MEMO Re: SUBPOENA TO TESTIFY BEFORE GRAND JURY

MEMO

TO: Office of the United States Attorney

Attn: Melody Berkheiser, Paralegal Specialist

U.S. Department of Justice

1000 S.W. Third Avenue, Suite 600

Portland 97204-2902

OREGON, USA

FROM: Mr. and Mrs. Louis Leroy Sutton

DATE: October 13, 2008 A.D.

SUBJECT SUBPOENA TO TESTIFY BEFORE GRAND JURY (2x)

Greetings Ms. Berkheiser et al.:

We have very recently retained a nationally recognized Private Attorney General to help us review and evaluate the two SUBPOENAs commanding us to appear on October 1, 2008. See 18 U.S.C. 1964(a).

Attached please find printed hard copies of the Track & Confirm records for each Certified U.S. Mail label serial number, showing that both SUBPOENAs were delivered on October 2, 2008.

We certainly hope that you are not contemplating contempt proceedings in retaliation for our failure to appear as scheduled.

On the merits, we have also taken note of the identical statements in the lower left-hand corner of each SUBPOENA, to wit:

This subpoena is issued on application of the United States of America. [bold emphasis added]

In order to confirm whether or not such “application” was proper legal “process” in all respects, we are hereby formally requesting that you forward a true and correct copy of same to us, via U.S. Mail. We will then request our chosen Counsel to review that application and to report back to us with his professional findings.

There is already prima facie evidence of fraud. The term “United States of America” legally refers to the 50 States of the Union, and to nothing else. See 28 U.S.C. 1746, for example. The latter statute is the only place in all of Title 28 of the U.S. Coode where the term “United States of America” occurs, and there it occurs in correct contradistinction to the “United States” (Federal government).

You are not employed by the Office of the United States of America Attorney, for example! Attached please find an excellent essay by our Counsel on the all important differences between “United States” and “United States of America”, in addition to a certified copy of his now famous “31 Questions and Answers about the Internal Revenue Service”. See the Answer to Question #16, in particular.

It is of equal importance that the McDade Act at 28 U.S.C. 530B mandates all U.S. Attorneys to comply with all State Bar disciplinary guidelines in each of the 50 States where they are stationed. Willful misrepresentation by U.S. Attorneys is thus actionable on probable cause of fraud. U.S. Attorneys have no powers of attorney legally to represent the 50 States of the Union. See 28 U.S.C. 547.

If fraud is committed by means of correspondence transmitted via U.S. Mail, the felony Federal offense of mail fraud has occurred in violation of the Federal criminal statute at 18 U.S.C. 1341. Moreover, only two (2) such “predicate acts” of mail fraud constitute a pattern of racketeering activity, as expressly defined by Congress in the Federal RICO statutes at 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq.

We remind you here that both SUBPOENAs were delivered late by means of Certified U.S. Mail.

Of overriding importance, in our humble opinions, is the standing decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Commissioner v. Acker. We now paraphrase that decision as follows: Even if the Internal Revenue Service were a de jure service, bureau, office or subdivision of the U.S. Department of the Treasury -- which they decidedly are not -- they would still not have any authority to create a specific liability for any tax by means of Regulations published in the Federal Register. See 26 CFR 1.1-1, 18 U.S.C. 912 and 31 U.S.C. 333, in chief.

And, to our great and everlasting surprise, our chosen Counsel was the first to prove that the term “U.S. Individual” on IRS Form 1040 legally embraces only federal citizens and resident aliens. This dramatic and even shocking conclusion is quite easily demonstrated, in retrospect, by combining the statutory definitions at IRC 7701(a) and 7701(a)(30). The only human variants of “United States persons” are federal citizens and resident aliens; all other variants are artificial, juristic entities like corporations (which have no heart).

Accordingly, insofar as any IRS officers or employees have attempted to procure our willing signatures on IRS Form 1040 “under penalties of perjury”, when neither of us is a federal citizen or resident alien, each such attempt appears to violate the Federal criminal statute at 18 U.S.C. 1622 -- subornation of perjury (another felony).

It is also clear to us, in light of extensive research and litigation shared with us by our chosen Counsel, that the perjury jurat on IRS Form 1040 is for verifications made “inside” the “United States” and “outside” the “United States of America”. Being one of the latter, Oregon is outside or “without” the United States. We are correctly advised that modifying the perjury jurat on IRS Form 1040 to reflect our domicile “without the United States” results in nullifying that jurat. Courts have also ruled that this jurat may not be modified.

We do hope all of the above are responsive to your present concerns with our status and activism, as protected by specific provisions in the Constitution for the United States of America, and as enforced by the Federal criminal statutes at 18 U.S.C. 241 and 242, for starters.

If you should have any further questions of either of us, please transmit same via U.S. Mail. We will promptly refer them to our chosen Counsel, as we have done with the 2 x SUBPOENAs in question. We will then notify you of his evaluation within 30 days, or as soon thereafter as humanly possible, given the severe economic hardship which agents of the “United States” and of Puerto Rico Trust #62 stubbornly persist in causing in our lives.

Thank you very much for your consideration.

Signed: /s/ Louis L. Sutton

____________________________________________________

Printed: Louis L. Sutton, Sui Juris

U.S. Mail:

Mr. and Mrs. Louis L. Sutton

c/o 50571 Maple Avenue

Scappoose 97056-4323

OREGON, USA

[Please see USPS Publication #221 for “foreign” address formatting.]

Copy: Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a), Rotella v. Wood

Office of the Postmaster, U.S. Post Office, Portland 97204

Attachments