                               Tax Law Specialist
                                               FOIA Branch



At 04:16 PM 3/16/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote:
>
>>>  she explained the historic role of jury nullification to her fellow
>>>  jurors.  Kriho was sentenced to a $1,200 fine several months after 
>>>  a mock hearing (without a jury of course) by an openly vindictive
>>>  judiciary. 
>
>Since the most recent notorious use of "jury nullification" was the O.J.
>criminal trial, I have a rather poor view of that process right now.
>
>Lane
>----
>Lane Lester / <mailto:llester@athens.net> / Athens, Georgia USA
>---- 
>Never mistake knowledge for wisdom.  One helps you make a 
>living; the other helps you make a life. Sandra Carey
>------------------------------------------------------
>You can unsubscribe from this conference at any time.
>Just send the command: unsubscribe conchr-l to <HUB@XC.ORG>
>
>

      


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail