Registered U.S. Mail No. ________________________________________
Return Receipt Requested
Restricted Delivery Requested
FORMAL REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION
FROM: Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law and federal witness
c/o 2509 North Campbell, #1776
Tucson, Arizona state
TO: Grand Jury Foreperson and the Grand Jury
In re: New Life Health Center Company
Grand Jury Room, Fourth Floor
U.S. DISTRICT COURTHOUSE
55 E. Broadway
Tucson, Arizona state
DATE: April 28, 1996
Dear Foreperson:
This is our formal request that you and the other members of
the federal grand jury conduct a full and immediate investigation
into our allegations that U.S. Attorney Robert Miskell, and
possibly also other accomplices of his within the Department of
Justice and the "Internal Revenue Service", have committed Mail
Fraud, Jury Tampering, and Obstruction of Justice in the matter
of the New Life Health Center Company (see U.S.D.C. #GJ-95-1-6).
We have attached a considerable amount of written materials
to substantiate the fact that, on September 25, 1989, Assistant
U.S. Attorney Robert Miskell was sanctioned $4,797 by the U.S.
District Court Judge in the case of U.S. v. Nordbrock et al. for
repeatedly lying to that Court. We argue that such a sanction
should give this grand jury pause to consider the credibility,
and motives, of Robert Miskell whenever he approaches you in the
matter of the New Life Health Center Company, and possibly also
other cases which he may bring before you, including but not
limited to "illegal tax protestor" cases.
We have also attached a considerable amount of written
materials to substantiate our allegation that Mr. Miskell, and
possibly other accomplices of his within the Department of
Justice and also the "Internal Revenue Service", have either
delayed, diverted, and/or obstructed our PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
to you, dated March 20, 1996, and sent via Registered U.S. Mail,
USPS serial number #R-591-643-753, Return Receipt Requested and
Restricted Delivery Requested. This PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION was
subsequently incorporated by reference as an exhibit in our
AFFIDAVIT OF CAUSES AND OBJECTIONS TO O.S.C., which was filed
with the Clerk of the U.S. Distict Court, District of Arizona, on
April 25, 1996. A copy of the completed AFFIDAVIT of April 25,
1996, is attached for your information.
Formal Request for Investigation:
Page 1 of 9
One of the Exhibits attached to our original PRIVILEGED
COMMUNICATION to you included a page from the IRS Internal
Revenue Manual, Handbook of Delegation Orders, page 1229-80,
(dated 4-3-91), Delegation of Personnel-Related Matters, Chart 2,
in which the Deputy Commissioner is delegated authority to do the
following:
Approve monetary awards and exceptions to monetary award
scales up to and including $10,000 for any one individual or
group, and incur necessary expenses for the recognition of
contributions
Approve monetary awards and exceptions to monetary award
scales of $5,000-$10,000 (excluding PMRS Cash Awards) for
any one individual or group
As Chairperson, Executive Resources Board, to review and
concur in recommendations for all awards for executives
Recommend to Treasury, monetary awards of $10,001-$25,000
($5,001 or more for Performance Management and Recognition
System (PMRS) Cash Awards) for any one individual or group
Recommend an additional monetary award of $10,000 (total
$35,000) to the President through Treasury.
[Emphasis added]
We are prepared to recommend witnesses to you who are
willing to testify, under oath, that these PMRS awards are
specifically reserved for the President of the United States, and
for U.S. Attorneys, upon obtaining grand jury indictments against
"illegal tax protestors". On this point, we would like to
emphasize that, under the First Amendment in the U.S.
Constitution, protest has never been illegal in America. The
term "illegal protestor" is, therefore, an oxymoron which cannot
survive a challenge on constitutional grounds.
Accordingly, to be consistent with the Constitution, the
term "illegal tax protestor" as found in various Acts of Congress
must be interpreted to mean that the "tax" is "illegal", and not
the "protest". Upon request, we can provide you with numerous
Supreme Court authorities for the proposition that Congressional
statutes must be construed in harmony with the fundamental Law.
Thus, it now appears that there are substantial cash
incentives for U.S. Attorneys to lie, tamper, and obstruct
evidence in seeking and obtaining indictments requested by the
"Internal Revenue Service", all in violation of applicable
federal law (see Title 18 United States Code) and the principles
established in the Constitution for the United States of America.
We have also enclosed materials which show that the Internal
Revenue Service has, since the year 1981, conducted an aggressive
campaign to harass and intimidate people affiliated with the New
Life Health Center Company, in order to "make an example" of
them. Specifically, we would like to draw your attention to
Exhibit 1 from the AFFIDAVIT OF NEIL NORDBROCK REGARDING NOTICES
OF DEFICIENCY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT. This Exhibit 1 is entitled [see next page]:
Formal Request for Investigation:
Page 2 of 9
COMPARISON CHART
AMOUNTS ASSESSED IN NOTICES OF DEFICIENCY
WITH
CORRECTED AMOUNTS OF DEFICIENCY COMMISSIONER NOW ASSERTS
BURNS AND RELATED BUSINESS ENTITIES:
This chart shows quite a dramatic discrepancy between, on
the one hand, the total from IRS Notices of Deficiency for the
calendar years 1978 thru 1982 ($721,572.00) and the corrected
amounts which total only $24,978.00. The arithmetic difference
between these two amounts is almost $700,000. According to said
AFFIDAVIT OF NEIL NORDBROCK, "The most flagrant violation
occurred in Burns' case for 1983, where the IRS now acknowledges
that the original assessment is more than 99.5% incorrect. See
Chart."
In support of our allegation that there has been systematic
abuse of the grand jury in the matter of New Life Health Center
Company and its workers, we attach a copy of PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE
TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT in the case of Nordbrock v.
Jensen, case number CIV-86-687-PHX-CLH in the United States
District Court for the District of Arizona. See, in particular,
the following pages in this document: 6, 9, 10, 12, 14, and 18.
Ladies and gentleman of the federal grand jury in the matter
of the New Life Health Center Company, we are prepared to provide
you with additional expert testimony concerning the subjects
discussed above, and other matters which are closely related to
those subjects. This expert testimony will give you much insight
into what has recently been proven, by authors and investigators
around the country, to be the greatest fiscal fraud that has ever
been perpetrated upon any people at any time in the history of
the world. We now look forward with eager anticipation to
testifying before you, because the time has now come for a shift
in the wind.
Formal Request for Investigation:
Page 3 of 9
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law and federal witness
email: supremelawfirm@yahoo.com
copies: New Life Health Center Company
U.S. District Judge John M. Roll
Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski
enclosures:
proof of $4,797 court sanction against Robert Miskell
AFFIDAVIT OF CAUSES AND OBJECTIONS TO O.S.C.
AFFIDAVIT OF NEIL NORDBROCK REGARDING NOTICES OF DEFICIENCY
PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
23 copies of CITIZENS RULE BOOK and JURY HANDBOOK
Formal Request for Investigation:
Page 4 of 9
PROOF OF $4,797 COURT SANCTION
AGAINST U.S. ATTORNEY ROBERT MISKELL
Formal Request for Investigation:
Page 5 of 9
AFFIDAVIT OF CAUSES
AND
OBJECTIONS TO O.S.C.
Formal Request for Investigation:
Page 6 of 9
AFFIDAVIT OF NEIL NORDBROCK
REGARDING NOTICES OF DEFICIENCY
Formal Request for Investigation:
Page 7 of 9
PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE
TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Formal Request for Investigation:
Page 8 of 9
23 copies of
CITIZENS RULE BOOK
and
JURY HANDBOOK
(under separate cover)
Formal Request for Investigation:
Page 9 of 9
# # #
Return to Table of Contents for
In Re Grand Jury Subpoena