Time: Tue Nov 26 05:41:49 1996
To: jbullock@freemarketnetwork.com
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Title 18 on military bases only?
Cc:
Bcc:
Sixth Amendment:
"... to have compulsory process for
obtaining witnesses in his favor ...."
/s/ Paul Mitchell
At 12:05 AM 11/26/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Paul,
>
>Where does the authority for the
>"extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction"
>come from?
>
>In peace.
>
>Jim Bullock
>
>
>
>
>Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote:
>>
>> 18 USC 1513 contains explicit language
>> extending this statute with "extra-territorial
>> application." Now, you might ask yourself,
>> why is this qualifier not found in more
>> statutes within Title 18? So, at least
>> this one statute can be enforced within
>> the several States of the Union, unlike
>> the others which have no application
>> outside the federal zone. So, I agree
>> with LeRoy, but only in part, because of
>> the obvious exception found in 18 USC 1513.
>> Confer at "inclusio unius est exclusio
>> alterius" in Black's Law Dictionary.
>> See also U.S. v. Lopez, S.Ct. (1995);
>> this is the really big case on this
>> subject.
>>
>> /s/ Paul Mitchell
>>
>> >Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 19:27:55 -0800 (PST)
>> >From: Charles Stewart <chuck@teleport.com>
>> >To: Timothy Lee <timr@efn.org>, commonlaw@teleport.com
>> >Subject: Re: ComLaw> Appeal or Cert? (fwd)
>> >
>> >On Mon, 25 Nov 1996, Timothy Lee wrote:
>> >
>> >> Charles Stewart wrote:
>> >
>> >Ah, Mr Richardson,
>> >
>> > So good to hear form you.
>> >
>> > But a quick correction here sir, I did not wright this message,
>> >I only forwarded out what was composed by others.
>> >
>> > You are echoing Rick Schramm, of Right Way Law, True?
>> >
>> > And are you doing your Deprivation of Constitutionally Secured
>> >Rights Suits under title 42 or 18? LeRoy Schwetzer says that Title 18
>> >only applies on military bases, and I presume tha same holds true for 42.
>> >
>> > And have you thought about Commonlaw Tort actions? And if not, why
>> >not? They seem as good as anything else to me. It looks from the books
>> >that they can do anything a t42 can do.
>> >
>> > Your comments would be appreciated. Your welcome to respond to
>> >the entire list on this also, if you prefer.
>> >
>> >
>> >Charles Stewart . . .
>> >
>> >
>> >> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >> > Date: 25 Nov 1996 07:35:16 U
>> >> > From: John Burr <john.burr@qmail.eonetworks.com>
>> >> >
>> >> > John:
>> >> > Could you put this question out to your law mailing list?
>> >> >
>> >> > I have a friend who has done a title 42 against a bunch of the judges and
>> >> > local district attorney. The scenario is basically this:
>> ><snip>
>> >> > Does anyone see any good issues for Cert here? We would like to get into
>> >> > the supreme court if possible. How can we frame the Cert so that an
>> >> > appeal from the appellate court goes there as of right if we are denied?
>> >> >
>> >> > Your help is appreciated,
>> >> > Kevin Haddock
>> >> > Dixianne Hawks
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Do NOT appeal this case. In the 1st place, when you appeal, you as the
>> >> appeallant are certifying that EVERY MATERIAL FACT IN THE RECORD IS
>> >> TRUE; all you are "appealing" is some procedureal error. The whole
>> >> appeal process was developed by judges, for judges and was designed
>> >> specifically to protect judges from an angry populace for mistakes on
>> >> the bench.
>> >>
>> >> In the 2nd place, appeals are not a right under the Common Law and in
>> >> fact there are rules and Supreme Court Case law which specifically state
>> >> that Citizens do not have a "right" to an appeal -- it is a process
>> >> which can be withheld or allowed at whim.
>> >>
>> >> Certiorari on the other hand is a process whereby the Judge gets to
>> >> certify the record as being complete, and then it is sent up to the
>> >> reviewing panel where both procedure and facts can be reviewed. Once
>> >> the Certiorari is in, then you submit various writs of errors to the
>> >> reviewing panel.
>> >>
>> >> However, my guess is that this STILL won't do you any good as my guess
>> >> is that you filed the case in the "United States District Court" under
>> >> 42 USC
>> >> 1985 or 1983? The Common Law as preserved in the Constitution must be
>> >> brought into the court properly and via procedure. The United States
>> >> District Court is a court of the territories and doesn't have
>> >> jurisdiction to hear the case you are trying to bring. They admit the
>> >> case of course, but then when they decide to judicially
>> >> rape/pillage/plunder, they can, since the venue and jurisdiction are
>> >> both wrong to begin with.
>> >>
>> >> We do Deprivation of Constitutionally secured rights suits regularly and
>> >> we teach the process too. Drop me a line if you want to.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ===========================================================
>> 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