Time: Thu Oct 02 18:09:07 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA00366;
	Thu, 2 Oct 1997 18:08:42 -0700 (MST)
	by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA06201;
	Thu, 2 Oct 1997 18:07:08 -0700 (MST)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 18:06:32 -0700
To: Coya Spoto <S-SPCOL@vjcstu01.vjc.edu>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Dred Scott decision and the outcome

We don't exactly have a brief, as such,
on the Dred Scott decision, but our work
truly pivots on the holding in that case.

What followed was a HUGE political controversy
in America, over the true meaning of that
extremely long decision;  then a massive and
bloody war;  followed by the 13th and 14th
amendments [sic].  I believe Taney was mostly
correct, but you must read the entire decision
to understand the full breadth of that opinion. 

If you want to pick up there, then read 
the case of Dyett v. Turner, Utah Supreme Court,
which is excerpted in the NINTH NOTICE AND DEMAND 
USA v. Knudson.  This case is now loaded into the 
Supreme Law Library ("SLL") at the URL just below
my name here (which you now have).

This is document #13 in the case law section of SLL.

Go to the home page;  click on "Supreme Law Library"
in the left margin;  then click on "U.S.A. v. Knudson";
this will take you to a "Table of Contents", and then
click on "13. 21382 [bytes] NINTH NOTICE AND DEMAND

The full decision in Dyett v. Turner is out there
on the Internet, somewhere in this vast ocean of
resources we now have at our finger tips.

If you want to journey into our very latest, and
the most sophisticated work we have done to date,
take time to read and study the OPENING BRIEF
in USA v. Gilbertson.  You would do best to take
this to the local law library, so that you can
have volumes of reference materials near by.
You might also leave a hard copy with the 
librarians, so that they can tell their clients
about this brief.  We have received many compliments
of this brief, from all over the country, especially
after loading it into SLL.

Thanks for staying in touch.  I hope life is
going well with you and yours.

/s/ Paul Mitchell

copy:  Supreme Law School

At 08:47 PM 10/2/97 -0500, you wrote:
>I wanted to read your brief on the Dred Scott decision.  And I wanted to
>thank you for all the work you are doing on behalf of us citizens. 

You are very welcome. 
We appreciate your kindness
very VERY much!

/s/ Paul Mitchell

>God bless.

Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris      : Counselor at Law, federal witness 01
B.A.: Political Science, UCLA;   M.S.: Public Administration, U.C.Irvine 02
tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night 03
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU 04
website: http://supremelaw.com       : visit the Supreme Law Library now 05
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best 06
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone 07
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this 08
_____________________________________: Law is authority in written words 09
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall 10
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. 11
======================================================================== 12
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] 13


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail