Time: Wed Jun 18 10:40:28 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA03233;
	Wed, 18 Jun 1997 10:40:48 -0700 (MST)
	by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA22239;
	Wed, 18 Jun 1997 10:40:27 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 10:38:58 -0700
To: timr@efn.org
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: influencing grand juries (and Dan Meador)
References: <>

I am sorry if you read my post to mean
that Dan was convicted of violating
18 U.S.C. 1504.  Actually, when I wrote
that, I did not really know WHAT he was
"convicted" of.  I was merely pointing
out that section 1504 does allow Citizens
to communicate a request to appear before
the grand jury, and I would be very surprised
if Dan's communications were anything BUT
a request to appear before the grand jury.

My other point is that federal juries cannot
be lawful bodies, as long as the law which
convenes them exhibits class discrimination
against Citizens of the several states of
the Union.  Therefore, you cannot be convicted
of violating 1504, IF the body is not a legal
body in the first instance.  


Writing letters to the local high school
basket weaving class is not going to put
you in jeopardy of violating section 1504,
because the basket weaving class is not a
lawful grand jury.  


Moveover, basket weaving classes cannot
issue lawful criminal indictments, if they
are not lawful grand juries.  Basket weaving
classes cannot issue lawful convictions 
either, if they are not lawful petit juries.


Federal grand juries are not legal bodies,
even if their members are otherwise qualified,
as long as the law which convenes them is 
unconstitutional.  You will find this point
covered clearly in the United States Attorney's
Manual for criminal prosecutions!

I did my best to explain that in my post;
but people have a way of reading things into
my writing which I never wrote, and which I
never intended.

Hence, the clarification.  The issue is so immensely
important, that it is certainly worth repeating,
over and over and over, until the American People

Federal grand juries are not legal bodies.
Federal grand juries are not legal bodies.
Federal grand juries are not legal bodies.

Get out your chalk, and saddle up to the blackboard.

We are going to write this 100 times, before you can
go home today.  :)

Now, because the very same law convenes grand AND
trial juries, when you have written the above 100 times,
you can start on your next 100 repetitions of the 

Federal trial juries are not legal bodies either.
Federal trial juries are not legal bodies either.
Federal trial juries are not legal bodies either.

And so on.

THEN you may go home (but NOT before).  :))

/s/ Paul Mitchell

At 09:31 AM 6/18/97 -0700, you wrote:
>A message included in Paul's post contains 100% error in regardso to the
>how and why Dan Meador, a personal friend of mine, was jailed.
>He was NOT indicted for Jury tampering, there WAS a jury trial, the
>judge was recused but failed to obey the law (gee, where have we heard
>that before??) and stayed on the case.  After many many months, in
>January of this year he was tried and the jury returned a guilty
>On June 5th, he appeared for his sentencing hearing.  The judge, a grade
>A-1 asswipe, called Dan, "... a menace to society...."  and  sentenced
>him to 16 months.  Dan was immediately taken into custody and jailed in
>the Tulsa county jail, awaiting re-location to a Federal prison
>somewhere unknown.
>Dan did not do what he was convicted of; the judge who tried the case
>lacks the statutory grant of authority to act; the recusal order was not
>one allowing the judge some sort of discretion, but was mandatory, yet
>the judge failed to recuse himself; the sentence was excessively harsh;
>the entire process of what (very loosely) passes for "due process" in
>today's courts has been filled with grevious procedural errors, and
>errors of both fact and law, yet Dan now sits in jail with an unknown
>fate awaiting him.
>The entire proceeding, from start to this date, in a word, sucks!  There
>are, of course, lots of legally descriptive words and phrases, but
>simply, sucks, seems to convey a lot of information by itself.  I'm
>sitting here with the application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus for Dan in
>my hands, faxed to me by his wife Gail, wondering if once again, we are
>going to see another travesty of justice, or can we hope that the law
>can and will prevail?
>Dan Meador, who's gold-plated research produced writings and teachings
>on the subject of the lack of authority for the IRS to reach out and
>touch most of us, deserves better than a trumped-up charge, heard in a
>kangroo court.  I for one, was not aware that Federal public servants
>were allowed to pronounce sentence on someone for being a menace to
>society because of their reading of law books.
>May it please God to damn this evil -- I implore this in the name of
>everything that is Holy.
>Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote:
>> 18 U.S.C. 1504.  Influencing juror by writing
>> "Whoever attempts to influence the action or decision
>> of any grand or petit jury of any court of the
>> United States upon any issue or matter pending
>> before such juror, or before the jury of which he
>> is a member, or pertaining to his duties, by writing
>> or sending to him any written communication, in
>> relation to such issue or matter, shall be fined
>> under this title or imprisoned not more than six
>> months, or both.
>> "Nothing in this section shall be construed to       <-----!!!!
>> prohibit the communication of a request to appear
>> before the grand jury."
>>   "Federal Ciminal Code and Rules," West Publishing Co.,
>>    1996 Edition
>> Paul Mitchell comments:
>> Of course, this criminal statute does assume that the
>> grand or petit juries are lawful bodies in the first
>> place.  B-U-T, the federal Jury Selection and
>> Service Act has recently been challenged before the
>> 8th Circuit Court of Appeals for exhibiting
>> class discrimination against Citizens of the
>> several states who are not also federal citizens,
>> by Right of Election.  Confer at "Right" and
>> "Election" in Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition
>> (with pronunciations).  JSSA is 28 U.S.C. 1861 et seq.
>> See also "Federal citizenship" in Black's supra.
>> The problem, in a nutshell, is that the very Americans
>> who are qualified to vote in the House and Senate, are
>> thereby DISqualified from voting in general elections,
>> AND from serving on federal grand and petit juries.
>> This is a blatant violation of the Guarantee Clause,
>> which applies in the state zone and nowhere else!!
>> Go figure!
>> "Reductio ad absurdum."  Unlawful indictments prevent
>> courts from perfecting subject matter jurisdiction.
>> See 1:2:2 and 1:3:3;  People v. De La Guerra;
>> Gardina v. Board of Registrars;  State v. Fowler.
>> Even a maritime court must have a valid indictment
>> before it can proceed any further.  This a guarantee
>> recognized by two international human Rights treaties,
>> to which the United States is a party.
>> The pure beauty of this challenge is that (1) state Citizens
>> merely need to stipulate that federal citizens have
>> no standing to bring this challenge and (2) the matter
>> can be decided without disturbing the so-called
>> 14th amendment.  This is so because ALL the cases which
>> upheld 2 classes of citizenship, did so AFTER that
>> amendment was declared.  Moreover, the cases which held
>> that one can be a state Citizen without also being a
>> federal citizen, did so AFTER that amendment was declared.
>> If the government tries to argue that they can conduct
>> criminal trials without valid indictments, then we will
>> have a really big fight on our hands, one fight which I
>> will be very proud to wage, to the finish line, and to
>> give my life, if necessary, to uphold this fundamental
>> Law.
>> But, you must remember, we started deep in our end zone
>> (the federal zone), and we are now only one foot from
>> our goal line (formal recognition of state Citizenship
>> as a separate class of Americans, by Right of Election
>> guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment).
>> I cannot serve in Congress until this issue is resolved,
>> finally.
>> It is rather awesome, when you think about it.
>> /s/ Paul Mitchell
>> http://www.supremelaw.com
>> >> >Subject: Dan Meador Update 6/12/97
>> >> >
>> >> >Dan was convicted of supplying via the mail asked for information to a
>> >> >Grand Jury. The law is clear he can do this. They called it jury
>> >> >tampering. No jury trial was given.
>> >>
>> >> This is at least a LITTLE more info, but hardly
>> >> enough to verify it.  How about a court name,
>> >> case #, etc etc.  You should know that people
>> >> ALL THE TIME misrepresent what happens to them,
>> >> and no. I am NOT saying that Dan is, I am just
>> >>
>> >> In Liberty,
>> >>
>> >> Charles
>> >>
>  *************************************************************
>  A lie on the throne is a lie, still, and truth in a dungeon
>  is truth, still, and a lie on the throne is on the way to
>  defeat, and truth in a dungeon is on the way to victory.
>  -- Anonymous
>  *************************************************************
>  "War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the
>  decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings
>  which thinks that nothing is worth fighting for is much
>  worse.  A man who has nothing for which he is willing to 
>  fight, nothing he cares about more than his personal 
>  safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of 
>  being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of
>  better men than himself."  --Anonymous.  Seen on a poster
>  at a gun show.
>  *************************************************************
> (541) 895-4417 voice
> (541) 895-4681 fax
> timr@efn.org

Paul Andrew Mitchell                 : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine

tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.2 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com   : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail