Time: Tue Nov 26 05:41:49 1996 To: jbullock@freemarketnetwork.com From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: Title 18 on military bases only? Cc: Bcc: Sixth Amendment: "... to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor ...." /s/ Paul Mitchell At 12:05 AM 11/26/96 -0500, you wrote: >Paul, > >Where does the authority for the >"extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction" >come from? > >In peace. > >Jim Bullock > > > > >Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote: >> >> 18 USC 1513 contains explicit language >> extending this statute with "extra-territorial >> application." Now, you might ask yourself, >> why is this qualifier not found in more >> statutes within Title 18? So, at least >> this one statute can be enforced within >> the several States of the Union, unlike >> the others which have no application >> outside the federal zone. So, I agree >> with LeRoy, but only in part, because of >> the obvious exception found in 18 USC 1513. >> Confer at "inclusio unius est exclusio >> alterius" in Black's Law Dictionary. >> See also U.S. v. Lopez, S.Ct. (1995); >> this is the really big case on this >> subject. >> >> /s/ Paul Mitchell >> >> >Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 19:27:55 -0800 (PST) >> >From: Charles Stewart <chuck@teleport.com> >> >To: Timothy Lee <timr@efn.org>, commonlaw@teleport.com >> >Subject: Re: ComLaw> Appeal or Cert? (fwd) >> > >> >On Mon, 25 Nov 1996, Timothy Lee wrote: >> > >> >> Charles Stewart wrote: >> > >> >Ah, Mr Richardson, >> > >> > So good to hear form you. >> > >> > But a quick correction here sir, I did not wright this message, >> >I only forwarded out what was composed by others. >> > >> > You are echoing Rick Schramm, of Right Way Law, True? >> > >> > And are you doing your Deprivation of Constitutionally Secured >> >Rights Suits under title 42 or 18? LeRoy Schwetzer says that Title 18 >> >only applies on military bases, and I presume tha same holds true for 42. >> > >> > And have you thought about Commonlaw Tort actions? And if not, why >> >not? They seem as good as anything else to me. It looks from the books >> >that they can do anything a t42 can do. >> > >> > Your comments would be appreciated. Your welcome to respond to >> >the entire list on this also, if you prefer. >> > >> > >> >Charles Stewart . . . >> > >> > >> >> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> >> > Date: 25 Nov 1996 07:35:16 U >> >> > From: John Burr <john.burr@qmail.eonetworks.com> >> >> > >> >> > John: >> >> > Could you put this question out to your law mailing list? >> >> > >> >> > I have a friend who has done a title 42 against a bunch of the judges and >> >> > local district attorney. The scenario is basically this: >> ><snip> >> >> > Does anyone see any good issues for Cert here? We would like to get into >> >> > the supreme court if possible. How can we frame the Cert so that an >> >> > appeal from the appellate court goes there as of right if we are denied? >> >> > >> >> > Your help is appreciated, >> >> > Kevin Haddock >> >> > Dixianne Hawks >> >> >> >> >> >> Do NOT appeal this case. In the 1st place, when you appeal, you as the >> >> appeallant are certifying that EVERY MATERIAL FACT IN THE RECORD IS >> >> TRUE; all you are "appealing" is some procedureal error. The whole >> >> appeal process was developed by judges, for judges and was designed >> >> specifically to protect judges from an angry populace for mistakes on >> >> the bench. >> >> >> >> In the 2nd place, appeals are not a right under the Common Law and in >> >> fact there are rules and Supreme Court Case law which specifically state >> >> that Citizens do not have a "right" to an appeal -- it is a process >> >> which can be withheld or allowed at whim. >> >> >> >> Certiorari on the other hand is a process whereby the Judge gets to >> >> certify the record as being complete, and then it is sent up to the >> >> reviewing panel where both procedure and facts can be reviewed. Once >> >> the Certiorari is in, then you submit various writs of errors to the >> >> reviewing panel. >> >> >> >> However, my guess is that this STILL won't do you any good as my guess >> >> is that you filed the case in the "United States District Court" under >> >> 42 USC >> >> 1985 or 1983? The Common Law as preserved in the Constitution must be >> >> brought into the court properly and via procedure. The United States >> >> District Court is a court of the territories and doesn't have >> >> jurisdiction to hear the case you are trying to bring. They admit the >> >> case of course, but then when they decide to judicially >> >> rape/pillage/plunder, they can, since the venue and jurisdiction are >> >> both wrong to begin with. >> >> >> >> We do Deprivation of Constitutionally secured rights suits regularly and >> >> we teach the process too. Drop me a line if you want to. >> >> >> > >> > >> >> =========================================================== >> 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