Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS, Part 27

[JosephSHaas]

... the burden of proof is upon them to not merely SAY they have jurisdiction, but to PROVE it in writing!
JSH

Joe...There are many U.S. supreme courts cases which assert that both "In personam Jurisdiction" and "Subject Matter Jurisdiction" MUST be "On the Record" before lawful proceedings take place. In addition, "Jurisdiction" can be challenged at ANY time, even AFTER trial and conviction ....

Joe...Here is a start for you on Dun & Bradstreet proving that the location on Pleasant Street is a CORPORATE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE........
  Home  |  Customer Service  |  Business Credit Education  |  My Account  |  Log In/Register ...
   
< Previous Showing 1 of 1 Next >

BR SUPREME COURT, UNITED STATES OF THE

Also Traded as UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 55 PLEASANT ST RM 412, CONCORD, NH    ....

[/quote]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Thanks Dick.  Your previous information on this was copied and sent to both E&E and the Freedom Four by me through the mail.  They have the info for when jurisdiction is challenged and no proof is given by them SAYing so, that this non-proof gets to the jury to, in effect, by their verdict, setting it up for what? a claim in the Court of Claims? Similar info about that court was also sent to all 2+4=6, and they have the time to research this, and do whatever it takes to, in Ed & Elaine's case, to get out of there!

BTW try United States for the company name in the search box over at http://www.dnb.com/us/ and then the United States in the location box just underneath that, and then: for "Select a State" click on New Hampshire.

It goes to: Senate, United States, 1750 Elm St., Ste. 120, Manchester, N.H.

Say what? Tomorrow's a snow day.  You wanna check this place out on Monday?

According to both the: (1) Senator John E. Sununu http://sununu.senate.gov/ website*, and the (2) Sen. Judd Gregg http://gregg.senate.gov/public/ website** neither of them shows this 1750 Elm Street as their address!  What's going on here?  Is this 1750 Elm Street the seat of the corporate United States here in New Hampshire? And if so, Who's in charge? Plus why list the "Senate", but not the House?

-* Sen. Sununu @ 1589 Elm St., Suite 3, Manch, N.H. 03101, 647-7500; +

** Sen. Gregg, @ 41 Hooksett Rd., Manchester, N.H. 03104, 622-7979.

Yours truly, -- Joe

[JosephSHaas]

Thanks David for that video of Danny getting shot at by one of the government goons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvYdjSQdRd4    [ 4:50 minutes.]

It sure looks like a blast of gun powder to me rather than morning fog.

- - Joe

Notice that it's up to fifty seven (57) "Text Comments" so far, as of a few minutes ago.

I've printed them out page by pages #1-5 of 6, p. #6 with nothing, so you've got to press the "All Comments" button to get a copy of the first nine (9) comments.  I'll re-copy and send to Danny and the others on Monday, as it's snowing up here in the mountains; and Concord too? I've called the federal court and they are open, with who? Bob Wolffe on the witness stand today? Or not to him yet, maybe this afternoon, and so on Monday morning?

Anyway thanks again David for that video and these others of: (1) "Concord NH: U.S. Marshals start requiring ID at courthouse" over at: http://youtube.com/watch?v=tSxXBaHSB-Q and (2) "NH Capitol police confront Real ID demonstrators" at http://youtube.com/watch?v=lCXcuMSXZRU of the Real ID Tatoo Parlor  plus: (3) "New Hampshire REAL ID Protest" at http://youtube.com/watch?v=OeE3iB90KeE&NR=1 with Lauren Canario in uniform goose-stepping in front of the State House, great! 

- - Joe H.

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a re-type of my e-mail letter of exactly 2:12 p.m. today (Fri., March 28, '08)

"BFA Item #1 of 3/26/08; Public Reply to.

From Joseph S. Haas (josephshaas at hotmail dot com) ...

To: The Executive Councilors [Exec. Sec. plus Councilor #1, 2, 3, 4 + 5;
Cc: producer at nhexecutivecouncil dot com]

Concord, New Hampshire

-- This is to follow-up my meeting with you all and the governor, Gov. John H. Lynch in your chambers: The G&C / Governor & Council on the 2nd floor of the State House this past Wednesday morning @ from 20:28 - 23:28 for exactly three (3) minutes on the tape, Part 2 of 4 over at http://www.nhexecutivecouncil.com/ with thanks by cc: to the Producer too.

--As indicated for summary here, the Business Finance Authority says certificate this/ certificate that.  My request before the G&C on May 2, 2007 was verbally answered(*) by the governor of: I'll get back to you, with my reply of: WHEN?  His re-answer: we'll get back to you, with my second reply of: WHEN? but with no further discussion, me saying on the way out the door that this guy was some 'slippery character' for avoiding this Article 8 accountability and in a prompt manner by Article 14 of our Bill of Rights.  On this past Wednesday, you were reminded by me about Roberts Rules of Order, of first in - first out, but that by your so-moved, Councilor ________, with subsequent yea votes, decided to place yourselves in the Out of Order status!

--Thank you again Councilor Ray Burton for asking the A.G. to talk about this at 38:25 - 39:25 of the tape = for exactly a minute, after the B.F.A. item #4 of 4 was concluded.  Yes Deputy Attorney General Bud Fitch called me on the phone to verbally deal with this issue, but that it was only a part answer to my sub-request that the Personnel Dept. in the Administrative Services hold a hearing against the governor for not doing his job!  i.e. to enforce the legislative mandate in RSA Ch. 123:1 by the shall word in that the Feds must file their blueprints under oath with Bill Gardner's Office of Secretary of State BEFORE their 1-8-17 U.S. Const. 'Consent' be fulfilled, because on June 14, 1883 the N.H. Legislature gave them consent, but what type of consent?  It was a 'conditional' consent. Thus they have no lawful nor legal authority to conduct U.S. Code business within this state!

--Bud Fitch told me that for public members, only licensing issues can go before the Personnel Board; and then just the other day somebody there told me that they only process employee payroll to the State Treasurer for their checks, but not constitutional officers.

--Therefore there has been no verbal nor written answer to my original question of what the governor intends to do about this 'shall' word.  The substantive has NOT been answered, just that procedural due process of law is NOT available against the governor for trying to halt his paycheck he gets today through the Administrative Services. When he FAILs to do his job he shouldn't get paid.  And so when the Feds FAIL to do their job too, and when it's pointed out to them by Ed Brown and others, (like me through the Federal Rule 36 process still ongoing with my complaint #______ against William Morse, Esquire) then the trial jury ought to vote: not guilty as their verdict against these federal trespassers onto both private and state/ public land!

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059. (cell phone).

P.S. See you at the next G&C for a 'Progress Report Requested' from you!  When are you going to advise the governor to answer the question!?"

JSH

note: see Mike D. enter the picture at 33:30- 35:30 for exactly two (2) minutes.  The first eighteen (18) minutes of this Part 2 of 4 deals with: (a) 0-5 the Women Dairy Farmers green-cover book presented to the G&C; (b) 6.5 - 9.5 the 9th graders from East Kingston get a Q&A(*) with the governor; and then (c) at 10 - 18:38  =  the mundane of confirmations and resignations with regrets, that's not listed on the Agenda but is there at the start of every meeting, usually held every other Wednesday, as are their paychecks. 18:38 starts the BFA.

footnote #2: F.Y.I. Part #1 of the tape is 35:53 minutes and seconds respectfully with some nice band music from the 6th, 7th & 8th graders over at about 0-3.5, then again at 6.5- 9.5, onto the Gold Star Mothers [12 to 20 = 8 minutes] license plate #1 given to the governor who gave it to Mrs. ________, reference too to the Blue Stars of not having been KIA, but are currently serving in the military; this tradition started during or right after WWII, onto 20 - 27 for The "We the People" winners from Milford to present the Constitution as they know if from reading it in school to represent the state in the Nationals on May 2, 2008 in Washington, D.C. [ref. a page of history is worth a volume of logic]; onto 28-31 for M.A.D.D., and then at 32-34 for when Virginia introduces the foreigners. End of Part 1 of 4.

[Dave Ridley]

Breaking news: Elaine Brown returns to New Hampshire

standby for direct link

or head to http://ridleyreport.com and the story should be there as the last video for 3/28. 

[Dan]

Thanks Dave.  Hope to see you all there Tuesday.

[JosephSHaas]

The Mossad unit of the C.I.A. on the loose to assassinate all defense witnesses in this case? so that the truth be buried with them!? -- Joe

note: this is a PRE-Sept. arrest post showing that there was no criminal intent for pre-venting bloodshed! as a defensive measure, not offensive, ON private land! the Feds operating OFF their property and both unlawfully and illegally! (1-8-17, U.S. Const. to N.H. R.S.A. Ch. 123:1).

a view from the statist to the south

http://www.townonline.com/stoneham/opinion/x2110139624

A vacation from paying taxes?


By Rep. Paul Casey/A View From the Hill
GateHouse News Service
Tue Aug 07, 2007, 10:17 AM EDT
Story Tools:  Email This |   Print This
Stoneham -

Ed and Elaine Brown have lived on their sprawling 110-acre estate in Plainfield, NH for a generation... Unfortunately, for the protestors, the country's tax laws are more than 100 years old and no one has ever successfully challenged them.

WRONG! The IRS tried to get over $62,000 from me as a landlord back in 1983 with case #M.83-50-D for Shane Devine in this very same court in Concord, N.H., and I won the case using Otto Skinner's book with the fact that section (5) of the Code is unconstitutional.  Section 5 deals with rents. I alerted this to the court in Ed's case, but that the Deputy Clerk sent my papers back to me so that the judge could not see that what he said in the trial transcript excerpt was wrong! in that he said to the jury that ALL of the tax code was constitutional, when it is NOT! that ought to result in a mistrial, but HOW?

The U.S. Marshal's goons read these postings here, but dare they feed the truth to the U.S. Attorney to straighten out this mess!?  No, they look upon the Arrest Warrants as shit* from that goddess there in the hallway and it smells good to them. Like a child on potty training they leave this shit* dangling to their ass hairs, and tell the Browns that they are brown.  This shit* has got to stop! Monier: let's get with it.  I'm serious.  A copy of this is going to Tom Colantuono, the U.S. Attorney this afternoon, with instructions as my public servant to do something about this!  He ought to file some motion for a mistrial.  Another copy going to Hodes at his Concord address to investigate McAuliffe as one of his appointees in this Legislative Court as to WHY he was not educated to this section 5 BEFORE he mouthed off to the jury that ALL the Tax Laws are Constitutional.  To investigate to advise him too to declare a mistrial, or IF he knew about my 1983 file ahead of time, then in a knowingly/ culpable mental state for a criminal charge of perjury in his own court!

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - Joe / Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059 (cell phone).

P.S. Here's more info that a lot of people are tax protestors, for having their U.S. tax dollars pay foreigners: http://www.informamerica.net/mossad-cia.html and see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossad and that "Alleged but unproven operations" section about "The alleged assassination of Canadian scientist Gerald Bull, developer of the Iraqi supergun, in 1990.  The most common theory is that the Mossad was responsible...The alternative theory is that Bull was killed by the CIA."  Hey! according to this informamerica website (posted in the "Citizenship?" section on the discussion page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mossad#Citizenship.3F ) the Mossad and CIA are not an "alternative" but the "same"! So OUR government kills Canadian scientists!?  I will NOT pay for such killings! NOR will I pay for these up to $102,000/year foreigners because "All of them, without exception, work for Israel and Israeli interests, not American interests"!

Modification: typo= not wn, but en.wiki for link #2 of 2.

[JosephSHaas]

Thanks Margot, For your "Explosives maker takes stand" in today's http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080329/NEWS01/803290340 where on page 2 of 2 you also wrote that 'The prosecution's case will continue next week" but with who? Andre LaBier, as indicated below...

...plus BTW see "This Day in History" over at his http://www.montgomeryvt.us/mhs.htm for the link to http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Ethel+and+Julius+Rosenberg who "were convicted on March 29, 1951" and executed before sunset on June 19th, before the start of the Jewish* Sabbath.

* See the link to "George Washington's Letter to the Jews of Newport, Rhode Island (1790)" about "protection" to follow...

JSH

Here's a re-type of my e-mail letter

"To: Scott Perry, Chairman
Board of Directors
Montgomery Historical Society
P. O. Box 47
Montgomery, VT 05470
(802) ______________

Hi Scott,

And thanks for the information in your July 2007 Newsletter Number 2007-3 under 'Speakers' that 'MHS Member, Andre LaBier will be our 2007 Inaugural speaker. A Chief Inspector with the U.S. Marshal Service...currently the U.S. Marshal Agency's liaison to the Department of Homeland Security...Andre will be discussing the role of the U.S. Marshal Agency in modern history. Date and time is still being set up.' http://www.montgomeryvt.us/MHSNews0707.html

Would you please let me know WHEN this will be, as I'd like to attend as either a member or guest. Will it be at your 'next Thursday of the month' on November 8th? or did I miss it, last Thu., Oct. 11th?  It not mentioned in your October newsletter over at http://www.montgomeryvt.us/MHSNews1007.html [No. 2007-4].

The reason for my interest being that he's signing affidavits against The Four Freedom Keepers in the Ed Brown/I.R.S. case when he knows or should know as a claimed historian that N.H. by RSA Ch. 123:1 http://www.state.nh.us offered jurisdiction to the Feds back on June 14 (Flag Day), 1883, from Art. I, Sec. 8, Clause 17 [U.S.Const.] for 'Consent', but that they declined, thus having NO jurisdiction beyond the soil of their deeded properties, since this state is a double-filing state with paperwork needed to be filed by the 'shall' word in the statute, but that the governor refuses to enforce by his Art. 41 powers, both of whom ought to answer for their oversteps, and back-steps respectfully, as the proof is in the certificate of non-filing I have from Bill Gardner, the N.H. Secretary of State himself.  To compare to Ohio and Conn. for Ed & Elaine Brown respectfully, in single-filing states for deeds only, as outlined by Attorney Larry Beecraft over at his website of: http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm The U.S. Attorney's own Manual #664 even says that this 1-8-17 'embraces courthouses'! See http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00664.htm and over in the documents section of http://danrileyld.blogspot.com/ the ld for legal documents.

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, New Hampshire 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059 (cell phone) http://newhampshireunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.6225 My 'Wise Up or Die' case scheduled for next Wed., Oct. 24th @ 1:30 p.m. in Lebanon District Court.

pc: David Corriveau of The VALLEY NEWS, at 603: 727-3210 which newspaper circulates to Montgomery, Vermont? and who might like to attend such an event too, re: his report in Saturday's paper (10/13,) Vol. 56, No. 127 @ pages A1+5 for 'Feds Detonate Bombs...." http://www.vnews.com " 11:44 AM

[JosephSHaas]

Here's the forward from page 32 in my Archives here, as just promised for that "protection" word in George Washington's speech, plus as it relates to N.H. Article 12, and this past Wednesday morning at the G&C/ Governor & Council of the "Gold Star" Mothers* of the past hopefully to honor the "Gold Seal" brothers of today, meaning: Dan, Jason, Bob and Reno.

JSH

* http://www.nhexecutivecouncil.com/ [click on the Wed., March 26th G&C], Part 1 of 4 @ 12 to 20 minutes into the 35:20 minute tape for the Gold Star Mothers; and Part 2 of 4 @ 20:28 to 23:28 minutes into the 1:15:22 minute tape for the Gold Seal Brothers. 

JSH

   Lindberg baby?  I never would of guessed that an issue as arcane as
the Lindberg baby would be brought up in the Ed and Elaine Brown thread,
although it does tie in with the kidnapping of the couple...hmmm.

Les, You get the James Burke "Connections" award; or should I say: "Concentration" prize? for finding the two kidnapping panels.    Congratulations.

Not only that, but here's another one for you to ponder on my Google search for "Rhode Island" federal over to George Washington himself; see http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/bigotry.html and the "protection" and "good citizens" connection in his response to Moses Seixas in Newport, R.I.

So in other words does that mean that when the gov't fails to protect, that the citizens go bad?  Not necessarily so, as in that for every action, there is an equal and opposite re-action formula.  When the N.H. Art. 12 protection at the state fails to check-and-balance federal aggression, then the citizen might be "bad news" for the Feds, but good news for the citizens, and especially here in New Hampshire, as by the guarantee to us by Article 10 of the right "and" duty to revolt against such unlawful and illegal activities by the Feds! They have failed to comply with N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1 from 1-8-17 U.S. Const., so we're supposed to give them/ the Feds a gold star for their blunders!?  A gold star is right!  Not that of like a merit badge, but a de-merit badge in the form of the gold seal from the Office of the Secretary of State in Concord.  A gold seal that the county judge sees in dark ink on the photocopy from Danny Riley, and he/ the judge goes nuts.  He must have friends or relatives on the federal payroll? who if this were ever to be ruled as them/the Feds out-of-order, as outlaws, then there would be repercussions? "1. An indirect effect produced by an event or action. 2. A reciprocal action." From the Latin word repercutere of to cause to rebound.  Just how far does this reciprocity go? "A COMMERCIAL policy or trade agreement between two or more parties." (emphasis ADDed, as the court not working in law, as by section 20 of the Coinage Act of 1792, but the "Commercial Paper" referred to as Federal Reserve Notes!*)

*According to 28 USC (Part V, Ch. 119), Sec. 2041 Money paid into the federal court is to go to the Treasurer of the United States. But since when was it coin v.s. currency? #___ years/decades/a century(?) ago? Whatever happened to the cashbox?  Notes were the intermediary exchange so that any robber between points A + B would get the claim tickets only.  The ends were never meant to be of paper! Roger Sherman put Art. I, Section 10 into the U.S. Constitution for a purpose so that the states be forbidden to offer or tender nothing but gold and silver coin as to pay a debt to the individual citizen when it is due from the state.  The same goes for the Feds, not by constitution, but by statute that cannot be over-ridden by any case law or "opinion" to the contrary.  If they don't like it they can contact their Congressman to TRY to change the law, not be the outlaws!  NOW is the time to conduct an audit of the federal court, and if not in compliance with the law(s), how can they judge the law against others, other than by despotism! or in a "dulocracy" [now look that up in your BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 5th edition (c)1979] where the servant dominates over the master, in this case: the public servants! who are hypocrites!

JSH

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a re-type of my e-mail letter of exactly 2:12 p.m. today (Fri., March 28, '08)

"BFA Item #1 of 3/26/08; Public Reply to.

From Joseph S. Haas (josephshaas at hotmail dot com) ...

To: The Executive Councilors [Exec. Sec. plus Councilor #1, 2, 3, 4 + 5;
Cc: producer at nhexecutivecouncil dot com]

Concord, New Hampshire

-- This is to follow-up my meeting with you all and the governor, Gov. John H. Lynch in your chambers: The G&C / Governor & Council on the 2nd floor of the State House this past Wednesday morning @ from 20:28 - 23:28 for exactly three (3) minutes on the tape, Part 2 of 4 over at http://www.nhexecutivecouncil.com/ with thanks by cc: to the Producer too...

--Thank you again Councilor Ray Burton for asking the A.G. to talk about this at 38:25 - 39:25 of the tape = for exactly a minute, after the B.F.A. item #4 of 4 was concluded....(*)

(*) Too bad I wasn't there later to hire Kenan Thompson from S.N.L. to question her/ Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, about this by asking either Councilor Pignatelli or Hollingworth game-show style:

"What's that bitch talkin' about?" 

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/bios/Kenan_Thompson.shtml

...with a game show answer to the skit by Karen Ladd, Tina Fey style? 

JSH

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Modification:

Kenan: Richard- "WW..WWWWhat's that bitch talking about?"

Richard: I..I..I have no idea.  I don't know (* buzzer) how anyone...

Katherine:

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2008/03/23/snl-works-ann-coulter-whats-b-talking-about-sketch

Suggestion:  see and hear this tape before reading it in full below, it's hilarious! 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

watch, [ "View video "here" on website above] then read:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

"Tina Fey: "She's getting directions to a margarita party to celebrate her graduation from DeVry.  She's looking forward to it, but she's a little apprehensive because the ghostly warnings of her father the fisherman still echo in the back of her mind."

[JosephSHaas]

Thank you Margot for the advance notice that: "After the government closes its case" today(?)* [Tue., April 1st] that "Elaine Brown is expected to testify as a witness for Gonzalez"  tomorrow? = Wed., April 2nd.

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080401/FRONTPAGE/804010353

* Your report is of yesterday's witness Robert A. Wolffe, but not printed until: when? and then posted on your http://www.concordmonitor.com website at exactly 6:36 o'clock a.m. this morning.  My presumption is for Elaine to be there tomorrow= Wednesday right?

Modification:  This gives us a chance to file for: an Article 14 + 91 "free" Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus in the Merrimack County Superior Court that covers the King City of Concord, the capitol for where this federal court sits as of by proprietary rights, but withOUT jurisdictional authority.

1.) See my Reply #6238 on page 416 of the old http://newhampshireunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.6225 that has been updated to http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.6120 as Reply #6131 on page 409 for: (3) "jurisdiction is defined as both for: (a) venue*****, as in 'The authority to interpret and apply the law', and; (b) territorial, as in 'The extent or range of such authority'"; and so to beware of when some clerk or judge says that they have jurisdiction, withOUT backing it up with the "type" of jurisdiction of either: (1) jurisdictional authority or venue; or (2) jurisdictional territory.

2.) Yesterday (Mon., March 31st), my visit to the federal court clerk's office resulted in me obtaining a copy of the Feb. 21, 2007 WARRANT FOR ARREST of Elaine Brown for "Violation of Conditions of Release" [document No. 208 in File #06-cr-00071-SM, signed and sealed by Judith Barrett, Deputy Clerk,  that was RETURNed 10/9/07 but get this: marked "WARRANT UNexecuted" (!?) withOUT the "SIGNATURE OF ARRESTING OFFICER", say what!? I'd like the Clerk James R. Starr, to explain the workings of his court on this particular item AND prove that they have the jurisdictional authority to act withIN our state of New Hampshire!

3.) (a) According to my Monday morning printout on 10/8/2007 @ 6:50 AM  of the http://www.law.yale.edu/library/research/prisoners/habeas.html website page that "no longer exists": an "Habeas Corpus...(is) A writ employed to bring a person before a court, most frequently to ensure that the party's imprisonment or detection is not illegal. In addition to being used to test the legality of an arrest or committment, the writ may also be used to obtain review of...(3) the JURISDICTION of a court that has imposed a criminal sentence." (emphasis ADDed!)

3.) (b) See also Title 28 USC Code Section 2241 for The "Power to grant writ" in paragraph (a) "may be granted by the Supreme Court, any justice thereof" for when, by paragraph (c) "He is in custody under or by color of the authority of the United States"; and so to exhaust all state remedies first, as by a check-and-balance against the feds, my petition will be filed in the state/county court this afternoon to get this hearing for hopefully sometime tomorrow morning or afternoon, so that when Elaine is through with her testimony over there in federal court, she can be transferred from U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier, to Merrimack County Sheriff Scott Hilliard under the execution of civil process in their building, by N.H. R.S.A. Chapter 123:1 [ see http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm ].

4.) A copy of the "Disk" sent to me by Assistant U.S. Attorney Aixa Maldonado-Quinones on Thu., March 13th '08 of the entire paper file of Dan Riley's Appeal #2007-0745 at the N.H. Supreme Court, is being duplicated and will be presented to the County Court ASAP, that includes the illegal "pull"ing of the case to the Feds in Removal Civil No. 08-CV-73 case there, when by the code this option shall only be allowed by the Defendant to "push" it there.  Two judges at the N.H. Supreme Court in opposition, needing the other three judges to vote in that En Banc hearing, yet to be scheduled...

5.) ...In the meantime I go ONE STEP BEYOND, (a) the mere citation of the Reynolds case of 1867 (N.D. NY 20 Fed Cas. 592-612, No. 11721) as in #9 on page 2 of Danny's MOTION; to: (b) an actual photocopy of such, and quote from page 605, column #1 of 2 "that full proof of the authority to detain his prisoner shall be made by the United States officer before the state court or judge, so that there can be no conflict of physical forces"...

6.) ...So Officer ________: Where are your ceding papers? as Ed kept asking in his federal court trial, but that fell upon deaf ears without any answer.  See the 65% reduction of both certificates of non-filing dated: September 10, 2001, and March 26, 2008 attached hereto this printout with Petition cover letter...

7.) Now WHO is the real "militant" here? having "force as EVIDENCE"! Reference myReply #4349 on page 290 of Wed., 6/20/2007 @ 10:04 AM that was over at http://newhampshireunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.4335 that has since moved to: Reply #4260 on page 285 over at http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.4260

8.) Although "The whole modern TREND" is to SUBmit to ASSERTED legal authority,

[reference my Reply #7012 on page 468 over at http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.7005 posted 2/14/2008 @ 12:06 PM, that has since moved to: Reply #7011 on page 468 @ 11:06 AM, see http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.7005 to be exact, being my actual post #960 of over a thousand so far to date.]

here in New Hampshire, we have the Article 10 right and duty to revolt, in our Bill of Rights (part First, N.H. Constitution)...

continued in Reply #____ to follow:

[JosephSHaas]

Continued from Reply #7171 above.

09.) To follow up on #8 above in regards to the word: "revolt", see my 11/16/2007 @ 10:31 AM printout of "Civil Disobedience" (c) 1999 by Peter Suber of The Earlham College in Richmond, Indiana 47374 with thanks by e-mail to him now at peters at earlham dot edu for his excellent website of: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/civ-dis.htm and especially in his Reply #3 of when the government "breaches its side of the contract" then disobedience can be by "revolution".

10.) In fact Thomas Jefferson even said that: "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion...Let them take arms...The tree of luiberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.  It is its natural manure." http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Politics/Views%20of%20Freedom/Tree%20of%20Liberty on my 1/13/2007, Sat @ 9:57 AM printout, and plugged into my Reply #1619 on page 108 over at http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=3868.1605 that was the website that got us going here that converted over to the newhampshireunderground, and then to what irt is now with nhunderground as abbreviated, on Sat., 1/27/2007 at 06:30:44 PM that can now be found on page 103 in Reply #1531 @ 5:45 PM at http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.1530 Notice therein of my suggestion of to defend(*) but by "non-deadly force" on BOTH sides!! ...

11.) ... (*) "defend" as per the dictionary definition of the word to the ultimate degree, see the "ward off" phrase for such over in my Reply #2535 at http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=3868.2535 of 3/2/2007, Friday @ 12:50:49 AM since having moved to Reply #2453 on page 164 @ 12:05 AM at http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.2445 of just about a month and a half after the January 2007 trial, it being my post #116 of over 1000 today. To which defend word, I add the word resist...

12.) ...per my Reply #7017 on page 468 of 2/15/2008, Fri. @ 3:02 PM [now #7016 @ 2:02 PM] over at http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.7005 quoting John Eidsmoe from page 2 of 8 from his http://www.eagleforum.org/court_watch/alerts/2003/oct03/Eidsmoe-10-08-03.shtml website of: "The rule of law means we submit to lawful(**) authority.  But just as strongly, the rule of law means we resist unlawful(**)  authority.  For the rule of law restrains both the people and their rulers.  Where law does not restrain the people, the result is anarchy.  Where law does not restrain the rulers, there is tyranny.  Those who believe in the rule of law must be equally opposed to both."

13.) So there you have it folks: re: to #12 above, there can be no Title 18, Sec. 372 "Conspiracy" when there be no "lawful(**) discharge of the duties of his office".  See my Reply #6660 on page 445 of Mon., 12/10/07 @ 1:10 AM over at http://newhampshireunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.6660 since converted over to Reply #6687 on page 446 @ 12:20 AM over at http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.6675 with the link to 18 USC 372 over at http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/372.html

14.) In fact, the official duties of the Marshal are two-fold according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marshals_Service of that "The USMS is the enforcement arm of the federal courts, protecting* federal courts, and ensuring** the effective operation of the judicial system".  These asterisks "*" + "**" herein referring over to the guarantee of specific performance, [ see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_performance (on my 11/30/2007 @ 3:09 PM printout) as indicated in my Reply #6163 on page 411 of Thu. 10/11/2007 @ 1:50 AM over at http://newhampshireunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.6150 that has since moved to: Reply #6059 on page 404 @ same time of @ 1:50 AM but now at http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.6045

15.) A photocopy of Marshal Monier's Oath of Office attached hereto (as signed May 20th, 2002) to "execute all LAWFUL precepts" (emphasis ADDed).

16.) See also U.S. Attorney Tom Colantuono's APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVIT of Feb. 15, 2002 (copy likewise attached hereto) that includes his "OATH OF OFFICE" in paragraph letter A of C. and most of all, his knowledge of that Title I, Section 8, Clause 17 (to N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1) "envraces courthouses" in his own U.S. Attorney Crimninal Resource Manual over at http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00664.htm (as on my 4/6/2007, Fri. @ 12:00 PM printout).

17.) Now isn't it about time that this RSA 123:1 filing finally take place? as from the old days when the New Hampshire district court held alternating sessions in Exeter and Portsmouth four times a year dealing with "minor criminal cases" http://www.nhd.uscourts.gov/ci/history/usdc.asp before moving to Concord in 1881 to where the L.O.B. is now, then moving to its present Pleasant Street location.

18.) My Reply #5853 of 9/28/2007 at 11:30 AM over at http://newhampshireunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.5850 since moved to Reply #5745 on page 384 at http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.5745 sites http://makethestand.com/article76.html wherein I've concluded therefrom that "Marshall Monier is a 'SOCIOPATH' according to" this website since the "ingredients of such a person" are: http://www.hss.caltech.edu/~mcafee/Bin/sb.html that: among others, "They never recognize the rights of others." "Can create, and get caught up in a complex belief about their own powers." And: "The end always justifies the means."

19.) Thus for the "omission" of not filing these papers, nobody wants to do it, until they're told to do so, because of Title 18 USC 13 I think is the reason. See http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/13.html referring over to both N.H. RSA Ch. 638:2 and 311:6 as I've indicated in my Reply #6975 on p. 466 over at http://www.nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.6975 of 1/31/2008, Thu. @ 12:40 PM since moved to Reply #6968 on page 465 of Jan. 30 '08 @ 11:40 PM at http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.6960

So now would this court please proceed onto the warrant, hearing and order, as the sails in this ship of state, failing which it goes back to Thomas Jefferson and his quote over at http://criminaldefense.homestead.com/JurySelection.htm [website taken down?] in that: "I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution." To which is added by me, of my 2/27/2007, Tue. @ 1:52 PM post over at "Quest for Fair Trial in Concord, NH" that "The jury's role 'as a check on official power' is in fact its intended function.  'Batson v. Kentucky', 476 U.S. 79, 86-87, n.8 (1986)"; see the paragraph just above that on the re-print attached here.

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059 (cell phone).

[JosephSHaas]

Mission accomplished.

30-page PETITION filed @ 3:59 p.m. with

copy to Monier @ 4:59 p.m.

Also: a copy of the day/time stamp sent to the court as proof of delivery.

To do: get an official service copy and court return copy to the superior court tomorrow.

Then find out WHEN Elaine is going to be there, so as to set up the hearing day + time.

JSH

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a re-type of the cover-page:

" - - - - - - - - - - The State of New Hampshire  - - - - - - - - - -

Merrimack County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Superior Court

Joseph S. Haas
-for my friend:
Elaine Alice: Brown

v. Stephen R. Monier,
U.S. Marshal

.................................. Docket # 2008 - E - _______

//////////////////         PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS  ////////////////

--NOW COMES, the Applicant/ Plaintiff, Joseph S. Haas, and requests that this court please issue a warrant to the Sheriff, Scott Hilliard to please visit the federal courthouse tomorrow @ __:__ o'clock a.m./ p.m. [time to be arranged], and to both serve the official copy of this petition (copy to supply this court tomorrow morning) upon the Marshal, plus to take custody of Mrs. Edward Lewis: Brown and deliver her to here for a hearing tomorrow afternoon @ __:__ o'clock p.m. (that is if she's in custody of the Marshal then, or to postpone until such time as can be re-scheduled) so that the Marshal can answer to this Prima Facie case of the federal court withOUT jurisdictional authority, as indicated on the papers attached hereto, and if he canNOT 'prove' such jurisdiction, then to grant the writ for the co-plaintiff Brown's release.

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, 603: 848-6059

Tuesday, April 1st, 2008 @ 3:59 p.m.

pc: (1) Marshal Stephen R. Monier, 53 Pleasant Street, Concord, N.H. 03301 @ 4:59 p.m. this afternoon

(2) Elaine Alice: Brown to serve tomorrow @ __:__ am/pm

with Certificate of Service to follow."

JSH

[JosephSHaas]

Update:

Thanks J.J. for your Response #6 over at http://www.redcrayons.net/?p=18#comments just posted at 11:51 E.T. a few minutes ago [from your http://www.redcrayons.net ] to say for Day 7 [April 1st '08] that: "Even Elaine Brown has bailed on the three defendants.  She took the 5th."

But from WHERE? After they trucked her up here, or in her prison cell or interrogation room down there in Danbury?  I guess I'll have to wait to see if Ed gets a subpoena to just erase her name and put his in there, to refile with the copy of the Bench Warrant.

At least this will give the superior court some time to investigate this.

Thank you "very" much for what is really bad news, but like they say: of a battle lost, but not the war.

Keep up the good work.  Maybe Margot can go into the details of HOW the 5th was taken to see in tomorrow's http://www.concordmonitor.com

Yours truly, - - Joe

[JosephSHaas]

...
Maybe Margot can go into the details of HOW the 5th was taken to see in tomorrow's http://www.concordmonitor.com

Yours truly, - - Joe

According to Margot's report: "Marshals tried to nab Brown in June" page 2 of 2: "the defendants are planning to begin their portion of the trial tomorrow" = Thursday, April 3rd @ 8:30 a.m. +

See http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080402/FRONTPAGE/804020303&template=page2

Thank you, - Joe

P.S. Or in other words, since Elaine is Reno's witness on a subpoena, she might have signed a general 5th Amendment paper, but David might like to ask her some questions on the witness stand anyway, that she can answer in the specific, right?

note: somebody said that she was taken back to Connecticut last night.  So she was in the holding cell down in the basement to be called in case the prosecution ended its portion of the trial early? She's coming back tomorrow?