Time: Wed Aug 20 21:34:47 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA07453;
	Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:22:32 -0700 (MST)
	by usr01.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA27352;
	Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:18:19 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:16:53 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLF: Dispute erupts over "ARIZONA REPUBLIC" [sic]

>Subject: Dispute erupts over "ARIZONA REPUBLIC" [sic]
>[This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
>                                      c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776
>                                         Tucson [zip code exempt]
>                                                 ARIZONA REPUBLIC
>                                                  August 10, 1997
>Mr. John Oppedahl
>Publisher and CEO
>"The Arizona Republic"
>c/o P.O. Box 1950
>Phoenix 85001/tdc
>Subject:  Letter from Frank G. Long, dated August 8, 1997
>Dear Mr. Oppedahl:
>I have  received, but  not accepted,  a letter  from Mr. Frank G.
>Long,  claiming   that  Phoenix   Newspapers,  Inc.  ("PNI")  has
>instructed him to take legal action against Me, to obtain a court
>order to  stop what he alleges to be "unauthorized and infringing
>use of  ARIZONA REPUBLIC".   With that letter, he also enclosed a
>copy of  a document  which he  described as  "a copy of complaint
>that will  be filed in U.S. District Court of Arizona and served"
>upon Me,  unless I  deliver to  his office by 12:00 noon, Friday,
>August 15, 1997, a letter advising PNI that I will:
>     (1)  immediately   cease    using   ARIZONA    REPUBLIC   on
>          correspondence or  on the  Internet in  connection with
>          any publications or related services;
>     (2)  refrain from  using ARIZONA  REPUBLIC in that manner in
>          the future;
>     (3)  sign an  agreement confirming  My acceptance  of  these
>          demands.
>Mr. Oppedahl,  I have  very good reasons to believe that Mr. Long
>is either  entirely ignorant of many important material facts, or
>he has  deliberately chosen  to withhold  many important material
>facts from you, which you need to know immediately.  In an effort
>to persuade  you to  reconsider the  action which  Mr.  Long  has
>threatened in  writing to  take, I  offer the  following for your
>careful consideration, review, and verification:
>1.   Mr. Long refers in his letter to correspondence which I have
>     been sending to the Pima County Attorney's office.
>It is  true that I have been sending first class U.S. Mail to the
>Pima County  Attorney's office.   However, this mail is of a very
>confidential and  sensitive nature,  because it  concerns several
>cases which  are currently  underway in state and federal courts,
>here in Tucson and also in Phoenix.  I can only speculate at this
>point in  time, how  it was that Mr. Long obtained access to this
>correspondence and  its contents.   You need to ask him yourself,
>how it was that he did so.  If and when you obtain an answer from
>him, would  you please  do Me the courtesy of relating his answer
>to Me?  I would very much appreciate that.
>     Confidential Letter to John Oppedahl, CEO:  Page 1 of 7
>For your  information, I  have requested  the  Pima  County  Jury
>Commissioner to  provide Me with an opportunity to testify to the
>currently convened  grand jury  in Pima  County,  concerning  the
>material evidence  I now  have of  probable  cause  for  charging
>several government  employees and  private individuals in Arizona
>with numerous  violations of  federal and  state criminal  codes.
>These  cases,  which  have  thoroughly  documented  the  material
>evidence to which I refer, are the following:
>     In Re  Grand Jury  Subpoena Served on New Life Health Center
>     Company, United  States District  Court, Tucson, case number
>     #GJ-95-1-6
>     Mitchell v.  Nordbrock,  Pima  County  Consolidated  Justice
>     Court, Tucson, case number #CV-97-3438
>     People ex  rel. Mitchell v. Pima County Consolidated Justice
>     Court, Superior  Court of Arizona State, Tucson, case number
>     #320831
>     Swan Business Organization v. Ulan et al., Superior Court of
>     the State of Arizona, Tucson, case number #315580
>     In Re Eugene A. and Linda H. Burns, United States Bankruptcy
>     Court, Tucson, case number #96-01624-TUC-LO
>     In  Re   New  Life  Health  Center  Company,  United  States
>     Bankruptcy Court, Phoenix, case number #93-06051-PHX-GBN
>     In Re J. Fife Symington III, United States Bankruptcy Court,
>     Phoenix, case number #95-08397-PHX-GBN
>     U.S.A. v. Wallen, United States District Court, Tucson, case
>     number #95-484-WDB
>I have  listed the  above cases  in part  because you  have ready
>access to  the docket files here in Arizona (Tucson and Phoenix).
>There are  a number  of additional cases which I could cite here,
>but their  files are  all in  the custody of court clerks who are
>located in  other states  of the  Union.  Notably, the grand jury
>civil case  #GJ-95-1-6 and  the Wallen criminal case #95-484-WDB,
>have resulted  in formal  Complaints of Judicial Misconduct being
>filed with the Clerk of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San
>Francisco, California.   I  would fully  expect that  the  latter
>Clerk will  give you  access to  the docket  files for  those two
>Judicial Misconduct Complaints, upon proper request for same.
>Now, with  these specific cases as a factual and legal foundation
>for what  I am about to tell you, I am extremely alarmed that Mr.
>Long has  admitted, in  writing which  he transmitted  to Me  via
>Certified United  States  Mail,  that  he  is  already  aware  of
>correspondence which  I have  been sending  to  the  Pima  County
>Attorney's Office.   For  your information,  I  have  had  direct
>written contact  with Mr.  David R. White, Chief Criminal Deputy,
>and Ms.  Carolyn Emerine,  Program Director.   Because she is the
>head of  that entire  government unit,  I would fully expect that
>Ms. Barbara  LaWall, Pima  County Attorney,  is also aware of the
>     Confidential Letter to John Oppedahl, CEO:  Page 2 of 7
>several written  materials which  I have already forwarded to Mr.
>White and  to Ms. Emerine.  Please contact the latter individuals
>on your  own, as  soon as  possible, to confirm what I am telling
>you here.  But, please read the rest of this letter first, okay?
>Without knowing  any more about Mr. Long's method(s) of obtaining
>access to  the information  which I  have supplied  to  the  Pima
>County Attorney's  office, I  would have  to say  that his letter
>contains enough incriminating admissions to constitute sufficient
>and probable  cause for Me to charge him with aiding and abetting
>a serious criminal conspiracy.  It is evident to Me that the Pima
>County Attorney's  office is  taking affirmative  steps to  delay
>and/or prevent  certain essential  investigations from proceeding
>into the  material evidence  which I  have  assembled  and  cited
>above.    The  criminal  violations  to  which  I  have  been  an
>eyewitness, and  the evidence  of which  I have  already verified
>under penalty  of perjury,  constitute  proof  of  the  following
>criminal activities:
>     (1)  deprivations of fundamental Rights, under color of law,
>          including, but  not limited to systematic violations of
>          voting Rights, and jury selection policies;
>     (2)  conspiracy  to   deprive  the   fundamental  Rights  of
>          Citizens of Arizona;
>     (3)  obstruction  of   correspondence  transmitted   through
>          United States Mail to a federal grand jury;
>     (4)  perjury before  a  United  States  District  Court  and
>          before a federal grand jury;
>     (5)  tampering with a federal grand jury;
>     (6)  obstruction of  justice in  proceedings before a United
>          States District Court and before a federal grand jury;
>     (7)  conspiracy to  commit  obstruction  of  correspondence,
>          jury  tampering,   obstruction  of   justice,  perjury,
>          barratry, extortion, and mail fraud;
>     (8)  placing  false   and  misrepresentative  statements  in
>          pleadings filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court;
>     (9)  threatening a  known federal  witness, and  retaliating
>          against a known federal witness;
>     (10) racketeering and  child kidnapping  across state lines,
>          and conspiracy to commit both across state lines;
>     (11) fraud, bank  fraud, mail  fraud, and  wire fraud  on an
>          Arizona pure trust, and upon the officers of an Arizona
>          pure trust;
>     (12) theft of  professional services,  wrongful termination,
>          contempt of  court, libel, defamation, grand theft, and
>          aiding and abetting one or more of the above.
>     Confidential Letter to John Oppedahl, CEO:  Page 3 of 7
>In support  of evidence  establishing probable cause for charging
>certain individuals,  both in  and out  of government,  with  the
>criminal activities  itemized above,  I have  enclosed, for  your
>careful review  and study,  several documents  which have already
>been filed  in the cases cited above.  I encourage you to confirm
>that these  documents have,  in fact,  been  filed,  served,  and
>docketed in their respective cases.
>2.   In his  letter, Mr.  Long refers to a complaint that will be
>     filed in  U.S. District  Court in Arizona, unless I yield to
>     his demands [sic].
>The so-called  COMPLAINT [sic] Mr. Long enclosed with his letter,
>in and  of itself  constitutes further  probable cause  for Me to
>believe that  Mr. Long  may already  be conspiring  with the very
>same individuals  who are  active suspects  in one or more of the
>criminal activities  itemized above.   I  refer  specifically  to
>Richard H.  Weare, Clerk  of the  U.S. District Court in Arizona.
>Please note the active role which Mr. Weare has, evidently, taken
>in the  conspiracy: to  obstruct correspondence, to tamper with a
>federal grand jury, and to obstruct justice in proceedings before
>the U.S.  District Court in Tucson last year, in #GJ-95-1-6.  See
>the enclosed letter to the FBI in Tucson, in particular.
>To My  knowledge, this  conspiracy  continues  right  up  to  the
>present time;   I know this, because the Chief Judge of the Ninth
>Circuit has failed to act on either of the Complaints of Judicial
>Misconduct which  I have  filed against two (2) federal judges in
>Tucson.   Mr. Long's  draft COMPLAINT  is first  described by Mr.
>Long as  a complaint  that will  be filed  [sic], but  that  very
>COMPLAINT already  bears civil  case number #[redacted].
>In other  words, it  has already  been filed in the office of Mr.
>Richard H.  Weare, and a federal judge has already been assigned.
>Therefore, that  proceeding has  already commenced,  but Mr. Long
>misleads Me  into thinking that he has not yet filed it, and that
>it has  not yet commenced.  What is the truth here, Mr. Oppedahl?
>This misrepresentation  is probable cause to charge Mr. Long with
>transmitting fraudulent and/or deliberately misleading statements
>via United States Mail;  this is also a federal offense.
>There are  a number  of other  misleading  and  misrepresentative
>statements which  Mr. Long  has already  written in his so-called
>COMPLAINT.   If you  do not already have a copy of this so-called
>COMPLAINT, I  do encourage  you to get a true and correct version
>of the  one which  must already  have been filed in the office of
>Mr. Richard  H. Weare,  in order  for it  to  bear  a  valid  and
>currently active case number.
>I do  feel that  it is My moral obligation to inform you that Mr.
>Long is  proceeding on  the basis  of  certain  assumptions,  and
>presumptions, that  are demonstrably  false and  which completely
>eclipse any  integrity his  allegations might otherwise have had.
>In particular, if he is deluding himself into believing that I am
>"profiting" from My activism as a writer, investigator, Counselor
>at Law,  and federal  witness, he  is tragically and demonstrably
>mistaken.  I will now summarize the real losses I have sustained.
>     Confidential Letter to John Oppedahl, CEO:  Page 4 of 7
>When I  worked for  Elizabeth Broderick on her civil and criminal
>cases in  Los Angeles,  she stiffed  Me for over $10,000 in legal
>services, and loaned Me a car with tampered front brakes.
>When I  worked for  LeRoy Schweitzer  and his nineteen (19) other
>co-defendants in  Billings, Montana,  he and his associates there
>stiffed Me for over $10,000 in legal services, and then proceeded
>to delay and tamper with numerous pieces of legal mail which were
>directed to Me, care of their post office box.
>When I  worked for  Sheila Wallen in her criminal case in Tucson,
>she stiffed  Me for  over $3,000  in legal services;  her brother
>David Wallen  aided and  abetted Herb Crawford in an act of grand
>theft against My private property.
>When I  worked for  the New  Life Health  Center ("New  Life") in
>Tucson, the  General Manager  stiffed Me for over $2,000 in legal
>services, and  damaged Me  in a  host of  other  ways  which  are
>already well documented, and which remain undenied.
>When Herb  Crawford vacated My apartment very suddenly, because I
>demanded that  he do  so, he  took with  him over $1,200 worth of
>cash and  office equipment, this after threatening Me twelve (12)
>times when he already knew very well that I am a federal witness.
>After Crawford  threatened My life, and this after I provided him
>with shelter  which he  told Me  he needed desperately, I did not
>think it was wise to keep any money around My house.  I entrusted
>the New  Life accountant  with $3,000  of My  own money, and that
>accountant, Mr.  Neil T.  Nordbrock, then  proceeded to  embezzle
>every last  penny of this money, leaving Me destitute and without
>essential medical services.  Do you have an adding machine?
>Mr. Oppedahl, if you do know the secret of squeezing blood from a
>turnip, would you please let Me in on this valuable secret?
>3.   In his so-called COMPLAINT, Mr. Long expresses his desire to
>     persuade a federal court to order an accounting by Me of all
>     "profits derived  from the providing of services through the
>     unauthorized use of ARIZONA REPUBLIC" [sic].
>Mr. Oppedahl,  this statement  by Mr. Long makes it very clear to
>Me that  he, and  his unnamed accessories, have much more in mind
>than some  trivial changes  in the  way I  have chosen  to  label
>envelopes which  I transmit  through the  mail.   This  statement
>expresses his  intention to bring down upon Me the criminal force
>and undue  influence of  the very  same conspiracy  which I  have
>already  identified  and  documented  within  the  United  States
>District Court,  here in  Tucson, in Phoenix, and in other cities
>across this  nation.    Do  you  want  to  be  the  one  who  was
>responsible for  authorizing such conduct by Mr. Long?  Would you
>please do Me the courtesy of an honest answer to this question?
>If you are still a bit confused by any of the points which I have
>already made in this letter, please find a way to locate and read
>the essay  entitled "Karma and the Federal Courts" in the Supreme
>     Confidential Letter to John Oppedahl, CEO:  Page 5 of 7
>Law Library  at http://www.supremelaw.com.    The  United  States
>District Court  ("USDC") is a territorial court, identical to the
>"territorial courts  of the United States" which are mentioned in
>15 U.S.C.  1121 --  one of  the statues  cited by Mr. Long in his
>so-called COMPLAINT;  this is the court he intends to petition.
>Arizona is  not a  territory;  it is a Union state, a REPUBLIC, a
>star on  the flag,  under the  Guarantee Clause.  If the attorney
>whom your corporation has hired does not yet understand this all-
>important distinction,  then you  and your  corporation may be in
>very deep  trouble, much  deeper trouble  than you  ever imagined
>possible.   I am saying this with all honesty, and with great and
>sincere earnest,  because the  conspiracy which I have identified
>needs to  be contained, not enlarged.  I am not referring here to
>some grand  or vague  international oligarchy;  I am referring to
>the statutory  definition  of  "conspiracy"  which  Congress  has
>legislated at  18 U.S.C.  241.  Even if you did not know anything
>about it  before now,  your willingness  to  aid  and  abet  this
>criminal racket  would still make you and your corporation liable
>as accessories  after the  fact;  all the more so, do you now run
>the very serious and real risk of criminal complicity, because of
>the many  statements of material fact which I am sharing with you
>here, all  of which can, and should, be independently verified by
>you before authorizing Mr. Long to proceed as planned.
>In conclusion,  Mr. Oppedahl,  please carefully  and deliberately
>reconsider the  actions which  Mr. Long  is threatening  to  take
>against Me,  as  described  in  his  recent  letter  and  in  the
>accompanying COMPLAINT  which he  has not  only drafted, but also
>filed in  the USDC  in Phoenix,  Arizona.   I should  think that,
>after reading  and verifying  all of  the statements which I have
>carefully prepared  for your  confidential review here, you would
>at least  give Me  the benefits  of the  doubt and  of a  private
>hearing in  your office, hopefully in front of witnesses (veteran
>reporters perhaps?)  and with  a good  tape  recorder  going,  to
>commemorate My verbal confirmations to you, in Person.
>I do honestly think that Mr. Long is proposing a course of action
>which could very well result in serious damages to your good name
>and reputation,  and to  the good  name and  reputation  of  your
>excellent newspaper,  that are  far beyond anything which you can
>presently anticipate  with any  degree of  accuracy.  I say this,
>because of  the mountains  of litigation  in which I have already
>been involved since I began this work in 1990.  The cases which I
>have cited  for you above, are only a sample of the overall story
>which I  have already  documented, to  the very best of My mental
>and physical  abilities.   The fact  that I  am still alive today
>should be  an indication to you that I am getting help, but it is
>not the kind of help which comes from a terrestrial source.
>Let us  now stop to pray and ponder the best course of action for
>you, for  your company,  for your newspaper, for Arizona, and for
>the entire  nation.   I can  guarantee to  you this much:  if you
>will humble yourself before the Most High and ask for His special
>guidance, you  will receive  it with  unfailing  reliability  and
>strength.  You have that on My word, because it is His Word which
>I am conveying to you.  On His Word you can always rely.  Always.
>     Confidential Letter to John Oppedahl, CEO:  Page 6 of 7
>Thank you very much for your careful and considerate attention.
>Sincerely yours,
>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
>Counselor at Law, federal witness,
>Citizen of Arizona state, and
>private attorney general
>copy:  Hon. William L. Scholl, attorney in private practice
>       Judge Alex Kozinski, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
>       James A. Crawford, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, Tucson
>       Division Commander, security and investigations
>       Officer Jack McLamb, Phoenix Police Department (Ret.)
>       Postmaster, USPS, Coronado Station, Tucson
>       Postmaster, USPS, Downtown Station, Tucson
>       anonymous colleagues
>     Confidential Letter to John Oppedahl, CEO:  Page 7 of 7
>                             #  #  #

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 3.0.3 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