Time: Fri Dec 12 04:31:32 1997 To: "Randy L. Geiszler" <behold@teleport.com> From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLF: IRS is an extortion racket Cc: Bcc: sls, friends References: Dear Mr. Geiszler, I construct 245 to say: "whoever injures, intimidates, or interferes with any person because he is campaigning as a candidate for elective office ...." I am now campaigning for the House of Reprentatives, a federal elective office. You would argue that the law does not protect me, because I am not a federal citizen, correct? The term "State" is defined to include the several States, D.C., and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States. See 18 U.S.C. 245(d). Thus, it has comprehensive territorial jurisdiction. I think I can defeat any argument that it applies only to federal citizens. If anyone should argue that it DOES only apply to federal citizens, then I will defeat that position for violating equal protection. This is the great, and fatal, flaw which comes with upholding 2 classes of citizenship, and the debate will come back to my major point, once again. You and Mr. Robert Wangrud are not interested in helping me; you both appear to be interested in blocking every single thing I say, and do. I now believe Mr. Wangrud is not who he says he is. You, Sir, have obstructed my efforts noticeably less than Mr. Wancrud, so my opinion of you is currently in suspense. Please remove me from ALL of your electronic mailing lists. Thank you, and goodbye. /s/ Paul Mitchell, Candidate for Congress http://supremelaw.com At 12:07 AM 12/12/97 -0800, you wrote: >Randy L. Geiszler here, > >Paul, did you know that 18 U.S.C. 240-245 are derived from civil rights >acts which, in turn are derived from the Civil War Amendments. Check it >out. Made the same mistake myself once, until a studious and concerned >patriot pointed it out. > >At 06:14 PM 12/10/97 -0800, Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote: >>[This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] >> >> >>Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris >>Citizen of Arizona state, Federal Witness, >>and Vice President for Legal Affairs >>c/o General Delivery at: >>2509 North Campbell, #1776 >>Tucson, Arizona state >> >>In Propria Persona >> >>All Rights Reserved >>without prejudice >> >> >> >> >> UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT >> >> DISTRICT OF ARIZONA >> >> >>In Re: ) Case No. #93-06051-PHX-GBN >> ) >>New Life Health Center Company, ) 7th SUPPLEMENT TO APPLICATION >>Debtor ) FOR INTERVENTION OF RIGHT, FOR >> ) RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY >> ) AND DEMAND FOR MANDATORY >> ) JUDICIAL NOTICE: >>________________________________) >> ) Rule 201(d), Federal Rules >>Paul Andrew Mitchell, ) of Evidence; Rule 4001, >> ) Local Bankruptcy Rule; >> Movant, ) Full Faith and Credit Clause >> ) >> v. ) >> ) >>New Life Health Center Company ) >>et al., ) >> ) >> Respondents. ) >>________________________________) >> >> >>COMES NOW Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris, Citizen of Arizona >> >>state, expressly not a citizen of the United States ("federal >> >>citizen"), Federal Witness, Private Attorney General, and >> >>Candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives (hereinafter >> >>"Movant"), to provide formal Notice to all interested party(s), >> >>and to demand mandatory judicial notice by this honorable Court, >> >>pursuant to Rule 201(d) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, of >> >>Movant's arguments, as made herein, why this Court should deny >> >>confirmation of Debtor's First Amended Plan of Reorganization. >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 1 of 17 >> >> >> FRAUD UPON THE COURT AND UPON MOVANT >> >> Fraud has been perpetrated upon this honorable Court, by >> >>virtue of misrepresentations by Mr. Robert A. Johnson, Esquire >> >>("Mr. Johnson"), to wit: >> >> Mr. Johnson does not have a valid oath of office. See >> >>attached Exhibits "A", "B", and "C", which are attached hereto >> >>and incorporated by reference as if set forth fully herein. >> >> Mr. Johnson does not enjoy any lawful power(s) of attorney >> >>to represent the "Internal Revenue Service" [sic]. >> >> Mr. Johnson has fallen totally silent in the face of two (2) >> >>affidavits which implicate Mr. Johnson in barratry, fraud, >> >>extortion, and criminal conspiracy against Debtor. >> >> Said affidavits have now become the truth of the case, for >> >>all time. See exhibits attached. >> >> Moreover, the "Internal Revenue Service" is not an >> >>organization within the United States Department of the Treasury. >> >>It has never been authorized by Act of Congress to exist as such. >> >> The "Internal Revenue Service" is actually an extortion >> >>racket operating as Trust #62, which is domiciled in Puerto Rico >> >>-- a federal "State" -- under color of the Federal Alcohol >> >>Administration ("FAA"), but the FAA was declared unconstitutional >> >>by the Supreme Court of the United States in the year 1935. >> >> >> DEPRIVATION OF DUE PROCESS >> >> This court has inflicted a financial hardship upon Movant by >> >>abusing discretion and depriving Movant of Movant's fundamental >> >>Right to due process of law, by failing timely to rule upon >> >>Movant's APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION OF RIGHT, RELIEF FROM THE >> >>AUTOMATIC STAY, AND DECLARATORY JUDGMENTS. >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 2 of 17 >> >> >> Movant has thus been arbitrarily and capriciously deprived >> >>of an opportunity to intervene in the instant case so as to >> >>defend the Debtor against certain, specific criminal conduct >> >>being perpetrated upon Debtor by officers, co-workers and agents >> >>of the Debtor. Movant has gone to great lengths to document said >> >>criminal conduct -- by means of pleadings including, but not >> >>limited to, Movant's VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS previously >> >>filed and properly served upon all interested party(s). >> >> The several officers and alleged agents of this Court are >> >>thus implicated in fraud upon Movant, and also in depriving, and >> >>in conspiring to deprive, Movant of fundamental Rights guaranteed >> >>to Movant by the Constitution for the United States of America, >> >>as lawfully amended, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 241 and 242. >> >> See Exhibit "D", also incorporated herein by reference. >> >> >> VERIFICATION >> >>I, Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris, hereby verify, under penalty >> >>of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, >> >>without the "United States" (federal government), that the above >> >>statement of fact is true and correct, according to the best of >> >>My current information, knowledge, and belief, so help Me God, >> >>pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1). >> >> >>Dated: December 10, 1997 >> >>Respectfully submitted, >> >>/s/ Paul Mitchell >> >>Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. >>Citizen of Arizona state, Federal Witness >>(expressly not a citizen of the United States) >> >>All Rights Reserved without prejudice >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 3 of 17 >> >> >> PROOF OF SERVICE >> >>I, Paul Andrew, Mitchell, Sui Juris, hereby certify, under >> >>penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of >> >>America, without the "United States" (federal government), that I >> >>am at least 18 years of age, a Citizen of one of the United >> >>States of America, and that I personally served the following >> >>document(s): >> >> 7th SUPPLEMENT TO APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION OF RIGHT, >> FOR RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY AND >> DEMAND FOR MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE: >> Rule 201(d), Federal Rules of Evidence; >> Rule 4001, Local Bankruptcy Rule; >> Full Faith and Credit Clause >> >>by placing one true and correct copy of said document(s) in first >> >>class U.S. Mail, with postage prepaid and properly addressed to: >> >>Christopher H. Bayley United States Trustees >>Todd V. Jones c/o P.O. Box 36170 >>c/o 400 E. Van Buren Phoenix 85067-6170/tdc >>One Arizona Center ARIZONA STATE >>Phoenix 85004-0001/tdc >>ARIZONA STATE >> >>Cathy Holt Robert A. Johnson, Esquire >>Lewis and Roca "Internal Revenue Service" [sic] >>c/o 40 N. Central Ave. c/o 3225 N. Central, #1500 >>Phoenix 85004/tdc Phoenix 85012-2469/tdc >>ARIZONA STATE ARIZONA STATE >> >>Brian Feldman, Esquire >>Department of Justice >>Civil Trial Section -- Western Region >>c/o P.O. Box 683, Ben Franklin Station >>Washington 20044-0683/tdc >>DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA >> >> >>[See USPS Publication #221 for addressing instructions.] >> >> >>Executed on December 10, 1997: >> >>/s/ Paul Mitchell >> >>Paul Andrew, Mitchell, Sui Juris >>Citizen of Arizona state, Federal Witness >>(expressly not a citizen of the United States) >> >>All Rights Reserved without Prejudice >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 4 of 17 >> >> >> Exhibit "A": >> >> CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE AND DEMAND >> >> TO: Mr. Robert A. Johnson >> FROM: Mr. Paul Andrew Mitchell >> DATE: May 27, 1996 >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 5 of 17 >> >> >>Certified U.S. Mail c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 >>Serial Number #P-899-777-085 Tucson, Arizona state >>Return Receipt Requested zip code exempt >>Restricted Delivery Requested May 27, 1996 >> >> CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE AND DEMAND >> >>Mr. Robert A. Johnson >>3225 North Central Avenue, Suite 1500 >>Phoenix, Arizona state >>zip code exempt >> >>Dear Mr. Johnson: >> >>This is to inform you that you have been implicated in barratry >>and criminal conspiracy because of verified statements of fact >>which have been made in EXHIBIT "D" attached to the AFFIDAVIT OF >>CAUSES AND OBJECTIONS TO O.S.C. which I executed and filed on >>behalf on the Company In re: Grand Jury Subpoena Served on New >>Life Health Center Company, U.S. District Court Case No. GJ-95-1- >>6, Tucson, Arizona. >> >>You will have at most thirty (30) calendar days, as of the above >>date, to file any verified affidavit(s) of rebuttal to this >>EXHIBIT "D", a copy of which is attached hereto for your >>convenience. Under applicable rules of the Common Law, which >>have been formally invoked in this case, your failure to rebut >>said EXHIBIT will render it conclusive fact and the truth of the >>case for all time. Silence creates estoppel by acquiescence. >> >> Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a >> legal or moral duty to speak or where an inquiry left >> unanswered would be intentionally misleading. ... We >> cannot condone this shocking conduct by the IRS. Our >> revenue system is based upon the good faith of the >> taxpayers and the taxpayers should be able to expect >> the same from government in its enforcement and >> collection activities.... This sort of deception will >> not be tolerated and if this is the "routine" it should >> be corrected immediately. >> >> [U. S. vs Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299 (1977)] >> [quoting U.S. vs Prudden, 424 F.2d 1021, 1032 (1970)] >> [emphasis added] >> >> Silence is a species of conduct, and constitutes an >> implied representation of the existence of the state of >> facts in question, and the estoppel is accordingly a >> species of estoppel by misrepresentation. [cite >> omitted] When silence is of such a character and under >> such circumstances that it would become a fraud upon >> the other party to permit the party who has kept silent >> to deny what his silence has induced the other to >> believe and act upon, it will operate as an estoppel. >> >> [Carmine vs Bowen, 64 A. 932 (1906), emphasis added] >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 6 of 17 >> >> >>Please be advised that the Company and its officers and co- >>workers have explicitly reserved their right to have a jury of >>peers resolve controversies of fact and law in this case. >> >>Thank you very much in advance for your cooperation. The clock >>is now running. >> >> >>Sincerely yours, >> >>/s/ Paul Mitchell >> >>Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. >>Citizen of Arizona state >>(520) 323-3921 phone/VM >>(520) 323-3922 fax/24-hour >>email: pmitch@primenet.com >> >>copies: Judge John M. Roll, U.S. District Court, Tucson >> Judge Alex Kozinski, Ninth Circuit, Pasadena >> Judge George Nielsen, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Phoenix >> Albert M. Rau, Chapter 13 Trustee, Phoenix >> James J. Everett, Counsel for Debtors, Phoenix >> >> >> # # # >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 7 of 17 >> >> >> Exhibit "B": >> >> CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE AND DEMAND >> >> TO: Mr. Robert A. Johnson >> FROM: Mr. Paul Andrew Mitchell >> DATE: June 15, 1996 >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 8 of 17 >> >> >>Certified U.S. Mail c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 >>Serial Number #P-476-653-250 Tucson, Arizona state >>Return Receipt Requested zip code exempt >>Restricted Delivery Requested June 15, 1996 >> >> CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE AND DEMAND >> >>Mr. Robert A. Johnson >>3225 North Central Avenue, Suite 1500 >>Phoenix, Arizona state >>zip code exempt >> >>Dear Mr. Johnson: >> >>This is to inform you that you have been implicated in barratry, >>fraud, extortion, and criminal conspiracy because of verified >>statements of fact which have been made in the JOINT AFFIDAVIT OF >>DR. AND MRS. EUGENE BURNS AND DR. AND MRS. SHELDON DEAL, which >>was executed and filed on behalf on the Company In re: Grand Jury >>Subpoena Served on New Life Health Center Company, U.S. District >>Court Case No. GJ-95-1-6, Tucson, Arizona. >> >>You will have at most thirty (30) calendar days, as of the above >>date, to file any verified affidavit(s) of rebuttal to this >>AFFIDAVIT, a copy of which is attached hereto for your >>convenience. Under applicable rules of the Common Law, which >>have been formally invoked in this case, your failure to rebut >>said AFFIDAVIT will render it conclusive fact and the truth of >>the case for all time. Silence creates estoppel by acquiescence. >> >> Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a >> legal or moral duty to speak or where an inquiry left >> unanswered would be intentionally misleading. ... We >> cannot condone this shocking conduct by the IRS. Our >> revenue system is based upon the good faith of the >> taxpayers and the taxpayers should be able to expect >> the same from government in its enforcement and >> collection activities.... This sort of deception will >> not be tolerated and if this is the "routine" it should >> be corrected immediately. >> >> [U. S. vs Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299 (1977)] >> [quoting U.S. vs Prudden, 424 F.2d 1021, 1032 (1970)] >> [emphasis added] >> >> Silence is a species of conduct, and constitutes an >> implied representation of the existence of the state of >> facts in question, and the estoppel is accordingly a >> species of estoppel by misrepresentation. [cite >> omitted] When silence is of such a character and under >> such circumstances that it would become a fraud upon >> the other party to permit the party who has kept silent >> to deny what his silence has induced the other to >> believe and act upon, it will operate as an estoppel. >> >> [Carmine vs Bowen, 64 A. 932 (1906), emphasis added] >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 9 of 17 >> >> >>Please be advised that the Company and its officers and co- >>workers have explicitly reserved their right to have a jury of >>peers resolve controversies of fact and law in this case. >> >>Thank you very much in advance for your cooperation. The clock >>is now running. >> >> >>Sincerely yours, >> >>/s/ Paul Mitchell >> >>Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. >>Citizen of Arizona state >>(520) 323-3921 phone/VM >>(520) 323-3922 fax/24-hour >>email: pmitch@primenet.com >> >>copies: Judge John M. Roll, U.S. District Court, Tucson >> Judge Alex Kozinski, Ninth Circuit, Pasadena >> Judge George Nielsen, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Phoenix >> Albert M. Rau, Chapter 13 Trustee, Phoenix >> James J. Everett, former Counsel for Debtors, Phoenix >> >> >> # # # >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 10 of 17 >> >> >> Exhibit "C": >> >> AFFIDAVIT OF DEFAULT >> >> TO: Mr. Robert A. Johnson >> FROM: Mr. Paul Andrew Mitchell >> DATE: August 5, 1996 >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 11 of 17 >> >> >>Certified U.S. Mail c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 >>Serial Number #P-332-390-902 Tucson, Arizona state >>Return Receipt Requested zip code exempt >>Restricted Delivery Requested August 5, 1996 >> >> AFFIDAVIT OF DEFAULT >> >>Mr. Robert A. Johnson >>3225 North Central Avenue, Suite 1500 >>Phoenix, Arizona state >>zip code exempt >> >>Dear Mr. Johnson: >> >> This is my AFFIDAVIT OF DEFAULT affirming, under penalty of >>perjury, that by your total silence you have defaulted in the >>face of my two (2) CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICES AND DEMANDS dated May 27, >>1996, and June 15, 1996, respectively, copies of which are >>attached for your information and recollection. >> >> In said NOTICES AND DEMANDS, you were advised that your >>silence in the face of the attached AFFIDAVITS would render them >>conclusive fact and the truth of the case for all time, and that >>your silence would invoke estoppel by acquiescence. >> >> To repeat, you have completely failed to answer or otherwise >>rebut, either verbally or in writing, any of the statements which >>have been made in the above mentioned AFFIDAVITS. >> >> >> VERIFICATION >> >> I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws >>of the United States of America, without the "United States," >>that the above statement of fact is true and correct, to the best >>of my current knowledge, information, and belief, that it is >>materially complete and not misleading, so help Me God, pursuant >>to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1). >> >> >>Executed on August 5, 1996. >> >>/s/ Paul Mitchell >> >>Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. >>Citizen of Arizona state and federal witness >> >>attachments >> >>copy: Federal Bureau of Investigation >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 12 of 17 >> >> >> Exhibit "D": >> >> PRESS RELEASE: >> >> "Paul Mitchell Wins Civil Verdict >> against Accountant for Embezzling $3,000" >> >> November 12, 1997 >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 13 of 17 >> >> >>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 12, 1997 >> >> Paul Mitchell Wins Civil Verdict >> against Accountant for Embezzling $3,000 >> >>Tucson, Arizona. Paul Andrew Mitchell, Counselor at Law, federal >>witness, and founder of the Supreme Law Firm and Supreme Law >>School, was awarded more than $3,000 in actual damages today from >>a jury of 8 who agreed that Neil and Evelyn Nordbrock had >>embezzled funds entrusted to their care and management. >> Mitchell was invited by the Nordbrocks to change plans and >>move to Tucson in late February of 1996, when they met at a >>conference on common law in Albuquerque, New Mexico. A scheduled >>speaker failed to show, and Mitchell was asked to address a full >>audience instead. The Nordbrocks were so moved by Mitchell's >>lecture, they offered him an office in Tucson, Arizona, to >>continue his research there. That office was a single room, >>without windows, in the administrative headquarters of the New >>Life Health Center. >> Soon after arriving in Tucson, Mitchell was invited to >>lecture at the Elizabeth Broderick Seminars in Palmdale, >>California, where Broderick claimed to have perfected huge >>commercial liens against government agencies like the County of >>Orange, California. Broderick even took credit for precipitating >>the largest municipal bankruptcy in the history of America, when >>the County of Orange floundered under Treasurer Robert Citron's >>failed financial management of overly leveraged derivatives. >>Broderick then issued phony bank checks against these bogus liens >>to all attendees of her biweekly seminars. An estimated 5,000 >>people received her warrants at these seminars. >> Broderick's checks were collected at FBI headquarters in Los >>Angeles, California. From there, the checks were handed to a >>property forfeiture team, with headquarters in the Department of >>Justice. Mitchell has recently filed a formal OFFER TO PROVE >>RACKETEERING in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, >>alleging that DOJ aided and abetted Broderick's racket, by using >>the phony checks to entrap Broderick's naive seminar attendees. >>Broderick has since been convicted of 26 counts of bank fraud and >>mail fraud. All her co-defendants were likewise convicted. >> While Mitchell was beginning to build an early foundation >>for Broderick's defense, his efforts were quickly scuttled when >>the Colton office rented by Adolf Hoch, a Broderick associate, >>was gutted of all computer and related equipment, leaving only >>the carpets and empty desks. At the same time, Mitchell was >>loaned a car with tampered front brakes. A Colton auto mechanic >>invited him to inspect the car, while it was on the rack and the >>brake assembly was at eye level. Adolf Hoch was asked to pay for >>the repairs, but he complained that the mechanic was gouging him. >>At that time, Hoch was driving a new Buick Riviera worth $35,000, >>and the estimated brake repairs cost less than $500. >> A related case was also heating up while Mitchell was in >>Colton, attempting to assemble a major defense strategy for >>Broderick and her co-defendants. The New Life Health Center in >>Tucson, Arizona, was served with a grand jury subpoena for all >>business records. The general manager of New Life, Eugene A. >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 14 of 17 >> >> >>Burns, had used several Broderick warrants, "flushing New Life >>with much needed cash," as Adolf Hoch had confided to Mitchell, >>on one of several trips from Broderick's San Bernardino office to >>the Essex Hotel in Palmdale, California. En route to Palmdale, >>Hoch was speeding at 90 mph, and nearly missed a small car as it >>crossed the highway, failing to anticipate the high speed of >>Hoch's new Buick in the dark desert. Hoch made a habit of >>holding the wheel with one hand and a cell phone in the other, >>while weaving recklessly through rush hour traffic. >> Mitchell returned to Tucson and turned his attention to an >>aggressive attack on the grand jury subpoena, and on the Internal >>Revenue Service which had initiated DOJ's attempt to obtain New >>Life's records. With strong encouragement from Neil Nordbrock, >>Mitchell conceived a powerful defense which was recently >>published in the Supreme Law Library, an Internet-based archive >>of all key cases Mitchell has litigated as a Counselor at Law. >>That library is available at Internet URL http://supremelaw.com. >> To facilitate court appearances, Mitchell was appointed to >>the office of New Life's Vice President for Legal Affairs, at the >>recommendation of New Life's accountant, Neil Nordbrock, and that >>appointment was recognized, and placed into evidence, by United >>States District Judge John M. Roll in Tucson. With this >>authority, Mitchell wrote a flurry of 25 pleadings which >>overwhelmed the federal judge and sent the IRS and DOJ running >>for cover. >> One of those pleadings exposed, for the first time, what >>Mitchell now calls "The Kick-Back Racket," a defunct federal >>program called Performance Management and Recognition System, >>which awards illegal cash payments to prosecutors and judges, for >>getting indictments from grand juries against tax protestors. >>Mitchell all but proved that a perjury racket was, and still is, >>rampant within the DOJ. On a motion by the corrupt prosecutor, >>Robert L. Miskell, the federal judge then struck all of >>Mitchell's 25 pleadings, after obstructing their delivery by the >>U.S. Postal Service to the federal grand jury convened in that >>case. Mitchell even used Registered U.S. Mail, but the return >>receipts were signed by Judge Roll's secretary, instead of the >>grand jury foreperson. >> During the course of studying New Life's records, Mitchell >>also discovered that his appointment to the office of Vice >>President had been faked by a rubber stamp trustee. In a very >>confidential memo to Neil Nordbrock, long-time accountant for New >>Life, Mitchell predicted that a fictitious trustee would cause >>enormous legal problems for New Life, if it was not corrected >>immediately. Nordbrock never answered Mitchell's memo on this >>subject, and observed passively as Eugene A. Burns, a former >>racketball champion, fell into a full blown panic when the FBI >>put pressure on Burns to jettison Mitchell from the case. >>Mitchell was abruptly terminated from New Life one month after >>Nordbrock received this confidential memo. Mitchell concluded >>from this that Nordbrock had conceived and/or maintained the >>fictitious trustee, from the beginning. >> The Pima County Justice Court, in which Mitchell sued >>Nordbrock, refused to allow this confidential memorandum into >>evidence, in addition to four full boxes of other documents. The >>judge in that case, Walter U. Weber, also decided to disallow >>Mitchell's claim that the Nordbrocks had breached a contract for >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 15 of 17 >> >> >>legal services Mitchell performed for them after his wrongful >>termination from New Life. Weber ruled that Mitchell had >>practiced law by providing legal services to the Nordbrocks. >>Mitchell plans to appeal that portion of the case, to make >>precedent based in part on the original 13th Amendment, and the >>Contract Clause in the U.S. Constitution. Mitchell also >>maneuvered Weber into a bona fide controversy over the provisions >>invoked by Weber's oath of office to support that Constitution. >> Neil Nordbrock had retained Mitchell to commence a quiet >>title action against the IRS, but Mitchell referred that case to >>Vern Holland in Tulsa, Oklahoma, a recognized quiet title expert, >>after Mitchell was invited to defend the Montana Freeman on >>location in Billings, Montana. Mitchell highly recommended >>Holland to the Nordbrocks, who did retain Holland to prepare the >>initial complaint to quiet title to a business office once owned >>by the Nordbrocks, but now forfeited to the IRS for unpaid >>federal income taxes. Neil Nordbrock had tendered a bogus >>Montana Freeman warrant to the IRS for the sum of $398,000, >>during the month before the Albuquerque conference. >> Upon returning from Montana, Mitchell learned that the >>Nordbrocks were about to switch attorneys once again, and retain >>a local Tucson bar member, after complaining bitterly and often >>to Mitchell about the bar monopoly practices. The Nordbrocks >>then paid the new attorney's retainer with money they embezzled >>from Mitchell. That $3,000 was all the money which Mitchell had >>in the world, at that point in time, and the embezzlement put >>enormous pressure on Mitchell just to survive. A private >>mediator even had to loan Mitchell money, just to buy food. >>Other generous Americans have quietly helped Mitchell climb out >>of the deep hole caused by DOJ's outright economic retaliation. >> Neil Nordbrock has already been convicted on two felony >>counts of falsifying federal income tax returns, and a lifetime >>injunction prevents him from preparing tax returns. Evelyn >>Nordbrock, his wife, makes a living doing tax returns for Neil's >>former clients, despite their low opinion of the IRS. Clearly, >>they have mixed feelings about Mitchell's admitted plans, and >>highly successful efforts thus far, to dismantle the IRS. Evelyn >>Nordbrock will need to find other work, if Mitchell succeeds. >> Mitchell also plans to sue Eugene A. Burns for wrongful >>termination, and a host of other claims arising from his practice >>of refusing Mitchell's frequent legal mail, and defaming Mitchell >>with obnoxious insults on the outside of refused envelopes. >>Under pressure from Mitchell to subpoena Eugene A. Burns for >>additional testimony, however, Walter U. Weber explained that >>Burns was no longer available. Why, he did not say. >> Weber had also threatened Mitchell with prison and hard >>labor, during the first day of trial, because of all the >>sensitive issues raised by Mitchell's voluminous pleadings. >>Mitchell types 140 words per minute, and shares huge quantities >>of email on the Internet. A motion to change judge was denied. >>Mitchell has filed a criminal complaint against Weber anyway, >>because Mitchell is a recognized federal witness under 18 U.S.C. >>1513, the federal law which prohibits retaliating against any >>federal witness. The penalties for violating this criminal >>statute are quite severe. >> Mitchell is now awaiting a ruling from a federal bankruptcy >>court in Phoenix, Arizona, to lift the automatic stay on >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 16 of 17 >> >> >>litigation against Burns and his company, and to issue a >>declaratory judgment on the validity of Mitchell's appointment to >>the office of Vice President for Legal Affairs. Mitchell's >>research has already uncovered numerous irregularities in the >>original bankruptcy petitions by Burns and New Life, including >>false appraisals of 4 rare South American macaw birds which Burns >>regards as his special pets. Magoo and the other macaws >>accompany Burns to and from work every day, and daily screech at >>high decibels, while people are trying to work, and talk on the >>telephone, in the same office space. >> Burns paid Mitchell $100 per week initially, upping that to >>$500 per week during the height of the grand jury litigation, but >>stiffed Mitchell for over $2,000 in back pay, when Mitchell >>discovered that "Sheryl Smith" is a fictitious trustee. Burns >>routinely paid New Life's former attorney, James J. Everett, at a >>rate of $175 per hour, before Everett upped that rate to $200 per >>hour. Burns is now reported to have sued Everett for fraudulent >>invoices; this report remains unconfirmed. >> >> >> Seventh Supplement to Intervention/Relief from Stay: >> Page 17 of 17 >> >> >> # # # >> >>=========================================================================== >>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 toolbar] : 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 10, non-proportional spacing.] 13 >> >> >> > > Randy Lee Geiszler > BEHOLD! Newsletter > Fourth Judicial District > 11348 S.E. 33rd > Milwaukie, Oregon > (503) 659-6545 > >"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better >than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask >not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. >May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were >our countrymen." - Samuel Adams." > >**************************************************************************** >Copy rights secured to Randy Lee Geiszler. >All rights retained. behold@teleport.com >PLEASE NOTE THE NEW SITE - Home Page BEHOLD NEWSLETTER: >http://www.announce.com/~behold >PLEASE NOTE NEW SNAIL MAIL ADDRESS AND PHONE FOR Randy Lee Geiszler ABOVE. >**************************************************************************** > >
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail