Time: Sun Nov 24 19:41:19 1996
To: liberty@hollyent.com
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Bernie Oliver Defense Fund
Cc: 
Bcc: Liberty Law


>>1st:  There will be another trial irregardless what the ruling is on the 
>>motion to dismiss.

Such tactics should be re-examined
in light of what is inserted below.

/s/ Paul Mitchell


  You see, the state filed additional charges after
>>the initial Grand Jury Indictment.


State grand juries are assembled from
voter registration lists, and voter
registration lists in Arizona are
fraudulent, because affiant must verify,
under penalty of perjury, that s/he is
a federal citizen.  Penalty for false
registrations is a class 6 felony.

/s/ Paul Mitchell


 They are trying those charges separately 
>>(my guess is so they would have prior convictions).
>>Ken.
>
>     You are correct, Ken.  My so-called PD informed me that he had informed
>Evans of the AG's office that he knew that I wouldn't be a plea-bargain
>candidate-- that I would refuse one.  The PD told me that Evans said, "He
>will be after we finish with him on the first incictment".  
>
>     W R O N G, Mr. Evans!  
>
>Bernie


Bernie,

The evidence now shows that:

1.  Elizabeth Broderick was relying
    upon a fraudulent commercial lien.

2.  Nora Manella was (is) not a U.S.
    Attorney, contrary to numerous
    pleadings she has filed in USDC, L.A.

3.  Elizabeth Broderick Seminars were
    allowed to continue, to expand the
    number of victims of the sting.

This is classic entrapment, and if you
utilized one of her warrants, you should
remove the entire matter into the proper
federal court (DCUS) on this federal 
question, i.e. Nora Manella's lack of
credentials, and evidence suggesting
that Broderick may be a federal informer.

I am sure you can think up other federal
questions, because the feds are into
everything these days.  It won't really
matter what you allege is your federal
question, because the DCUS cannot proceed
until Chief Justice Rehnquist sorts out
the many problems that arise from the
fact that not one federal judge is currently
immune from federal income taxes upon their
compensation, in violation of Article III.
See Evans v. Gore, S.Ct. (1921).  I can help
you with the removal action;  it is rather
routine, actually.  The correct procedure
is to petition the DCUS for a Warrant of
Removal, then an Order to the U.S. to show
cause why its alleged agent(s) should not be
charged with perjury, fraud, entrapment, 
etc.  Nora Manella would be named in this
Application for OSC.  

Got it?

In summary:  remove your case into the DCUS,
where it will stalemate the federal judiciary
until Rehnquist acts on the Demand for 
Temporary Assignment of a qualified federal
judge (i.e. one whose compensation is not
being diminished by federal income taxes).

For details, see URL  http://www.supremelaw.com

click on "Karma and the Federal Courts"

Good Luck!!

/s/ Paul Mitchell

<snip>
      

Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail