Time: Tue May 06 21:02:49 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA10760
	for [address in tool bar]; Tue, 6 May 1997 18:33:26 -0700 (MST)
Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 20:36:51 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: [LEADERS] SLS: Open question for Leroy Schweitzer

Dear America and LeRoy Schweitzer,

Since you have not answered any of my recent
mail, and since you have done absolutely nothing
to date to help, or even inquire, as to the fate
of the invoice for professional services which
Mr. Randy Parsons asked me to prepare, and submit,
to the Freedom Center in Billings, Montana state,
I now have a few pointed questions for you, and
I do feel that you have a legal and moral obligation
to answer these questions, because we had a contract,
which you and your associates have breached quite
deliberately, as far as I can tell.

So, here is question #1:  

You claimed to be an expert in American banking laws
and procedures, particularly when you began to teach
your seminars, which people traveled from great distances,
in some cases, to attend.  Setting aside some of the
obvious controversies that erupted as a result of your
associates' position with respect to other human races,
I want to put a much more direct question to you about
the fate of the commercial warrants which you were 
promoting, and using, to purchase equipment, discharge
debt, and do a number of other things.  So, here goes:

If you were so educated in commercial banking law, that
you could attract students from all over the country,
are you asking me, and others, to believe that you had
no idea what would happen to these commercial warrants,
when you and others tried to clear them through banks,
credit card companies, the Internal Revenue Service, 
mortage lenders, and the like?

It would seem to be a rather risky proposition to 
encourage heavy traffic in these warrants, without
first having assembled a jury of peers, in a court
of competent jurisdiction, such as the local county
district court (like the one where I filed the Petition 
for TRO to keep the feds from shooting you to death).  

Would you agree, or disagree, with this statement?

By the way, I totally disagee with your construction
of the term "one supreme Court" as that term is used
in the U.S. Constitution.  I believe that "one" means
one, as in "one, two, three."  But, you are surely
entitled to your opinion, and I mine.

If you do agree that it was a rather risky proposition,
in light of all your fore-knowledge about the likely
fate of these commercial warrants, then why didn't you
get declaratory relief from a jury of peers first,
before touting them as the silver-bullet solution
to all IRS debts and the like?  I mean, I had people
flocking to me with PROOF that the U.S. Postmaster
was actually honoring these warrants.  "LeRoy Schweitzer
told me so," they said.

I am asking this question, because the evidence available
to me now indicates that each and every one of those
commercial warrants has eventually worked its way 
straight into the hands of the FBI, whereupon the FBI
handed them over to the local offices of the United
States Attorney, criminal investigation division.
See the article from the Dallas Morning News concerning
the so-called "Freeman Tentacle," as Morris Dees calls it.

Did it not occur to you that this kind of thing might
happen, and probably involve hundreds, if not thousands,
of people in the need to defend themselves before a
very hostile federal judiciary?  and spend scarce 
resources on legal assistance, filing fees, and process
servers?  and fines, penalties, forfeitures, and probably
also bankruptcies, if and when lenders foreclosed on 
home mortgages?  

Please answer yes, or no.

You will note that the Justice Department is now, apparently,
using a successor to the PROMIS software which they stole
from the Inslaw company, and then bribed a federal judge
to uphold the theft, all the while they were exploiting
the vast power of this software to access electronic
banking records and record-match their way to a field day
with the types of electronic information which could be
assembled, as these commercial warrants and associated
electronic records worked their way through the network
of electronic banking databases which now litter the
nation's landscape.  

Maybe you were never well enough informed of the
heavy investment which American banks have made
in high-powered computers during the past 20 years.

Again, since you were touting yourself as a banking expert,
I would have expected you to be thoroughly familiar with
this technology as well.  I am, because I have done systems
programming for a large investment bank, and I can tell
you that writing a purchase order for another million
dollars worth of computer hardware was a regular 
occurrence at the investment bank where I consulted
for about a year.  These were certified checks, and not
commercial warrants which were based on a new instrument
which was unproven in the banking world.

I hope I haven't compromised your privacy, or your defense,
with these difficult and pointed questions, but my hindsight
tells me that you may have been a tad negligent to get so
many people on your bandwagon (bankwagon), just as it ran
out of gas.  I would expect you to say the very same things
about me, if I had been in your shoes, and you in mine.

By the way, have you tried to walk a mile in my moccasins lately?
I have been where you are:  I lectured at Elizabeth Broderick's
seminars, but when I started to ask questions about the rubber
stamp "U S CRIMINAL COURT" which she used to press ink on her
"perfected" commercial lien, they loaned me a car with tampered
front brakes and, when that failed, they gutted the legal office
I was assembling to develop a decent civil and criminal defense in
her two cases, with 4 other defendants who also refuse to answer
any of my mail now.  Do you agree with me that there is a real
pattern developing here, a pattern which is not of my own 
making, but one which is being imposed upon me from the outside?

By the way, the FBI stole the best videotape I have ever made:
it was the lecture which I gave after a stirring Easter sermon
which a Paulist Father gave for our benefit, just one week
earlier.  I veered away from federal law to share some personal
things, and I took the opportunity to relate the same story which
Father Dougherty had told, about a prostitute who became best
friends with the Maker of the Universe.  I am telling you this,
in case you ever have a chance to view this movie.  I won't,
because the FBI has it, and they won't return it.  Please do
let me know if they ever show it to you.  Or, should I say,
please let me know if you ever plan to show it to Us again,
some day soon.

I await your sincere and considerate response.


/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com



========================================================================
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.    : Counselor at Law, federal witness
email:       [address in tool bar]   : Eudora Pro 3.0.1 on Intel 586 CPU
web site:  http://www.supremelaw.com : library & law school registration
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
========================================================================

===========================================================
  L.E.A.D.E.R.S. email list:  your one-stop legislative
  action list.  To subscribe, send an email to:

               leaders-l-info@logoplex.com

  leave the subject blank, and the body of the message as:

                 subscribe leaders-l

  Be sure to visit our website at:

        http://www.logoplex.com/resources/leaders/
===========================================================

      


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail