Time: Thu Aug 21 00:28:03 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA00929
	for [address in tool bar]; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 22:19:19 -0700 (MST)
From: pmitch@primenet.com
Date:  Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:04:14 -0500
Subject: SLF: MEMO to Frank G. Long and John Oppedahl
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: SCV Echo <scvecho@dixie-net.com>

Date:  Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:18:35 -0700
To:  (Recipient list suppressed)
From: pmitch@primenet.com
Subject:  SLF: MEMO to Frank G. Long and John Oppedahl

>Subject: SLS: MEMO to Frank G. Long and John Oppedahl
>Dear Clients,
>Mr. Long is an "attorney" who has demanded
>that I stop using "ARIZONA REPUBLIC" on my
>mailing envelopes and in documents which 
>I publish on the Internet.  They have no
>registered trademark in this name, although
>they have applied for it.  If you have not
>already received a copy of my first letter
>to Mr. Oppedahl, CEO of the parent company,
>I will be happy to re-send it to you here,
>upon request.
>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>[This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
>TO:       Frank G. Long, Unregistered Foreign Agent
>          John Oppedahl, CEO, Phoenix Newspapers, Inc.
>FROM:     Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
>          Counselor at Law
>DATE:     August 20, 1997
>SUBJECT:  Please Turn Off the Pressure!
>Dear Frank:
>I have  received your  fax communication  today.   I do not agree
>with you  when you  say that  it is  "essential" that I sign your
>proposed Settlement  Agreement by  Friday noon.  Since I have not
>even read  it, I  am not in any position to cite provisions which
>justify such haste.  Your "deadline" is artificial and contrived,
>at best.
>You are  wrong to  conclude that I am not serious about resolving
>our "dispute" amicably.  On the contrary, I have already gone way
>out of  my way  to explain  our situation,  and to  take steps to
>ensure that your position is also recognized.  If what you say is
>true (and  it is not true), I would not have taken the initiative
>to begin editing our huge database in honor of your request.
>I fail  to see where such excessive pressure tactics are going to
>get you  what you want, unless there is, indeed, some real hidden
>agenda to your intentions.
>What are your true and complete intentions, Mr. Long?
>Is it the original Thirteenth Amendment?
>Is it the all important difference between the USDC and the DCUS?
>Are you,  in fact,  colluding with staff of the federal judiciary
>in Phoenix  and/or Tucson,  and with  the Pima  County  Attorneys
>office in  Tucson, to  impede, halt,  obstruct, or compromise the
>services we are obligated to deliver to our clients?
>If you  are, then  you may  be putting  yourself in a position of
>liability for  obstructing justice.  But, as a licensed attorney,
>I should not need to be telling you these things, should I?
>I can  honestly say  to  you  that  I  have  already  made  major
>commitments to  more than  one client,  to complete their work as
>soon as possible, and hopefully before Friday.  In light of their
>paramount needs, I worked all weekend on the editing which I have
>already described  to you.   This  good  faith  on  my  part  is,
>evidently, not enough for you.  This saddens me deeply.
>If you persist in pressuring me in the way that you have today, I
>would  have  to  regard  such  pressure  as  an  attempt  by  you
>deliberately to  impede the  delivery of  essential  professional
>services to clients who are facing imminent incarceration, by the
>same hostile  federal judiciary  with  which  you  appear  to  be
>colluding and  conspiring.  Is this only an appearance, Mr. Long,
>or are  you in  fact colluding with the offices of Mr. Richard H.
>Weare in  Phoenix and  Tucson, and  with the  office of  the Pima
>County Attorney in Tucson?
>You do  not have  any right to impair the obligations of my prior
>contracts, in  particular  because  all  licensed  attorneys,  as
>officers of  the courts  in which  they are admitted to practice,
>must be  able to  demonstrate that  they have  taken an  oath  to
>support the  U.S. Constitution.   Have  you?   I have no contract
>with you  or Phoenix Newspapers, Inc., verbal or written, at this
>point in time;  and, furthermore, if you do not immediately begin
>to demonstrate  at least a gram of professional consideration for
>my prior commitments and obligations, I will take your refusal in
>this regard as seriously as possible.
>My clients  have a  fundamental Right to counsel of their choice,
>under the Sixth Amendment, and you now given me cause to conclude
>that you  are more  than willing  to interfere with my priorities
>and obligations  to these  clients.  This is a violation of their
>fundamental right  to effective  assistance of  Counsel  and,  as
>such, it  constitutes probable cause to charge you with violating
>18 U.S.C. 242 -- deprivation of fundamental Rights under color of
>law --  and possibly  also 18 U.S.C. 241 -- conspiracy to deprive
>fundamental Rights.   This  is a fair gentleman's warning to you,
>Mr. Long.
>Since you have failed to demonstrate any specific reason why your
>artificial deadline  warrants a  total upheaval in my crowded and
>pressing  schedule,  I  must  politely  demand  hereby  that  you
>immediately cease  and desist  any further  pressure tactics.   I
>think you know exactly what I am talking about here.
>If you  do not  understand exactly  what I am talking about here,
>please advise  in writing,  and I  will elaborate in excruciating
>detail, but  only after my other pressing obligations are met, in
>a timely and professional manner.
>I will look forward to your immediate cooperation in this regard.
>Please fax me evidence of your oath of office, no later than noon
>on Friday  next (August 22, 1997).  If you do not, I will proceed
>on the  basis of  probable cause that you are not who you say you
>are, and that you fully intend to continue, and foster, a program
>of intentional  harassment,  misrepresentation,  and  retaliation
>against a  known federal  witness, in deliberate and premeditated
>violation of  18 U.S.C.  1512 and 1513.  Again, you have now been
>Thank you for obeying American Law never repealed.
>Sincerely yours,
>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
>Counselor at Law and federal witness
>c/o 2509 N. Campbell Avenue, #1776
>Tucson 85719/tdc
>ARIZONA STATE (See USPS Publication #221.)
>email:       pmitch@primenet.com (586/Eudora Pro 3.0.3(16):
>             preferred, to conserve all resources)
>phone:       (520) 320-1514 (private line:
>             please get permission to disclose)
>fax machine: (520) 320-1256 (dedicated hard copy:
>             available 24-hours per day or night)
>fax modem:   (520) 320-1513 (switched fax/modem:
>             use when fax machine is busy/no answer)
>website:     http://www.supremelaw.com
>                             #  #  #


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail