Time: Sat Nov 16 16:26:39 1996 To: joyce@mlode.com From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: ALERT: VIGIL PLANNED Cc: Mike Kemp Bcc: At 02:37 PM 11/16/96 -0800, you wrote: >Well...somehow you seem to be getting involved in this. I won't give you >my opinion on the situation unless you ask for it. Joyce, We cannot ask you for professional advice without paying for it. What is your standard rate? /s/ Paul Mitchell >Now somehow Dot is trying to get me involved in it. It appears to be >the classic situation I often encounter. "I have no money and it is the >13th hour. Can you help me?" Well, what are you going to suggest? > Joyce Dear Joyce, Mike sent me the retainer, first class U.S. mail, but with no zip code (my preference). Now, USPS has delayed the mail, probably due to no zip code. So, we have our federal question, yes? This delay goes to effective assistance of Counsel, a fundamental Right under the Sixth Amendment, and probably also under the Alabama state constitution. Since I have been stiffed for so much money by several clients, who were led to believe I was a deep cover government agent, I cannot work without the retainer. "A man is worthy of his hire." So, here's the intermediate tactic, which Mike and I developed on the telephone about 2 hours ago: 1. Motion to Continue, pending preparation of new Counsel (they are rushing Mike; Mike will use this to slow them down); 90 days, or 60 in the alternative 2. If judge denies, then we Motion for Reconsideration and Stay of Sentencing 3. If judge denies, Motion for Court to Produce Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 4. If judge refuses, we are up to the appellate court with a Mandamus, compelling him to produce Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (we need this for interlocutory appeal infra) 5. If judge agrees, the record will have appealable issues in the Findings and Conclusions memorandum 6. Petition Appellate Court for Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Order (i.e. denial of continuance, when it directly jeopardizes effective assistance of Counsel) 7. If judge gets nasty about a non-bar licensed Counsel (Me), we submit judicial notice re: original 13th Amendment, and Full Faith and Credit Clause; now we call Joyce in for the howitzer treatment! :) 8. All the while these quick briefs are giving the State of Alabama headaches, we are working on our Petition to the District Court of the United States for Warrant of Removal, on the federal question(s) raised in the record, e.g. delayed mail due to lack of zip code (this will nail the USPS for violating federal law: USPS cannot discriminate against first class U.S. Mail for lacking zip codes) 9. The rest is confidential and available only under non-disclosure agreement with the Supreme Law Firm. I have half of next week, and all of next weekend, to prepare necessary papers. Mike, I am copying this to you. Please submit Notice and Demand for Proof of Credentials to all government players: they MUST have oaths of office and delegation of authority, and also bond (or surety) on their offices. This will jam up the proceeding even faster. You will allege that none of the actors has credentials; that shifts the burden back to them to produce proof of their authority (if any). /s/ Paul Mitchell >Return-path: <DotHB@aol.com> >Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 15:37:45 -0500 >From: DotHB@aol.com >Message-ID: <961116153744_350440628@emout13.mail.aol.com> >To: joyce@mlode.com >Subject: Fwd: ALERT: VIGIL PLANNED > >Joyce > >Paul is an attorney. Mike has NO money. > >Is it possible to get something together so that Mike could >carry this into federal court - pro se. "Pro Se" in Latin means "For It". Mike is not an "it"; he is a proper Person. Therefore, his pleadings will be titled "In Propria Persona" = "In His Proper Person" (not "person"; there is a big difference) Confer in Black's Law Dictionary, any edition. He will also enter his pleadings: "Under Protest, Necessity, and By Special Visitation Only" /s/ Paul Mitchell > >Moving it and delaying the sentencing on November 25, >sounds impossible to me. > >Dot Bibee > >--------------------- >Forwarded message: >From: pmitch@primenet.com (Paul Andrew Mitchell) >To: DotHB@aol.com >Date: 96-11-15 19:46:01 EST > >Dot, > >Kemp's retainer money is reported >to be "in transit," because he >failed to use Express Mail. > >I am proposing that he file >a Motion to Continue, pending >availability of time for his >new Counsel to get up to speed. > >This is a routine motion, which >can only be denied by depriving him of >the fundamental Right to effective >assistance of Counsel (see Sixth >Amendment). We may need someone >to loan him the retainer, if the >first payment does not arrive >in time. Because I have been stiffed >for over $25,000 in fees, I am not >in a position to work either pro bono >or on contingency. I regret that >this has happened, but it has made >it absolutely necessary that I be >compensated for my time. > >/s/ Paul Mitchell > > > >At 09:22 AM 11/15/96 -0500, you wrote: >>Paul >> >>I am very encouraged. Thanks for helping Mike. He is a great guy!!! >> >>Keep me informed and I will pass this along. >> >>Dot Bibee >> >> > >=========================================================== >Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.: pmitch@primenet.com >ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state >=========================================================== > > > >
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail