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