MEMO

TO:       West Virginia State Bar
          c/o 2006 Kanawha Boulevard, East
          Charleston, West Virginia

FROM:     Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
          Counselor at Law

DATE:     December 21, 1996

SUBJECT:  Stephen D. Herndon


For your  information, Mr.  Stephen D.  Herndon has  been removed
from  the  office  of  court-appointed  attorney  for  Mr.  Floyd
Raymond,  Looker,  Sui  Juris.    Because  Mr.  Looker  has  been
proceeding In  Propria Persona  and  Sui  Juris  since  the  mail
service of His formal Plea in Abatement, no one is "representing"
Him, not even Mr. Floyd Raymond, Looker.  See attached, to wit:

     To represent  a person is to stand in his place, to speak or
     act with  authority on  behalf of such person, to supply his
     place, to  act as  his substitute  or agent, see Black's Law
     Dictionary, Sixth Edition. [see attached]


Perhaps it  is best  to  think  of  the  term  "represent"  as  a
contraction of  the words  "re" and "present", i.e. "re-present".
Mr. Looker is "presenting" himself, but he is not "re-presenting"
himself.

I hope  this clarifies the matter.  If not, please seek advice in
the pleadings which Mr. Looker has now filed in the United States
District Court  [sic] in  Wheeling, West  Virginia, specifically,
His  Memorandum   of  Points   and  Authorities   in  Support  of
Defendant's  Challenge   to  Jurisdiction   for   Violating   the
Fundamental Guarantee  of Effective  Assistance of Counsel: Sixth
Amendment (not ATTORNeys).

Finally, please  be advised  that Mr. Looker has authorized me to
begin preparation  of a  formal criminal  complaint  against  Mr.
Herndon, for  violating 18  U.S.C. 241  and 242.  We are awaiting
additional evidence which is now being discovered by the USPS.


Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell

Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law and federal witness
c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776
Tucson, Arizona state
Postal Zone 85719/tdc

email:    supremelawfirm@altavista.net

website:  http://supremelaw.com


             Memorandum to State Bar of West Virginia:
                          Page 1 of 2


              Excerpt from CONFIDENTIAL Memorandum

     28.  The   ORDER  requires  respondent  to  appear  "by  his

authorized representative".  To represent a person is to stand in

his place,  to speak  or act  with authority  on behalf  of  such

person, to  supply his  place, to act as his substitute or agent,

see Black's.  Respondent has not authorized anyone or anything to

stand as His substitute or agent, nor does He consent now to such

a substitute  or agent, rendering the Order impossible to obey on

its face,  see "The  Merchant of  Venice" by William Shakespeare.

Respondent hereby  rebuts  the  presumption  that  the  fictional

persona of  "JOHN E. TRUMANE" exists now or has ever existed, see

reference  to   Respondent  as   "it"  in  Petitioners'  verified

petition, page  3, line 22.  Respondent objects to the use of the

term "it" to refer to any proper Person.


             Memorandum to State Bar of West Virginia:
                          Page 2 of 2


                             #  #  #
      

Return to Table of Contents for

U.S.A. v. Looker