Time: Fri Nov 15 18:25:41 1996
To: Skip Leuschner <skipl@pacifier.com>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: 9 cents per minute, anywhere in America
Cc:
Bcc: Electra Briggs, Jean-Pierre Weingarten, Dean Hines, Bernie Oliver, Harvey Wysong, Marcia A. Armstrong, Richard Ginn, Nancy Lord, Neil Nordbrock
Dear Skip,
I regret it very much that
you find it necessary to write
this, in the tone that you
chosen. Since I am not
yet privy to all the customs
and practices of this list
(I am new here), I have found
it necessary to be rather
assertive in the face of what
appears to me as another falsehood,
being sown for no good purpose,
in the minds of people who might
be regular readers here.
If you want to characterize what I wrote
as "legalistic crap," that is your
choice of words, and I will defend
your fundamental Right to exercise
freedom of speech here. However,
freedom of speech does not embrace
the publication of lies which can be
and are very damaging to a person's
livelihood; this is libel, not
freedom of speech. There is a difference.
Imagine, if you will, that someone on
this list started to post innuendos
that you are really a deep cover
CIA operative, and you are covering
a widespread child kidnap racket which
is being run through the Child Protective
Services department of the State of
Arizona. Wouldn't you object to such
an innuendo, in the strongest of terms?
I know I would, and I would expect you
to do so also, if it were false.
Since we have come to this point, just
what is the "specific purpose" to which
you refer? I will not threaten you,
at any time. But, if you should choose
to join the small group of people on
the Internet who find it necessary to
imply, or suggest, or infer, that I am
a government agent, then I will find it
necessary to take steps to prevent such
damaging lies from propagating here.
Wouldn't you do the same, or not?
I am asking a real question of you,
not a loaded question, nor am I begging
this question.
If you are deleting my email, then we
will never have a chance to communicate
with each other, one-on-one. That is
rather tragic, in my opinion. My purpose
in sharing what I have written to the FBI
is to provide you with evidence that certain
people, particularly within the federal government,
might, and do, have a real motive to perpetrate
character assassination here, specifically against
me and all the work I have done in the area of
federal law for the past 7 years.
If ROC stands for "Return Our Constitution,"
then I for one am not as interested in
academic philosophies, as I am in the
real applications of freedom, the Bill of
Rights, and fundamental Law. To label
the unique challenges of my own situation as
"legalistic crap," as you have done here,
is to abandom the principles of the Constitution
if and when the first real live example comes
marching across your monitor screen.
I will be happy to hold out the olive branch to
you, but first I need to know whether or not
you are going to join the liars who are lurking
behind certain robes, both in and outside of
government. So, Skip, the choice is up to
you. What's it going to be?
I await your answer.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Mitchell
>Just out of curiosity Paul, why would you think that anyone on ROC gives
>a damn about the legalistic crap which follows? We subscribed for a
>specific purpose, some of us long ago, and your squabble with Harry has
>nothing to do with that purpose. It is nothing but a nuisance. I can't
>speak for others, but your name has earned a place on my "delete before
>reading" list. The only thing any of us has going for us on the internet
>is our credibility in the context of the purpose of the list. You are
>violating the contextual restraint blatantly, with attendant damage to
>your credibility.
>
>Will you now threaten me with a lawsuit also. Your threats bring no
>credit to you or your profession.
>
>Again, take your private squabbles and irrelevant inputs private please.
>
>Skip
>
>
>On Fri,15 Nov 1996, Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote:
>
>> Dear Sir,
>>
>> Okay, Harry, now you have escalated,
>> so I will escalate with you.
>>
>> For your information, and you
>> had better take note of this,
>> I have already filed an Affidavit
>> of Non-Governmental Affiliation,
>> pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1),
>> and pursuant to Rule 24(a) of the
>> Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
>> in the United States District Court,
>> Central District of California,
>> Western Division, on April 5, 1996.
>>
>> I have this file-stamped document
>> on my desk as I type this, so I am
>> transcribing off the original.
>>
>> The case into which I filed this
>> affidavit is UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
>> V. MARY ELIZABETH BRODERICK et al. [sic],
>> Case Number CV-96-2141-CBM.
>>
>> You, sir, are now treading perilously
>> close to libel, and I hereby demand
>> that you cease and desist any further
>> attempts on your part to use innuendo,
>> false association, lies, deception,
>> or fraud to defame me further.
>>
>> I have already had several important
>> cases scuttled by persons known and
>> unknown to my, in part by convincing my
>> client(s) to believe that I am some
>> kind of deep cover government agent.
>>
>> This is a lie, and I want it to stop.
>>
>> Do you understand what I have just
>> written to you, or do you not understand
>> what I have just written to you?
>>
>> I will be happy to make a scanned facsimile
>> of this document available to anybody
>> who politely requests it here.
>>
>> Thank you for your cooperation, and
>> for your consideration.
>>
>> /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
>> Counselor at Law, federal witness
>> and Citizen of Arizona state
>>
>> copy: Thomas H. Basham
>> Federal Bureau of Investigation
>>
>> letter to FBI from Paul Mitchell follows:
>>
>> c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776
>> Tucson [zip code exempt]
>> ARIZONA REPUBLIC
>>
>> September 13, 1996
>>
>> Mr. Thomas H. Basham
>> Supervisory Senior Resident Agent
>> Federal Bureau of Investigation
>> U.S. Department of Justice
>> 201 East Indianola
>> Phoenix, Arizona 85012/tdc
>>
>> Subject: Criminal Misconduct by John M. Roll,
>> United States District Court, Tucson
>>
>> Dear Mr. Basham:
>>
>> Thank you very much for your letter to Me, dated September
>> 9, 1996, concerning alleged criminal misconduct by a Federal
>> District Court Judge in Tucson, Arizona.
>>
>> In your letter, you stated that My letter to the FBI does
>> not contain sufficient detail to determine whether a criminal
>> investigation is warranted. You also requested that I submit, to
>> the Tucson office of the FBI, further documentation of the
>> alleged misconduct, to include names, dates, and any other facts
>> that may be pertinent. To this end, enclosed please find all the
>> pertinent materials currently in My possession and control.
>>
>> The thread of evidence you should follow concerns the events
>> which occurred immediately after a federal grand jury subpoena
>> was first served on New Life Health Center Company in Tucson,
>> Arizona state ("New Life"). Pay particular attention to the fate
>> of all the U.S. Mail which We transmitted directly to the grand
>> jury Foreperson in response to their subpoena.
>>
>> I was retained by New Life at that time to answer the
>> subpoena (see enclosed PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION, dated March 20,
>> 1996) and to assist New Life with their civil defense. This
>> PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION was mailed to the Grand Jury Foreperson
>> via Registered U.S. Mail, return receipt and restricted delivery
>> both requested. The enclosed evidence will show that this
>> PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION was illegally intercepted by John M.
>> Roll, who handed it to Robert L. Miskell in the office of the
>> United States Attorney in Tucson.
>>
>> After investigating on Our own, and with the able assistance
>> of the Postmaster, We decided to prepare and mail a FORMAL
>> REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION to the same federal grand jury. This
>> request was mailed to the Foreperson on April 28, 1996 (see
>> enclosed). This FORMAL REQUEST was also intercepted by John M.
>> Roll, who also handed it to Robert L. Miskell. We have reason to
>> believe that the federal grand jury never saw this FORMAL REQUEST
>> either.
>>
>> At a subsequent hearing on the matter, John M. Roll
>> admitted, on the official court record, that he had intercepted
>> this FORMAL REQUEST. He also said that he had not opened it, but
>> that he had given it to Robert L. Miskell. At that same hearing,
>> Robert L. Miskell admitted, on record, that he had received this
>> FORMAL REQUEST from John M. Roll, and that the mail in question
>> simply contained a formal request that the federal grand jury
>> investigate possible violations of federal law by Robert L.
>> Miskell. We inferred from Miskell's comments that he had,
>> indeed, opened this mail, because he was correct about its
>> contents.
>>
>> At this point, We felt it was necessary to place the
>> Foreperson of the federal grand jury on the Proof of Service list
>> for all subsequent pleadings which We planned to file in that
>> case. All together, some twenty-five (25) different pleadings
>> were then filed under My signature, or under signatures of Mine
>> and Dr. Eugene A. Burns. Some of these pleadings are affidavits.
>> All pleadings currently in My possession and control are
>> enclosed, for your review.
>>
>> Counting all 25 pleadings, the PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
>> (26), and the FORMAL REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION (27), none of
>> which were ever delivered to the federal grand jury Foreperson to
>> whom they were mailed, We count 27 counts of mail fraud, 27
>> counts of jury tampering, 27 counts of obstruction of justice,
>> and 27 counts of conspiracy to commit all of the above, committed
>> by a conspiracy of persons including, but not limited to, John M.
>> Roll, Janet Napolitano, Robert L. Miskell, and Evangelina
>> Cardenas. Other likely accessories to these crimes include
>> Robert A. Johnson, Robert H. Weare, and William M. McCool.
>>
>> At another hearing on the matter, John M. Roll complained
>> that he had some 14 inches of pleadings to read in this case.
>> But then, he immediately called a recess, and huddled for quite
>> some time with his staff, both inside and outside the courtroom.
>> When he came back into session, John M. Roll qualified his
>> earlier statement by saying that he really had only 6 or 7 inches
>> of pleadings in this case, but that he guaranteed, if We had
>> filed them, he had read them. This statement was witnessed by Me
>> and by My assistant Counsel, Neil Thomas Nordbrock, who is also a
>> federal witness to perjury of oath by Robert L. Miskell in
>> another case. Neil Nordbrock and I took his qualification to
>> mean that John M. Roll had, in fact, intercepted all 25 pleadings
>> which We had mailed to the grand jury Foreperson. You can
>> measure their thickness yourself.
>>
>> I hope this response to your letter is satisfactory. If you
>> should need any additional information, permit Me to recommend
>> that you first contact Dr. Eugene A. Burns, Managing Director of
>> New Life Health Center Company, 4500 East Speedway, Suite 27,
>> Tucson, Arizona state. As of the moment I vacated the premises
>> at New Life, Dr. Burns was in possession and control of all the
>> documentary exhibits which were attached to the enclosed
>> pleadings. These documentary exhibits include, for example, the
>> Postmaster's response to our FOIA request for a certified copy of
>> the Standing Delivery Order (USPS Form 3801) signed by the
>> federal grand jury Foreperson in the New Life case. This
>> response stated that there was no such document in existence,
>> proving that the Foreperson had never authorized anyone else to
>> accept or sign for U.S. Mail addressed to him/her.
>>
>> Thank you very much for your consideration.
>>
>> VERIFICATION
>>
>> I, Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S., Citizen of Arizona
>> state and federal witness, hereby verify, under penalty of
>> perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without
>> the "United States," that the above statements of fact are true,
>> correct, complete, and not misleading, to the best of My current
>> information, knowledge, and belief, so help Me God, pursuant to
>> 28 U.S.C. 1746(1).
>>
>> Further Affiant sayeth naught.
>>
>>
>> Respectfully submitted,
>>
>> /s/ Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
>>
>> Citizen of Arizona state and federal witness
>>
>>
>> attachments: to FBI, Tucson
>>
>> copy: Bruce J. Gebhardt
>> Special Agent in Charge
>>
>> copy: Thomas H. Basham
>> Supervisory Senior Resident Agent
>> c/o Federal Bureau of Investigation
>> 1 South Church Avenue, Suite 600
>> Tucson, Arizona state 85701/tdc
>>
>> copy: Postmaster
>> U.S. Post Office
>> Downtown Station
>> Tucson, Arizona
>>
>>
>> # # #
>>
>> >
>> >Can You Say Agent Provocateur ?
>> >Harry
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >The last user of box 1776 caused Postal Inspectors and FBI to come
>> >around asking questions about her. Maybe no connection. Just a word
>> >of caution. Of course a learned man such as yourself would check on
>> >the legallity of such, I'm sure.
>> >>
>> >
>> >>I was wondering that myself , After all the box number that the orig. gives
>> >>"1776" is false. Sounds fishy to me . Use at your own risk.
>> >>
>> >>Paul Andrew, Mitchell,
>> >>2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state
>> >>
>> >>This is not his box number.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >
>> >>>You can make it fit in here. Just claim its a front for an FBI or BATF
>> >>>sting operation authoorized and paid for by Clinton's telecommunication
>> >>>act. Hmmm, I wonder if it really is?
>> >>>
>> >>>Russ
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >"This year will go down in history.For the first time , a civilized nation
>> >has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more
>> efficient,
>> >and the world will follow our lead into the future !"
>> > Adolf Hitler
>> > Berlin Daily
>> > April 15, 1935
>> >
>> >
>> > "Freiheit stirbt in kleinen Teilen. "
>> >---An appropriate German saying :" Freedom dies in small pieces ."
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >========================================================================
>> >To subscribe: send a message to the Liberty@hollyent.com
>> >with the word SUBSCRIBE in the subject/topic field. Use UNSUBSCRIBE to
>> >remove yourself from the list. Questions/comments/problems?
>> > email: Not Moderated@hollyent.com or listmgmt@hollyent.com
>> >For information about this system and its lists email: info@hollyent.com
>> >========================================================================
>> >via: Holly Enterprises 602-922-1639 - www.hollyent.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ===========================================================
>> Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.: pmitch@primenet.com
>> ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state
>> ===========================================================
>>
>>
>
>
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail