Time: Sat Feb 01 08:54:31 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA28009; Sat, 1 Feb 1997 07:19:36 -0700 (MST) Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1997 08:51:26 -0800 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: federal grand jury challenge (a template) [This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] [ D R A F T] Express U.S. Mail Certified Serial Number #P-xxx-xxx-xxx Return Receipt Requested Restricted Delivery Requested Foreperson Federal Grand Jury [street] [city] (zip code exempt) [STATE] In re: Grand Jury Subpoena Served on Mr. John Doe Dear Foreperson: At the verbal request of My client, Mr. John Doe, I am writing this letter to challenge your alleged authority to issue a subpoena upon Him to testify before your body. We hereby document the reasons for Our challenge, as follows: 1. Janet Reno has failed to produce any credentials in response to a proper and timely Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") request and appeal submitted for same. In addition to the request and appeal, a 10-day courtesy notice was also mailed to Ms. Reno. Her deadline for producing credentials was 5:00 p.m. on Friday, January 24, 1997. Her failure to produce the requisite credentials means that she is now estopped from claiming any of the authorities which can be exercised by the Attorney General, because her silence is a fraud, pursuant to U.S. v. Tweel, and her silence activates estoppel, pursuant to Carmine v. Bowen. Thus, the U.S. Attorney(s) who signed the subpoena to Mr. Doe have no delegation of authority at all. 2. The federal Jury Selection and Service Act, 28 U.S.C. 1861 thru 1865, is unconstitutional for exhibiting prohibited class discrimination against Citizens of West Virginia state who are not also federal citizens. This is the case, even though each and every member of your "grand jury" is otherwise qualified, according to the requirements of this Act. The problem is that the Act itself is unconstitutional, and its unconstitutionality dates from the moment of its enactment. In several federal cases around the nation, this challenge has been placed properly before federal courts, but they are now obstructing justice by failing to rule on it. Accordingly, your body is not a lawful grand jury, and Mr. Doe cannot be compelled to testify before a group of people who are not a lawful body. 3. Evidence now shows that specific employees of the federal government receive financial kick-backs upon obtaining federal grand jury indictments against the "enemies" of the President. These kick-backs include $25,000 per indictment to U.S. Attorneys, and $35,000 per indictment to the President of the United States. These kick-backs are being paid under color of a defunct federal program called the Performance Management and Recognition System ("PMRS"). A FOIA request for all financial records of the PMRS system has been submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. A staff attorney in the Treasury Department has responded by admitting that there are no records for many PMRS kick-backs, because they were paid in CASH! Add to this the evidence of widespread perjury and property conversion rackets within the Department of Justice, using computer software which was stolen by that Department, and you have the makings of a massive criminal conspiracy among employees of the U.S. Department of Justice, the "Internal Revenue Service" [sic], and possibly also the federal judiciary. 4. Recent research has also proven that the federal judiciary has sabotaged the U.S. Constitution and corrupted laws governing the conduct of the federal courts. This has been done in part by creating the false impression that the United States District Court ("USDC") has territorial and subject matter jurisdiction within the several States of the Union, particularly over criminal prosecutions, when it does not. The truth is that the USDC is designed to adjudicate matters that arise within the federal zone, and the District Court of the United States ("DCUS") is designed to adjudicate matters that arise within the state zone. You will notice on the subpoena which you attempted to serve upon Mr. Doe, that the USDC is named. This is a fraud upon you, upon Me, upon Mr. Doe, and upon all American People, who enjoy the fundamental guarantee of due process of law. Sedition by syntax is not due process of law. For your edification, We have attached to this letter a number of essays, and additional documents, which constitute material evidence to support the challenges which We bring to you in this letter. These documents also constitute probable cause to charge the U.S. Attorney(s) in Mr. Doe's case with fraud, jury tampering, and perjury of oath, not to mention a host of other criminal violations of pertinent federal laws. See Title 18, United States Code, Sections 241 and 242, for example. Please give all this evidence your careful and considerate attention. The future of this nation is riding on what you do. Sincerely yours, Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. Citizen of Arizona state, federal witness, Counselor at Law, and Counsel to Mr. John Doe attachments copies: Mr. John Doe The Internet # # # Attachment Converted: "C:\ATTACH\TEMPLATE.doc" ==================================================================== [Text is usually formatted in Courier 11 non-proportional spacing @] [65-characters per line; .DOCs by MS-WORD for MS-DOS, Version 5.0B.] Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., email address: pmitch@primenet.com Web site for the Supreme Law Firm is URL: http://www.supremelaw.com Ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state [We win] We can decode all your byte streams, spaghetti code notwithstanding. Coming soon: "Manifesto for a Republic" by John E. Trumane ie JetMan ====================================================================From ???@??? Sat Feb 01 10:22:27 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA22292 for [address in tool bar]; Sat, 1 Feb 1997 07:33:03 -0700 (MST) From: "Charles Bruce, Stewart" <chuck@teleport.com> To: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] CC: commonlaw@teleport.com Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 22:47:59 +0500 Message-ID: <yam6970.2968.3279160@mail.teleport.com> Organization: Self Government Coalition Subject: Re: Mitchell Warning (WAS: The Freemen of Montana) MIME-Version: 1.0 Your delusional Mr Mitchell, You have been kiced off of 3 lists that I know of, the libertylaw list that libertarian one in arazona, and the NWLibertarians one that I run, whereupon most of the subscribers cheered at your departure. What kind of a reality check do you need before you figure out that youve become addicted to a defective antisocial behavior pattern. I realy would like to see you make some changes so that you can fit in wityh everyone else. But I will not let you destroy any of the lists which I run, just because I desire to reach out to you. You seem unreachable. Charles Bruce, On 31-Jan-97, Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote: >Don't let me stop you, Charles. >I asked Leroy a simple question. >I deserve a simple answer. >That should be obvious to you, >and to everyone else on the >Internet. >Have you contacted Tarheel? >/s/ Paul Mitchell >At 03:34 AM 1/31/97 +0500, you wrote: >>I am warning you Mr Mitchell. If you repeat the below tones against the >>freemen, I will unsubscribe you from the commonlaw list. >> >>Charles Bruce, Stewart >> >>On 31-Jan-97, Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote: >>>Mr. Stewart, >> >>>I made no accusations. >>>I asked a simple and >>>straightforward question. >>>I have been asked many >>>times whether or not >>>I am a federal agent, >>>and I do not regard it >>>as an accusation, even >>>when the same person >>>asks me the same question >>>4 or 5 times. >> >>>I will look forward to his >>>answer. Since he and his >>>co-defendants owe me quite a >>>lot of money, I will attach >>>meaning to any decision he >>>might make to persist in >>>his silence. >> >>>So, your request is >>>respectfully denied. >> >>>As for the statements >>>which I have made previously, >>>I can substantiate, and >>>have substantiated, each >>>and every statment I have >>>made concerning the Freemen, >>>particularly their advocacy >>>of racial discrimination >>>against Negroes. >> >>>So, once again, your request >>>is respectfully denied. >> >>>Contact Tarheel for further >>>substantiation. He has much >>>of the evidence, although not all >>>of it. >> >>>/s/ Paul Mitchell >> >> >> >>>At 09:14 AM 1/17/97 -0800, you wrote: >>>>Mr. Mitchell, >>>> >>>>Please cease and decist from your unsubstantiable accusations >>>>against the montana freemen on any of the lists which I run. >>>> >>>>You have been suspended from the libertylaw list by a judgement >>>>of your peers for this exact problem, and I will not tolerate it on the >>>>lists which I run. >>>> >>>>Charles Bruce, Stewart . . . >>>> >>>> >>>>On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote: >>>> >>>>> >> > >From the "Dallas Morning News" Online: >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > Authorities study links in fraud cases >>>>> >> > By Thomas G. Watts / The Dallas Morning News >>>>> >> > 01/11/97 >>>>> ><snip> >>>>> people who conspired to stiff Paul Mitchell; >>>>> people who tampered with Paul Mitchell's front brakes; >>>>> people who cleaned out Paul Mitchell's legal office in Colton; >>>>> people who chauffered Paul Mitchell at 95 mph, >>>>> barely avoiding a broadside in the high desert; >>>>> people who removed $50K from Broderick's private locker; >>>>> people who investigated Broderick's Orange County lien; >>>>> people who were requested to investigate extortion by >>>>> Broderick's associates (and other crimes); >>>>> people who tried to enter Paul Mitchell's hotel room, >>>>> while he was in the room, on the telephone; >>>>> people who tailed Paul Mitchell all around the Essex Hotel >>>>> in Palmdale/Lancaster; >>>>> people who filmed Paul Mitchell's private lecture at the >>>>> Essex Hotel, and stole the videotape; >>>>> people who were convicted as Broderick's co-defendants; >>>>> people who are related to those co-defendants; >>>>> people who paid Elizabeth Broderick to attend Leroy's >>>>> seminars; >>>>> people who witnessed Paul Mitchell attempt to assist >>>>> Broderick at her "arraignment"; >>>>> people who tried to film Paul Mitchell cross Spring Street >>>>> after the arraignment; >>>>> people who tried to interview Paul Mitchell as he crossed >>>>> Spring Street after the arraignment; >>>>> people who smacked Paul Mitchell's companion in the head >>>>> with a video camera in the middle of Spring Street; >>>>> People who told Paul Mitchell that he would be getting paid "soon"; >>>>> >>>>> and so on, and so on. >>>>> >>>>> There are probably more. This is a >>>>> media "spin" term, if you know what >>>>> I mean. >>>>> >>>>> /s/ Paul Mitchell >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>>==================================================================== >>>[Text is usually formatted in Courier 11 non-proportional spacing @] >>>[65-characters per line; .DOCs by MS-WORD for MS-DOS, Version 5.0B.] >>>Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., email address: pmitch@primenet.com >>>Web site for the Supreme Law Firm is URL: http://www.supremelaw.com >>>Ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state [We win] >>>We can decode all your byte streams, spaghetti code notwithstanding. >>>Coming soon: "Manifesto for a Republic" by John E. Trumane ie JetMan >>>==================================================================== >> >> >> >> >==================================================================== >[Text is usually formatted in Courier 11 non-proportional spacing @] >[65-characters per line; .DOCs by MS-WORD for MS-DOS, Version 5.0B.] >Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., email address: pmitch@primenet.com >Web site for the Supreme Law Firm is URL: http://www.supremelaw.com >Ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state [We win] >We can decode all your byte streams, spaghetti code notwithstanding. >Coming soon: "Manifesto for a Republic" by John E. Trumane ie JetMan >====================================================================
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail