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

[JosephSHaas]

    I'm not sure which is worse, the thugs who stole the Browns property,
the bottomfeeders who auction said stolen property.

In regards to the "bottonfeeder" auctioneers (the fat slob in Mass. like a giant catfish and his N.H. sidekick), I did just talk with Peggy Riley, and she said: she was NOT going to research this tax NOT a debt definition, and so I then did ask her please for a: "Memorandum of Sale" for both auctions.  She said that she'd look into it and get back to me.

Here's what I found over at:

http://books.google.com/books?id=2OE9AAAAIAAJ&pg=RA1-PA486&lpg=RA1-PA486&dq=%22memorandum+of+sale%22+definition&source=web&ots=afR36uh78F&sig=BFeiwyMpkc_KZXcyO0m0Ua4M5JY at page 486 of the book: "A TREATISE UPON SOME OF THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW, by William Wait, Vol. I, William Gould & Son, Publisher, Albany, N.Y. 1877 at The Stanford University Library, The Law School Gift of H.C. Jones, 324000

"AUCTIONEERS, Sec. 2. Form of memorandum of sale.  A general memorandum entered in a book by the auctioneer at the commencement of an auction sale, showing the name of the person on whose account the sale is made, the nature of the property, the terms of payment, referring to entries following for the names of purchasers, and lots struck off to each, and signed by the auctioneer, or by his clerk, under which he enters the name of each purchaser, the description of the goods sold, and price, is a sufficient memorandum of each sale within the statute of frauds. Price v. Durin, 56 Barb. 647."

JSH

See "Progress Report" to follow. #2 of 2.

[JosephSHaas]

Update:  I did just call her/ Peggy Riley at the I.R.S.office phone # in MAss. and got a recording from her that she's on the road March 3+4, and any media to call her cell phone # if they wanted.  So I left a message that it's been almost four (4) weeks since my call to her on Fri., Feb. 8th, when she told me that she'd look into this and get back to me of a copy of this "Memorandum of Sale" of both auctions in MAss. and New Hampshire. I left her my name, address and telephone # for where to send this information.

JSH

[keith in RI]

docket entry for yesterdays hearing. apparently the court recognizes that danny is representing himself but his non- wanted, non-accepted, non-lawyer, lawyer sven wiberg, gets the official duty of screening all of dannys evidence discs before sending them to danny! so if danny represents himself then why does he need an evidence screener? and what are the parameters for sven wiberg approving and disapproving the evidence being forwarded to danny?! is there any law that allows the government to appoint an evidence screener for you?

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Chief Judge George Z. Singal: STATUS CONFERENCE as to Daniel Riley, Jason Gerhard, Cirino Gonzalez, Robert Wolffe held on 3/3/2008. Atty Wiberg to review materials (discs) before sending them to the jail for Defendant Riley to review. Defendant Riley's motion re property (doc #277)will be dealt with by the Court once the government files its response. (Court Reporter: Dennis Ford) (Govt Atty: Robert Kinsella) (Defts Atty: Stanley Norkunas, Sven Wiberg (stand by counsel), Daniel Riley, pro se,)(Total Hearing Time: 21 mins)(CJA Time: 42 mins) (jar) (Entered: 03/04/2008)

[keith in RI]

yesterdays docs from dannys criminal case:

danny demands items stolen from him by the govt be returned!
the govt has been ordered to respond by 3/10/08. though they really dont care about deadlines anyway because the judge just lets them do it whenever they please anyway!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2220167/danny-288

results of hearing monday and response to dannys motion for more computer time. dannys request was deemed "moot" because they (judge, jail, prosecutors) all agreed to give him 4 hours per day on the computer. doesnt that mean motion granted? even when he wins a motion the refuse to say he won! calling it moot.... is that a legal term?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2220174/danny-290

the courts response to why every one of dannys witnesses are denied.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2220184/danny-291

dannys motion for Right of Defense Against Unlawful Arrest.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2220197/danny-292

the court didnt know how to classify this one so they docketed it this way:
(construed as)RESPONSE by Daniel Riley re 278 Order. (jar) (Entered: 03/04/2008)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2220203/danny-293

dannys demand for the discovery evidence the govt was supposed to hand over by court order but still hasnt. with only 3 weeks left before trial!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2220216/danny-294

order on jury questioneers
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2220222/danny-296

take note in the order:
#1 "counsel wiberg ...educate mr riley and permit mr riley to excercise legal reasonable challenges at jury selection"   first they call him his counsel, then they say he may allow mr riley... if danny is representing himself how can wiberg allow him to do anything?! this is a complete kangaroo court! they keep forcing pro-se on danny and he is sui juris. anyone wonderingwhy he repeats himself twice in every document this is why. they are ignoring his wishes and it is blatant!

#2 and 3, these must be responses to reno sending and having posted the log book entries. you dont need to post juror questioneers to show the court is railroading these guys because the public docs do a perfect job of that! it has become obvious that the court and judge have one goal, finding any way possible to send danny and the others to jail for the rest of their lives! even if it means acting illegaly to do so.

[Russell Kanning]

WTF? are they gonna try to move the Trial AGAIN? grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr! and what is this ordeal with them coming up with these conferences/secret meetings(as well as hearings), schedualling them cancelling them, holding them out of State for?

meet your federal government

[DonnaVanMeter]

WTF? are they gonna try to move the Trial AGAIN? grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr! and what is this ordeal with them coming up with these conferences/secret meetings(as well as hearings), schedualling them cancelling them, holding them out of State for?

meet your federal government

true true

[JosephSHaas]

An open letter to Danny Riley:

It's a push/pull situation here.

One judge tells the U.S.A. to push
The other judge allows the U.S.A. to pull.

1.) On Feb. ____ (See reply #___ above) N.H. Supreme Court Judge Hicks granted the U.S.A.'s Motion to Intervene, but then in the next sentence, explaining that it was a LIMITed Intervention to that of to file either a Brief or Memorandum of Law, by the Mon., March 3rd deadline.

2.) The Clerk's office by: _________ (employee) on Feb. ___ gave free of charge (in violation of Rule #___ that reads 50-cents per page) the U.S.A. the certified copy of the file, in which to use by Title __ U.S. Code Section #____ to file the Notice of Removal. No bill for same has yet to be sent to the Feds.

3.) As stated by Danny in his earlier Reply, the U.S.A. is NOT a defendant, and by Title ___ U.S. Code ____ the Feds can use the N.H. Criminal Code at the Federal level, then to alert THE U.S. Attorney himself of this: RSA Ch. ____ tampering with public records, in that the U.S.A., by its Assistant from P.R., filed erroneous information with the federal court that IT was the defendant in the case!  This is a lie! Or if he, Tom Colantuono, the U.S. Attorney, won't at least reprimand his assistant, then to allow Danny to enter these documents into evidence to be marked an exhibit #__ in the criminal case against him!  that is, if this cannot be corrected before then...

4.) ...because on Feb. 28th the N.H. Supreme Court received a copy of the Feb. _______ notice of filing in Case #_____________ at the U.S. District Court, and a single judge, Judge James Duggan (former Appellate Defender from the Franklin Pierce Law School in Concord) issued an ORDER of Removal, (sort of like when a DEFENDANT files a Notice with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manchester, then all state action stops.) ...

5.) ...BUT as already stated: the U.S.A. is NOT the DEFENDANT, and stated right now: nor is a push a pull.

6.) Let me explain: What is an adversary? An opponent, the enemy ["The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language" (c)1973 @ page 11], from the word: adverse, "Actively opposed" and "to turn toward with hostility".  The word oppose (page 499) defined as: "1. To be in contention or conflict with; resist. 2. To be against. 3. To place in opposition; contrast" and from the Latin word: "opponere, to set against." And contention (page 156) being a "Dispute", from contend: "1. To strive, vie, or dispute. 2. To maintain or assert." from the Latin word: "contendre, to strain*, strive with."

7.) * to strain (page 684) is: "1. To pull**, draw, or stretch tight. 2. To exert, tax***, or be taxed to the utmost. 3. To injure or become injured by overexertion. 4. To stretch beyond the proper point or limit."

8. Yes, the word dispute (page 209) is "To question the truth or validity of", so how in Hell can a giving over of from an Order of Removal by Duggan continue the question of the validity (page 784) or il-legality of the federal non-filing to N.H. R.S.A. Ch. 123:1 from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution!? (*)

9. The word dispute is to strive or strain*, thus to pull, and so to allow them to pull is to end the dispute! Case closed: or in other words: to Hell with our sovereignty over the Feds with the "Consent" word (*), let them do whatever they want with our state citizen. This bullshit has got to stop! Shame on you Jim Duggan!  Have you attended your Rule #__ Continuing Judicial Education? 

10. Danny ought to file some OBJECTION for an en banc hearing before the full court, so that the other three judges can dis-agree with Duggan, and find that what Hicks had written is the true course of action IN their court and proceed toward a judgment that the Feds had the opportunity to Brief, but blew it, and so everything that Danny wrote is true, and so to either grant him the appeal, or at least send it back to the Strafford County Superior Court for a hearing that never occurred.

Yours Truly, - - Joe Haas

P.S. And so as Pastor Robert Schueller said on his "Hour of Power" T.V. show on Sunday from The Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove, CAlifornia, the key word is "confidence" of to be confident (Philippians 1:6), defined at page 151 as to trust in a person or thing.  In this case not a single-person judge, but the others too, for "complete" justice, by Article 14, N.H. Constitution, Part First & Bill of Rights, and also THE U.S. Constitution too!

[JosephSHaas]

What's Ed's case #2005-________ at the Grafton County Superior Court in North Haverhill, N.H.? http://www.nh.gov/judiciary/courtlocations/grafsupedir.htm Tel. 603: 787-6961.

Ed & Elaine Brown v. John Hickey, of the Boston Postal Service dba N.H. Post Office (?) in Plainfield.

What a jerk this Hickey is! Check out: 17:00 - 22:00 for these five (5) minutes over at http://video.aol.com/video-detail/ed-brown-documentary-by-john-klar-nektv/661431988

It's the tape back on January __, 2007 by http://www.nektv.com public television from Newport, Vermont, with host Eric Benson interviewing Attorney* John & Jackie Klar who then go into the Brown house to get the story, including HOW this case first got started:

Ed was buying Postal Money Orders in increments under $3,000 and paying off the mortgage, and so this Hickey character curious as to WHY he stopped buying them, and instead of asking Ed this question (simple enough as Ed said: the mortgage to the bank was paid off), that Hickey decided to use that Title #___ U.S. Code Section ____ of "structuring" against Ed, and so raided his wife Elaine's Dental Office, with State Trooper cars on the lookout.

A lookout to what pro-tection!?  Aren't they supposed to protect us from the outlaw feds!?  Ed filed a case of trespass or something in the County Court, but Judge Jean K. (Mrs./ Senator Peter Hoe) Burling transferred it to the feds!  Say what! To a court in non-compliance with the N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1 from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution!? How stupid can she get, or if not ignorant, than corrupt! I presume Ed told or showed her his copy of the 2005 Certificate of Non-Filing from Bill Gardner's Office of the Secretary of State, or did he?

Anyway here we have a County Judge bowing down to the Feds, and now N.H. Supreme Court Judge Jim Duggan in this kiss-ass attitude of the Feds can do no wrong.  This crap has got to stop!

JSH

* Plus, what ever happened to the "attorney" John Klar?  What type of an attorney is he? To check out his website: http://www.christianwords.us/endorsements.htm

pc: John Klar, RevElation Press, P.O. Box 106, Irasburg, Vermont 05845 e-mail: revpress at kingcon dot com

[JosephSHaas]

Ed's case #05-C-033 was "Removed" by Defendant John J. Hickey, to the U.S. District Court over Ed's objection that the Feds have "no legitimate interest." legit, as in RSA Ch. 123:1 from 1-8-17, U.S. Constitution.

Plus: Jean K. Burling retired on: _________ due to health problems (re: "The N.H. Bar News" of Feb. 8, 2008 @ page 27 of 36; Vol. 18, No. 15, see http://www.nhbar.org *) and replaced with: Peter H. Bornstein, Feb. 13, 2008 - Aug. 17, 2024 according to The Red Book, http://www.state.nh.us click on the Governor's Council.

JSH

* not in the electronic version, on the internet, under archives.

[JosephSHaas]

The New Hampshire Banana Republic?

Yeah: I used to call this state: The Plantation of New Hampshire" because of its support of Plank #1 of The Communist Manifesto, by Karl Marx of: Application of all rents to public purposes, then AFTER "they" took my rents under a Town Tax Sale (not all, BTW, since some tenants still paid me, some put their's into escrow, and some paid the town; plus another by-the-way, of them escrow-ers paying nobody when I finally won the quitclaim deed with docket markings that they would never tax the corporation again, since the interest on the $60,000 in stolen rents ($15,000/yr. x 4 years 1984-88) would be more than enough to pay the taxes forever, but some greedy bidder at a then Sheriff's Sale took over (temporarily), and volunteers these contributions.*

* "Appellants by asserting a void right are merely volunteers so far as payment of taxes, payment for repairs and expenditures for other maintenance are concerned. McMillan v. O'Brien, 219 Cal. 775, 29 P.2d 183-186, 91 A.L.R. 383" Curtis, Justice (1934), cited in: McNulty v. Copp et al, 271 P.2d 90-101 (1954) @ page 99 [14] 5, McMurray, Justice, pro tem. Cir. 15769-15771, District Court of Appeal, First District, Division 1m CAlif.ornia; cited in: 26B C.J.S. 473 DETINUE at B. DAMAGES 1. In General, Sec. 11 Generally, footnote #9. [Ref. My REPLY of May 29'07 in #07-C-0147, at page 8 of 12 against "The Citizens Bank" of Concord, N.H.: "not your typical bank" is their slogan, but a bunch of thieves! ]

You get my drift on this for Ed's case, right?

Now go to Google Book Search and you'll find some interesting stuff about: "The Banana Wars: United States Intervention in the Caribbean, 1898-1934".  http://www.google.com for that very long website address. (*)

On pages 56, 57 + 58 you'll find some Juan J. Estrada, the governor of The Bluefields there in Nicaragua, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluefields who solicited aid for American residents against Zelaya and his Bluefields Steamship Company who were antagonizing the banana planters.

See page 56 for an interesting story about American Counsul, Thomas Moffett who was awakened in the dead of night by a mysterious voice heard outside his window saying the revolt was to begin on the ninth (of Oct. 1909), and did.

Plus, check this out: "A loyalist* naval force steamed down the San Juan River to invade Bluefields.  On the way Zelaya's troops captured two Americans, Lee Roy Cannon and Leonard Groce, professional dynamiters laying charges in the river.  Zeleya had both executed, but not before Moffat tried vainly to obtain their release and the condemned wrote plaintive letters to their next of kin.  Hearing of the executions, Knox wrathfully described Zeleya as 'a blot upon the history of Nicaragua.' footnote #13.

Now here's where it gets interesting @ page 57 in that the commanding officer of the U.S.S. Des Moines (that replaced the USS Tacoma) in Dec. 1909 said to: "disarm [the] soldiers of both sides"...

...sort of like what the N.H. Supreme Court ought to do to the Feds here in our state, because, like Major Smedley Butler, the marine since the Spanish-American War did, was to keep the peace there, so he wrote to his father, a powerful Pennsylvania congressman.

According to wikipedia this Bluefield "was named after the Dutch pirate Abraham Blauvelt who hid in the bay's waters in the early 17th century" [his fictional descendant by that name in the Ian Fleming James Bond novels to films of Double O- Seven]. The Miskito monarchy (of Estrada, the "governor"?) proclaiming to be the Miskito Reserve, by Zeleya?

Who were the loyalists* to who? It reads in the book that Butler was fuming over having to protect Estrada whose revolution was protected by the American prohibition against fighting within city limits.

Now enter: "Rear Admiral Kimball, had earlier alarmed Bluefield's American entrepreneurs ('concession-hunters who were backing the revolution for profit; Kimball called them) by posting about town a notice declaring that the American military in Nicaragua would not protect any 'so-called American interest that as a matter of fact has no existence in law** or in right.' One of the American residents had angrily responded: 'Then what are you going to get when the Revolution we are backing wins out?'15".

** I wonder what the Admiral would say to the inhabitants over at 55 Pleasant Street in Concord, N.H. when he'd have learned that there is "no existence" of such a N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1 filing as from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution, that is required.  Ed Brown already said: you do not exist. Now WHO is the loyalist vs. the revolutionary? WHO is loyal to the Constitution, and WHO is revolting?  "They"/ the current Federalies like to say that Ed Brown and his co-conspirators are the revolutionaries (as by Art. 10, N.H. and as by right).  And conspiring in secret!?  You have got to be shitting me!  All of these actions and re-actions were done up-front, in plain view, and as by right to remain loyal to the Constitution for which our ancestors fought for us not to be re-set into the yoke of extreme taxation as who and what we rebelled against, that King George jerk who refused to hear our many petitions, as do the same powers-that-be-corrupt here IN N.H., namely the House Speakers over the past few years declaring that Rule 4 does NOT "exist"!  That is bullshit! when the petitions are properly endorsed with the District # of the State Rep. by Rule 36.

Taxation and protection are reciprocal by Art. 12.  Where is the Federal government's Art. IV, Sec. 4 guarantee to us of a Republican form of government!?  Instead we have a "dulocracy" where the servants dominate over the master.  "Dominion" is an order of the angels, and I hereby pray that some real action take place! Angels as messengers to God Almighty: please hear and read my prayer and petition, that as in that Civil War song: the TRUTH goes marching on. The phrase "under foot" defined as: "Obstructing free movement."  What we have here is Federal "Big Brother" George Orwellian "Nineteen Eighty Four" and "Doublespeak" with a big foot. But not so big as our bigger state foot! The Feds in N.H. over at Pleasant Street with cases operated on by ONE judge, currently accepting the Dan Riley case on a pull situation, seconded by one of the rotten toes of the N.H. Supreme Court.  But get this, as you already know: we have five toes on our N.H. Supreme Court foot.  So Danny to file that Objection to the Removal, and/or Motion for a Hearing En Banc, before ALL five judges.  Let the state hearing begin, and for Jim Duggan to "wise up" and vote 5 to 0 FOR Danny, as the Feds did and do lie that they are the Defendant!  Appeal for Writ of Habeas Corpus against these outlaw Feds who have NO "legitimate interest" GRANTED.

JSH

(*) http://books.google.com/books?id=Xc1RBfZd3pcC&pg=PA57&lpg=PA57&dq=bluefields+rebellion&source=web&ots=5tjyvJtQP9&sig=gI9BKpNOX79grB9x644SuJrmv0Q&hl=en

[Russell Kanning]

letter we got from Ed

http://www.newhampshirefreepress.com/NHFreePress/?q=node/30

he seems much more upbeat

any good links to articles about the other 4 guys available out there?

[keith in RI]

the latest documents from sherry peel jacksons case in georgia: i believe she is out on bail pending appeal.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/2245251/sherry-3508

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2245252/sherry-3508-2

[JosephSHaas]

letter we got from Ed

http://www.newhampshirefreepress.com/NHFreePress/?q=node/30

he seems much more upbeat

any good links to articles about the other 4 guys available out there?

Yes, I've talked with that postal woman [Kathy or Cathy Royal -- I've never received ANYthing in writing for the correct spelling of her name]  numerous times on TRYing to either: get my $50.00 bill (a) returned, or (b) sent onto Ed; but I guess they're waiting until AFTER the trial for whatever reason, maybe to TRY to charge me for aiding and abetting to finance Ed's "legal work"!? To get him an attorney is against the law!? "They" might say that he COULD have used the greenback to buy more bullets? Interfering with the mail is a FEDERAL offense, no? The Marshals ASKed the P.O. to HALT the mail, and they did on NO proof that "they" had a "legitimate interest" since they have NO RSA 123:1 filing papers.  Their walk and talk here, there and everywhere, including the courthouse, BUT not Bill Gardner's Office, is a bunch of shit!  The Feds need to get off their ass and start walking!  - - Joe

Modification: Oh! I forgot.  Bob Wolffe was supposed to subpoena her in on this subject, since he too used to work for the Post Office, but since his signed deal, I guess that's gone down the tubes? Or have any of the other Three (or Four?) Freedom Keepers put her on their witness list?

[keith in RI]

governments response re: items stolen from dannys house.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2254311/danny-304

[Kat Kanning]

Thieves totally devoid of morality.