Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS, Part 29

[JosephSHaas]

Behind the scenes:
...
4. The U.S. Clerk woman took my Bill and said that she'd present it to the judge as a Motion, and that they would get back to me.

5. The Office of U.S. Attorney is just beyond the parking garage next to the Superior next to the U.S. Court. 6th floor. And the window clerk took my courtesy copy to her, so that if and when the U.S. Clerk calls, then she will know what to talk about.
....

Update: I did just call the U.S. Attorney's Office and left a voice mail* for Paula D. Silsby http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/me/ to please turn this "courtesy copy" as also signed by me into an OFFICIAL Complaint for the crime under the U.S. CRIMINAL Code of the Clerk +/or by Order from, the judge (Geo. Z. Singal) to her that they purposely/ knowingly in a culpable mental state of a positive commission that's really a negative away from the statute and so her/him/them criminals to Title 18 U.S. Code Section 3232, and to please investigate and then charge for prosecution.

*= Paula D. Silsby, U.S. Attorney, 100 Middle Street Plaza, East Tower Sixth Floor, Portland, Maine 04101-4100, 207: 780-3257 http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/offices/index.html

Her website very good at that Report a Crime chapter over at http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/me/report_crime/index.html seeing the Public Corruption listing for the F.B.I. in Portland @ 207-774-9372 but me getting that jerk Mr. Luckner AGAIN, me asking him WHO his boss is: Todd DeFeetey (spelling?) and then he hung up the phone, prompting my call to F.B.I.-Boston for N.E. @ 617-742-5533 me talking with the Mr. "Duty Officer" of the day (today: Wed. Oct. 1st) who will look into this, me telling him of the urgency of it, because I'll give a public report of what they do or don't do to ask the question of: Was 18USC3232 violated or not? ___ yes or no, and WHAT happens next? (beyond the complaint I've made to the P.C.C. in Concord, N.H. against the attorney, David H. Bownes of Laconia, me as a witness to this illegal hearing last week), and this investigation of BOTH the Clerk +/or judge!! My public report at that Forum  in Portland, Fri., Oct. 17 '08 @ 4:30-7:30 p.m. at the Portland High School Auditorium where this Silsby WILL most definitely be getting "a piece of my mind" when she brags about her role in dealing with this "Rule of Law", and IF she does NOTHING about this latest infraction of the law! The "Duty Officer" said: WHERE? Me telling him again, and IF with the same mentality as Luckner, probably thinking WHAT? Another Columbine incident there!?  Of course NOT! He can check with the receptionist to Silsby who I told I WILL be as vocal as that guy in the movie of when he sticks his head out the window and yells: I've had enough: I will take no more of this bullshit!

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

note: Case #07-cr-189 U.S. District Court, N.H. withOUT that Rule 18 motion by Defendant Gonzalez, re: last week's hearing; and co-defendant RILEY, Dan in jail over in Dover for Strafford County, Democratic candidate Tim Brown for the Office of Sheriff telling me at the Rochester Fair that all of the Deputies of Republican Estes are Deputy U.S. Marshals too, and so when I alert them of these illegal transports, I've yet to get an apology of past wrongs, but did have the last hearing scheduled over there in Portland canceled maybe because somebody in the county? The County Commissioners putting a halt to further possible lawsuit against the county? pc: to The Commissioners, Sheriff Estes, Candidate Tim Brown, Warren Dowaliby, the Jail Superintendent, and The "Foster's Daily Democrat" later today.

[JosephSHaas]

... we live in an imperfect world, with a lot of messed up people....

...including her majesty asshatter, Warden Lisa J.W. Hollingsworth of the Marion, Illinois 62959 U.S. Penitentiary @ P.O. Box 2000 for Ed Brown #03923-049 who wrote on Sept. 24th '08 in a 1-page Form letter #BP-S327.08 postmarked same day and received today (Wed., Oct.1st'08) that my "correspondence might facilitate criminal activities".  What a crock of shit! To appeal to her what? conscience? Do you really think she can distinguish between right and wrong? She's a vindictive person or in other words, a bitch, plain and simple, full of spite being malicious ill will, not just hostility or enmity, defined as deep-seated hatred, ingrained or imbued, defined as to pervade, of to spread throughout, permeate: to pass through the openings or interstices of, the word interstice from the Latin word intersistere of to stand in the middle of, but to stand maliciously, with malice, from the Latin word: malus meaning bad, and so her both wrong and evil.  I dare her to specify what in the last packet  might make it easier for criminal activities to happen. Liar! Thief, One deserving of an appeal to her and beyond so that she can be fired!

Here's what was in the 17-pages: 1.) A Masthead for The "Fort Fairfield Journal", 2.) a legal notice, 3.) an Affidavit of Publication, 4.) a copy of the U.S. Army website for Fort Leonard Wood plus a copy of my letter to the C.O.P. in Cohoes, N.Y., 5.) the website page for the Waynesville Regional Airport, 6.) my dual letter to the U.S. Marshals in N.Y. and Washington for the N.H. + N.Y. Annual Reports, pages 7, 8 + 9 of a copy of my Complaint to the P.C.C. against Huftalen + others,  10.) The attempted PLEA AGREEMENT of June 12, 2008 to Reno, plus my Reply #7712 of an indication of this to go to the Strafford County Grand Jury to show a culpable mental state of criminality of the Feds!, 11.) My Complaint to the N.H. Personnel Dept. against Paul Broder, professional LIAR for the Attorney General, 12 + 13.) website pages for some archeological site: The Goseck circle, 14.) a copy of my 1-8-17 U.S. Const complaint to the Albany P.D. by their website, 15.) a website page and similar letter to the Alice, Texas P.D., 16.) Ditto of website + letter to the Randolph, Vermont Police Dept.  + 17.) my memo of having filed this P.C.C. complaint.

So Warden: get with it! The truth that is, stop your lieing!

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

[lastlady]

Reno's letter to the judge before sentencing.

www.cheatingfrenzy.com/gonzalez520.pdf

[JosephSHaas]

Reno's letter to the judge before sentencing.

www.cheatingfrenzy.com/gonzalez520.pdf

1. Violation of Title 18 U.S. Code, Section 3232

Thank you "very" much L.L. This is MOST excellent! and with the PROOF in the file of Huftalen's KNOWing this there will be NO reason (other than the possibility of more corruption, as their decision ought to be made ON the circuit IN Vermont OR Maine as single-filing states in compliance, see http:/ www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm ) for NOT having the 1st Circuit Court judges rule for a mistrial to either double jeopardy or a re-trial where another judge who will allow ALL evidence to be marked for an exhibit to get to the jury that Danny said yesterday on my visit with him from about 1:10 - 2:00 p.m. that you all had a jury trial so-called, but not a "trial by jury", or in other words for the former of: the judge's manipulation of what they will see and not see!

2. Violation of 6th Amendment.

Plus of the five subpoenas even allowed by Rule #___ defining or micro-managing the 6th Amendment part of "to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor" defining witnesses as only in the plural for up to five, but what about the Ninth Amendment, as in up to a million dollars ($1,000,000) was allocated to each defendant, and so WHY not more witnesses if they wanted? Danny did ask this of his attorney Sven Wiberg of Portsmouth to put in that required motion, but that he REFUSED to do so, and especially when three of his five witnesses were overseas and could not make the trial, as the gov't REFUSED to pay for their travel expenses! ... [and so now, we the citizen/tax-payers have to pay for Danny's incarceration for 40+ years!? What type of logic is that, other than insanity!]

3. Federal request to the Power Company withOUT lawful nor legal authority, but that the N.H. Electric Co-op feeds on it withOUT regurgitation, instead, after my August meeting with them, them being delighted with the taste of corruption!

...plus more witness(es) such as the Chairman of New Hampshire Electric Co-op to say that Feds TOLD his and MY company as a member thereof in Plymouth to NOT unravel the lines, but as Danny said yesterday with the company bucket ladder merely unbolted it that he re-bolted.  So YES- a Fed could have climbed up there, but ALL the defendants by their attorneys decided NOT to go this angle because WHY?  Because to show the illegality of the request from the Feds would blow the lid off their collecting $___________ each per this case in a court with no jurisdictional authority from 1-8-17 U.S. Const. to N.H. R.S.A, Ch. 123:1! So based upon PROOF yet to get from either our gov't or the company of WHO did this malicious mischief, a criminal complaint cannot be fined in Plainfield YET with the C.O.P. there for first crack at this criminal prosecution or else I'll do it privately, but will be SOMEtime you can mark my words on that as they have violated my First Amendment free speech rights to communicate with Ed by e-mail, AND the telephone: WHO cut those lines too? Plus as a member of the Co-op and a citizen, would have collected $revenue to offset a price increase for rates by less expenses, and as a beneficiary of the federal tax respectfully, and so me a "victim" too, but now forbidden to put in a V.I.S.!? Won't somebody PLEASE put one in as a recipient, even at the infinitesimal $amount? ___ I've been TRYing to get this information from Ed, but that my letters and visit form are being DENIED and given the dust treatment by the Warden out there who is actually a party in the 3rd degree of "hindering prosecution"! 

4. Oct. 4, 2007 Assault & Kidnapping.

Same goes for me TRYing to get the names of the four agents who assaulted and kidnapped Ed & Elaine last Thu., Oct. 4, 2007 @ about 7:30 p.m., and so a filing into the Claremont District Court by this Monday, October 6th since the 365-day deadline for misdemeanors ends this Saturday Oct. 4th when the court is not open, and so to try to get my complaint out in the mail as postmarked to them today, cc: to the Plainfield Police, and Ed Kelly's Office in this Unified Court System by way of his Clerk at the Concord District Court, him barricaded in the Johnson Building behind the State Mental Hospital on Pleasant Street, to lead onto the RSA Ch. ____ Summons on an Information with the Art. 88 words later when these names are supplied to me for private prosecution of these fine-only convictions.  The point being that with these faults (as the fault from the P.C.C. against Bownes*) they can then be used in a Motion for Mistrial in Danny's case: the last BEFORE any appeal. * Bownes BTW "very" angry at both Reno and me for supplying him with the gold-sealed certificate from Bill Gardner's Office of Secretary of State, David turning around and lip-saying to me: "You fucking asshole" is EXACTLY what one of the Deputy Marshals told me were the EXACT words of his lip-reading on my visit to the courthouse this past Tuesday, Sept. 30th @ about 4:15 p.m. on my visit to the G.S.A. Office there to see Mr. Rettig. Shame on you David!  And I thought you were maybe saying: you wanted the original gold-sealed certificate.

5. The Law Library Assault of Oct. 26th, 2007.

More criminal assault charges to file with the Dover P.D. within the next three weeks, to see if they want to prosecute in Dover District Court for jail time in addition to any fines for those who assaulted Danny telling him he was going over to Maine in violation of the law, because ignorance of the law is NO excuse, but somehow with these exemptions when it is public corruption! and so for me then to file my private criminal complaints against _________________________________________________ ? The names of the "Correctional" Officers please Danny, getting a copy of this to forward to me for processing. My Reply #_______ of Oct. 27th from page 62 of my Archives here to follow...

JSH

[JosephSHaas]

Here's the forward, as promised. 

1.) Notice that Sven did NOT file that SPECIAL APPEARANCE form from the start!  Shame on you Sven Wiberg, Portsmouth Attorney! +

2.) I had forgotten about this Maine not a state until 1820, and so with Geo. Z. Singal, a refugee from Italy who became a Naturalized United States Citizen in WHAT? a Federal Court in Maine?  THEN his appointment to become a judge is VOID, because the Senate, who did the confirming process, did a lousy job! He is an illegal! as NOT in compliance with the state statute, as outlined over at http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm from 1-8-17 U.S. Const. AND because of the federal non-filing in MAss.achusetts either! per my papers on this copied and sent to Ed & Elaine plus all four co-defendants...

...Thus a copy of the printout here of this to my two U.S. Senators Sununu and Gregg to call for a follow-up investigation of this illegality.  The President appointed him, but the Senate had to confirm, and they did so against the law, and that ALL cases he's ever heard have got to be re-opened because of this stain! of that the end does NOT justify the means, because we are supposed to have procedural due process of law, by the 5th + 14th Amendments, and anybody who says otherwise is a sociopath in extreme denial, and needs their head to be examined in the mental ward of their local hospital, while reading Al Gore's book: "An Inconvenient Truth" or as "Give 'em Hell Harry" Truman used to say: they hear the truth, and think it's hell...

pc: James Whitmore the actor from Hollywood to Peterborough, N.H. every Summer to the Playhouse there who plays "Give 'em Hell Harry" every now and then, and who might have connections to the McArthur Foundation for a $grant for somebody to take over, as I've almost had it with this corruption, getting reading to stick my head out the window like that guy in the movie and say: I can't take it any more!

JSH

....

...Danny had fired his federally court-appointed attorney Mark E. Howard who had put in this Motion AGAINST Danny's wishes for a "Speedy Trial" (within 70 days of Sept. 12th, and so by Thanksgiving), and who (the lawyer that is) appeared at the pre-trial in-chambers "Status Conference" with Judge Geo. Z. Singal on Tue. 10/25 @ 1 p.m. the judge set the deadline of 11/13,Tue. for Danny to sign the Waiver of Speedy Trial, who MIGHT sign such IF the new attorney, Sven D. Wiberg files a SPECIAL APPEARANCE against the jurisdiction of the court, him appointed 10/26,Fri. @ 2 p.m. when Howard was allowed to Withdraw, and the Motion for Demand to be own Counsel was also denied withOUT prejudice to what? Re-Motion within 10 days?  Danny does NOT have the paper nor pen to write such as he's now in Max!(**) Plus the Judge in Order #34 (according to PACER- thank you Bill for the relay) consolidated as to Daniel Riley with Notice of Compliance Deadline set of 11/1/07 whatever that means.

(**) I did visit with Danny this afternoon at the jail where he told me what happened Friday @ 11:30 a.m. he was told to get out of the Law Library because he was heading to the Portland, Maine court.  He told the guard: NO! His court schedule he got was for Mon., Oct. 29th @ 4:45 p.m. in Concord and that he was NOT going across state lines outside the jurisdiction of the state, ... He was working on his N.H. case, and they had some people in a van awaiting his 1.5 hr. ride to Portland who were getting impatient.  Instead of allowing Danny to be in contempt of court, for a court that is in contempt of the constitution of the United States, the guard called for back-up, and Danny was hit 14 times with some pepper balls that caused marks to his skin that he showed me the ones by his left shoulder, and told me that his right shoulder was taken out of its socket, "dislocated" when one of the 20 guards who jumped him, got the handcuffs on him with his hands behind his back and pushed his hands up to the back of his neck. The smell from the pepper balls caused him a nose bleed, and black eyes, plus he was in leg irons too all the way to Portland.  I asked him if he put it on the record of what happened.  He said no.  The judge maybe thinking him of being disoriented like this all the time? So back he went to the jail, the nurse gave him some ointment for the wounds, for about a 10-minute check-up only.  Pictures taken then locked into Max.  Him ordering dinner tonight as I was talking with him for about an hour, still in handcuffs and leg irons, when Mrs. Marie Miller (Bill's Mom) arrived to see her son.(****) ...

And WHY Maine?  It was incorporated in 1820 to become a state, that used to be part of MAssachusetts, that I've investigated through the Mass. Secretary of State's Office too is a double-filing state, and so as corrupt as New Hampshire withOUT the 2nd filing beyond the Registry of Deeds.  Maybe Danny can move that a pre-trial ought to occur in Vermont (to check out http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm to see it might be a single-filing state in compliance with 1-8-17 U.S. Const., and so pre-trial alright to grant a federal Habeas Corpus against the N.H. Feds in non-compliance with N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1. 

Yours truly, Joe Haas

P.S. YES! This is Great news! Vermont is a single-filing state and so in compliance with 1-8-17 U.S. Const. by the mere registry of the deed with the Town Clerk's Office, as outlined on pages 210-211 here @ 211 for Vermont Title 3, Ch. 4, Sec. 60 -- a copy of this being mailed to Danny tomorrow for some better federal action!

[JosephSHaas]

Reference the Maine statute in Title 1, Section 2 of 1954, there must be a "const. grant" needed for the Feds to have proper jurisdiction in Maine.  http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm that goes ONEV STEOP BEYOND beyond this "Consent" from the General Court or Legislature there, from Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 U.S. Const. since Maine is with a "Conditional" Consent too, like N.H., in that there has been no grant of such spelled out in the Maine Constitution! Wow! I had overlooked this before.  To bring this matter up to The "Rule of Law" Forum at the Portland High School on Friday, October 17th '08 @ 4:30-7:30 p.m. [ See http://www.mainehumanities.org/ ] where U.S. Attorney (de-facto) Paula D. Silsby will be there, for me to send her a copy of this Reply #____ ahead of time to what? Have her void her own office as not de-jure but de-facto? And so what does that mean? Especially when the defendant demands by claim to their rights that are supposed to be guaranteed by THE const.! They can waive them IF they want, but if not, then WHO is the one doomed?  The gov't or the REAL victim of a gov't operating as outlaws! outside the law! - Joe Haas

[JosephSHaas]

This IS MY MOTION TO RECONSIDER!:

To file a "Motion to Reconsider", based upon the latest replies.  I just called Mark @ about 11:05 a.m. and spoke with him about these latest findings as alleged from Danny that must be correct, in that the Co-op was victimized by the Feds being the liars and thieves that they are to please have the Co-op issue that apology of believing and "acting" upon these lies, because if NOT, then I will sue the Co-op in court as a recipient of what would have been my infinitesimal $amount of the tax that would have been collected by the payment on the account by Ed & Elaine.  Plus the violation of my rights that are supposed to be a guarantee by the First Amendment to Freedom of Speech and Assembly, plus the 5th & 14th Amendments to procedural due process of law, rather than from some dictate from on high, the Feds really the lowest of the low when they KNOW what the law is and do otherwise as OUTLAWS, anybody following in on their footsteps low-life's too! A copy of this and ALL these replies of today going to Mark to please schedule a hearing for Tuesday, October 28, 2008 @ __:_ o'clock a.m., (the last Tuesday of the month, so said Sharon @ 1-800-698-2007*) where I will do NO talking but to HEAR their reply and hopefully a signed apology in writing, or even a copy of the Fed. letter or memo on the Co-op side to some what? verbal communication only, because IF not then I will sue! Do doubt about it.  This is serious business dealing with more than mere money but people's life and liberty too!! - - Joe

Here's a re-type:

"mdeanlaw.net Mark Dean, Attorney

Joseph Haas
PO Box 3842
Concord, NH 03302

September 15, 2008

RE: Requests concerning Co-op electric service to Brown's property.

Dear Mr. Haas,

--I am writing to follow up our telephone conversation today concerning three requests which you made during your presentation to the New Hampshire Electric Cooperative ('the Co-op') Board of Directors ('the Board') on August 28, 2008.

--As we discussed, I consulted with the Board following your presentation.  The Board authorized me to provide you with the following responses to your requests, subject to my subsequent confirmation of certain facts and legal conclusions which contributed to the advice I had provided to the Board.  The Co-op's responses to your requests are as follows:

----You asked that the Co-op provide you with any non-confidential information or documents concerning any disruption of electric service or physical damage to the Co-op's electric distribution lines or facilities relating to the Brown's property in Plainfield, New Hampshire.  As we have discussed, none of the Co-op's relevant information or documents fall within this non-confidential category.

----You asked that the Co-op, either on its own or in cooperation with you, pursue the initiation of state criminal prosecutions against federal law enforcement officials for criminal mischief under NH RSA Chapter 364.  Having reviewed the facts and the law, the Co-op does not intend to take the actions you have suggested.

----You asked that the Co-op consider filing a statement in connection with criminal sentencing proceedings relating to an individual whom you believe 'reconnected' the Brown's electric service.  Having reviewed the facts and the law, the Co-op does not intend to make such a filing.

--While I understand that these are not the responses you had hoped for, I want to assure you the Board appreciated your presentation, and carefully considered all the facts and legal opinions available to it in reaching these decisions.  If you have any further questions concerning these matters, please contact me.

Sincerely, Mark Dean

344 Moran Road, Hopkinton, New Hampshire 03229, (603) 746-6300; (603) 494-1032 (cell); (603) 746-6310 (fax)  mdean at mdeanlaw dot net "

JSH

P.S. See http://mdeanlaw.net or http://www.mdeanlaw.net

[JosephSHaas]

Breach of Duty for Specific Performance.

Reference: the currency I sent to Ed insured last year (Sept. '07) for his legal defense.

The tracking # showed it as having NEVER left the Concord Post Office!

The mail was NOT delivered to the intended recipient, and because of that fact, there was no furtherance toward Ed obtaining legal counsel BEFORE his arrest Thu., Oct. 4th '08 @ about 7:30 p.m. of almost a year ago.

Say what for $damages to the U.S. Court of Claims?* I say $616 million (six hundred and sixteen million dollars!) The details of that exact $figure later AFTER it is collected.

To get the paperwork started I called David Papa @ 644-4074, who referred me over to Cindy Mason "again" @ 644-3802 who is Kathy or Cathy Roy's supervisor, me having already dealt with them in TRYing to get the envelope back to me, that eventually arrived when the Feds let loose of Ed's mail having been put on hold someWHERE (un-tracked) for whatever unknown excuse there being NONE of lawful variety, for them to explain themselves in this forum!

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

[JosephSHaas]

To: The Claremont District Court

From: Joe Haas

Re: RSA Ch. 625:8,III(b) Private Prosecution against 4 un-named U.S. Marshals, for: trespass and simple assault. http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/625/625-8.htm [the kidnapping charges to file later in Grafton County Superior Court].

Date: Thursday, October 2nd '08  [Eid al Fitr, whatever that is on the calendar; see http://www.when-is.com/eid-al-fitr.asp just found to be the breaking day of all evil habits.]

WHEREAS: According to RSA Ch. 625:8 Limitations, V. "A prosecution is commenced on the day when a warrant or other process is issued, and indictment returned, or an INFORMATION IS FILED, whichever is the earliest." (emphasis ADDed).

NOW So be it this "Information" filed ALSO within the RSA Ch. 625:8,(c) one year too, of last year: Thu., Oct. 4, 2007 @ about 7:30 p.m. to further the prosecution.

Noting that there is no RSA Ch. 625:8 "delayed discovery of the offense", but that of WHO the exact offenders are, because there has been a "hindering prosecution" by the Warden Lisa J.W. Hollingsworth out in Marion, Illinois in me trying to get these names from Ed Brown, and so now relying on the U.S. Marshals to provide these to me please, by way of my F.O.I.A. request, them getting a copy of this in their N.H. Office in Concord later this afternoon to forward to Washington for this answer, at which time I'll be back to issue those 4 summons' by RSA Ch. 594:14 + Art. 88.

In the meantime, anchoring this prosecution so as to like kill two birds with one stone.

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

pc: Ed Kelly, Administrative Judge, c/o his Clerk @ Concord District Court, in this "Unified Court System", the postmark determining the day of filing, and/or by special dispatch to Claremont too.

P.S. See also http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm by Attorney Lowell "Larry" Becraft of Hunstville, Alabama.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080824/ap_on_bi_ge/tax_fight_irs_loses

...that the Feds have and still do NOT have any jurisdictional authority here as technically RSA Ch. 635:2 trespassers, [ http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/635/635-2.htm ] four of whom did on Oct. 4, 2007 go ONE STEP BEYOND that to RSA Ch. 633:1,I(c) kidnapping of Ed & Elaine, [see the terrorism definition as in my other complaint to the Grand Jury in Strafford County @ Dover in Reply #__ above, http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/633/633-1.htm ] so to file a complaint in ... District Court for eventual Docket #__________ and serve the perpetrators with the RSA Ch. 594:14 Summons' [ http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LIX/594/594-14.htm ] as concluded with the words: "against the peace and dignity of the state" as spelled out in Article 88 for the form of informations.  This to do next month so as to be withIN the RSA Ch. 625:8,I,(c) "one year" statute of limitations for a misdemeanor, see http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/625/625-8.htm 

So Ed + Elaine: who were these four goons? 1. ____________ 2. _____________ 3. __________ + 4. ____________ and the other #_____ trespassers after-the-fact there to secure their "militant" seizure with force as evidence v.s. your certificate of non-filing as THE evidence of their un-lawfully and illegally being on posted* PRIVATE property! * with your NO TRESPASSING sign "and" words to that effect! that they "knew" about so as not to escape their culpable mental state of doing this with a purpose and/or unprivileged physical contact and so: a double charge of: RSA Ch. 631:2-a,I(a) Simple Assault, see http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/631/631-2-a.htm

As soon as I can get these names I'll file my complaints there to: The Claremont District Court, Tremont Square, P.O. Box 313, Claremont, NH 03743-0313, Tel. 603: 524-6064 M-F 8-4 Denise MacLeod, Clerk, Judge John J. Yazinski (who found me guilty of going through a "yellow" light! calling it a "red" light violation! in Concord District Court a few years ago, plus who issued the Arrest Warrant against me for my Free Speech Rights!! and so needing a "Special Justice" but the current office being vacant, see http://www.courts.state.nh.us/courtlocations/sulldistdir.htm#Claremont for directions to there too. )

The complaints being summarized of: ignorance of the law is no excuse. The "law" being THE const. and in particular: Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 U.S. for "Consent" needed by the State, and so every Deputy Marshal being briefed by Monier of this, but acting on his orders anyway, and so the full/ plain truth being of them unprivileged to even touch Ed & Elaine since a privilege is a "right or benefit enjoyed by an individual or class" and so with NO rights bestowed to public servants, but only so many privileges to them by us, their supposed masters, there being NO such "benefit" or "advantage" in this case! The word advantage defined as: "A favorable position", and favorable: "Manifesting approval" but WHAT kind of approval was given on June 14, 1883 by our State Legislature & General Court to the Feds?  Answer: it was a conditional approval!  Was the condition met?  No! There was no federal filing under oath by the officer per RSA 123:1 see http://www.generalcourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-IX-123.htm over to http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm This is the substance to these charges to be formerly presented to the court.

So Ed & Elaine: If you can't supply the names, or only some of them, I'll file charges against Unknown Agent(s) #1 + 2, etc. and let all of them be allowed to plead: Respondeat Superior in to have their superior: Stephen R. Monier of Goffstown as the U.S. Marshal answer to all 4 x 2 = 8 of these charges for a potential RSA Ch. 651:2,II(c) jail term of up to one year on each charge + IV(a) $2000 fine IF Gordon Gillens, the Plainfield Police Chief files the charges, so cc: to him too, but more likely my private prosecution by 651:IV(a) for an up to  $1,200 fine for each of these Class B misdemeanors.

But then maybe Monier will plead Respondeat Superior to let the corporate United States answer to the charges, in which case the possible 651:2,IV(b) fines be up to $20,000 for each misdemeanor and so x 8 (or more) = $160,000 divided by 2 = $80,000 to me as the qui-tam complainant they say, so willing to share with any law student/paralegal -turned attorney recently barred to maybe want to make a name for himself or herself WELCOME to tackle this case.

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

pc: Gordon A. Gillens, Chief of Police, The Plainfield Police Department, 110 Main Street, Meriden, N.H. 03770, 603: 469-3344 http://www.plainfieldnh.org/police.html to give him the opportunity here to talk with his appointers: The Board of Selectmen at their next meeting scheduled for Wed., Sept. 3rd '08 @ 6:00 o'clock p.m. that if they advise him, and he decides NOT to sue, then I will! so pc: to The Selectmen too, as an Agenda item #____ please that I'd like to "hear" +/or "read" what you have to say/write on this opportunity. [Rbt. W. Taylor, Judy A. Belyea, + Thos. P. Williams. Jr.]

P.S. Ed & Elaine: In order for the trespass charges to stick, for them to be guilty of an 635:2,I trespass all that is needed is for them to have known of this un-privilge, as in them supposed to know the Const. 1-8-17 U.S. and furthermore Monier briefing them on this RSA 123:1 but that they do enter anyway, but would be better if you can back it up with section III.(2) of your verbal "order" to leave, as in did you say to them when they tackled you some words like: get out of here!? "personally communicated to" them.

[JosephSHaas]

Mission Accomplished:

A. Visits:

1. My visit to the Concord District Court at about 3:50 p.m. to deliver my Criminal case copy against the 4 un-named Marshals* who trespassed onto private property, assaulted, then kidnapped Ed & Elaine withOUT lawful nor legal authority (re: no RSA 123:1 papers on file as required from 1-8-17 U.S. Const.)

2. My visit to the U.S. Marshal's Office to deliver my F.O.I.A. for the names of these four scumbags!!!!

B. Mailings:. I did mail out:

1. the letter to Mark Dean, Esq. seeking an apology from the N.H. Electric Coop on Thu., Oct. 28th for being so dumb as to accept, at face value, the demands of the Marshals that they be ordered to dis-connect the wires, knowing AT and AFTER my presentation of THE evidence, that the Feds were the real "militants" using FORCE as evidence, the Co-op the dupes of the devilry from the Feds who KNOW but do otherwise and so are hypocritical bastards deserving a one-way ticket to hell!

2. the appeal letter to the Warden saying what an asshatter she is for actually being a criminal for her "hindering prosecution" of these fellow feds, them all deserving Club Fed for a day and then the dunking booth; +

3. the Claremont District Court filing papers mailed to over there to secure this claim against these four shitheads!!!!* Yeah: call me the John Walsh of "America's Most Wante", them wanted by us to serve time in equal #amounts for what they have done AT LEAST! I mean it: off to jail they go, if only to convince that Plainfield COP to go gets some balls!

4. The latest packets to: Ed & Elaine, plus Danny, Jason, Reno + Bob of: (a) The http://www.concordmonitor.com report of Reno's hearing by Margo, and my two Replies here, plus the one to The Monitor, (b) my letter to the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to look into this Witch L.J.W. Hollingsworth; (c) that website page showing Singal the hypocrite wanting to be heard by the Senate, but denying it to others!, and so a copy of that PROCEDURAL ORDER crap; (d) the Update call to the Fed. Marshal in Washington for those Annual Reports (N.H. + N.Y. plus: Texas + Missouri); (e) my letter to the Maine State Police about the Maine vehicles loaned to here, with Attny Parr's answer of must be from some local level, unknown; for Danny to file a Motion for Discovery? __ (f) my letter to Maine Sen. Susan Collins sent to Washington against that jerk Fed. Maine Rep. Tom Allen; (g) verification of relay of papers to see if the Innocence Project is all hot air or not; (h) my e-mail letters to Ch. 6 News going nowhere, so to forward to Ch. 13 tomorrow, __; (i) that Jennifer Siegal writing about the Jews, but when a bad apple like Hodes appears, she decides to pretend that it does not exist; (j) Jennifer Horn running against Hodes, is actually running along side him, for us to put some trap door under his feet because she's running like a scared chicken; (k) my drop-off papers to the G.S.A.-N.H. (l) Maine U.S. Attny Paula D. Silsby's website copy and my Reply #7910 mailed to her too; (m) my e-mail letter copy to GSA-Boston and her replies back to me for more details as given; (n) My Reply #7913 of the 18USC3232 violations, plus that of the 6th Amend. too having been violated with only 5 subpoenas, the Oct.4'07 Assault & Kidnapping, and the Law Library Assault of Oct. 26 '07; (o) to copy and give Reply #7914 to Sununu and Gregg to un-confirm Singal (+/or to Hodes + Shea-Porter to impeach - oh, what a waste of time there too, as they need to be kicked out of office for their brown-nosing these judges: disgusting! Need some more shit-balm Hodes!?) (p) The Warden Appeal / Reply #7912 (as mailed to her); (q) The Maine statute proving the Feds over there need some Const. grant even more difficult to obtain by an Amendment to the Const. needing 3/4 of the votes in the state that was never done, and so people pretend the "Rule of Law" does not exist!?; (r) Reno's 3-page letter to the judge, now a public document in his file #07-cr-189; (s) my Claim of $616 million (to present to the Concord Postmaster tomorrow before my filing a case with the U.S. Court of Claims; (t) David Bownes' Oct. 15, 1982 RSA Ch. 31:6 oath (that he has violated, and so my complaint to the PCC); (u) my MOTION TO RECONSIDER to the Electric Co-op; + (v) = my Information filing with the Claremont District Court against these 4 Federal Marshal scumbags!!!!

Yours truly, - Joe Haas

[JosephSHaas]

Here's the First Draft of my "Appeal to Judge of Clerk's Denial":

NOW COMES the Plaintiff Haas and states as follows:

1.) The Plaintiff does acknowledge that the Const. of the United States of America was ratified by the state of New Hampshire on June 21st, 1787 (as the 9th state to do so) and that "was declared in effect on the first Wednesday in March, 1789".

2.) This includes Article VI, Section 2 commonly referred to as "The Supremacy clause" since "This Const. and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof (not pursuant to, but in pursuance of, as will be differentiated below***) ...shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Const. or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." That notwithstanding meaning in spite of, defined as regardless of, or in other words, for us to have LESS regard for a state statute, UNLESS that statute is of MORE regard, as in "To observe closely", that observe word meaning: "To adhere to or abide by", the word abide meaning to comply with, and comply defined as: "acquiesce, as to a command" and the acquiesce word meaning: "To consent*"; thus back to THE Const. as THE "Supreme: LAW OF THE LAND (as in "The Rule of Law"!) and in particular:

3.) Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 that gives power to the Laws of the United States, i.e. the U.S. Code or Statutes at Large only AFTER "Consent* of the Legislature of the State".

4.) Here in New Hampshire our Legislature or General Court did give "Consent" on June 14, 1883, but what type of "Consent" was it?  It was a "Conditional" consent: "provided, that an accurate description and plan of the lands so owned and occupied, verified by the oath of some officer of the United States having knowledge of the facts, shall be filed with the secretary of THIS state" (emphasis ADDed, because it might be on file with the U.S. Secretary of State by mistake?) R.S.A. Ch. 123:1 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm I've checked the Federal Archives for New England on Trapello Road in Waltham, MAss.achusetts and there is NO such receipt in case this document might have become lost or stolen.

5.) There being NO such filing in THIS state, as evidenced by the gold-sealed certificate of federal non-filing issued to me by Bill Gardner himself, our current Secretary of State, this being proof of lack of jurisdictional authority, (a copy threreof given over to Assistant U.S. Attorney Wm. Morse in the Ed Brown trial against the I.R.S. but who violated his Rule 16 duty to present it to the judge for a ruling as to allow it to be marked as an Exhibit for the jury to weigh, that ought to result in a Mistrial declared right after my complaint to Washington against Morse is concluded leading onto double-jeopardy, or at least a new trial) this document in Frank Mevers' State Archives not MISSING IN ACTION but A.W.O.L.= Absent without leave, or permission or consent*! The Consent needing to be a commission of a thing to be done, not the opposite of this omission!

6.) See also N.H. R.S.A. Ch. 92:2 for an "Oath Required" of the judge reading this who was "appointed to any public office" http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/92/92-2.htm who shall "subscribe the oath or declaration as prescribed by part 2, article 84 of the const. of New Hampshire" that reads that: you "will bear faith and true allegiance to the United States of America** AND the state of New Hampshire (BOTH, emphasis ADDed), and will support the const. thereof." what? the latter, right? as this const. is in the singular rather than the plural, and as stated in the second "I, A.B. do" paragraph of: "to the rules and regulations of this const. and laws of the state of New Hampshire." http://www.nh.gov/constitution/oaths.html [noting that anybody taking an oath to ONLY the U.S. Const., as I've found out elsewhere, is NOT a de-jure officer, and his/their contracts signed are a nullity from the start, any such deputizing UNDER such sub-division is a farce, and makes a mockery of such, as in contempt of the Const., such actions by them a sham: something false or empty purporting to be genuine, and so counterfeit, the harms done to those UNDER their corruption needing these wrongs to be righted! Thieves! they be deserving the sevenfold treatment by Public Law 97-280, 96 Stat. 1211 of Oct. 4, 1983 = The Year of the Bible for 1983 & Beyond, including Proverbs 6:30-31 for the thief to return 7 times the amount stolen!!!!!!!]

7.) ** The United States of America is THE "United States" and so by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States "is a constitutional federal republic", and a "federal republic" by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_republic is "The states in a federation also maintain all political sovereignty that they do not YIELD to the federation" (emphasis ADDed****) as by the Tenth Amendment (adopted by New Hampshire on January 25, 1790) "reserved to the States", the word reserve meaning to retain, or to keep in a particular "condition", the State of New Hampshire in other words: keeping the power of the Feds to exercise their legislation OUT of this state until they comply with our "conditions" as set forth in RSA 123:1, and especially to those who NEVER waive this right!

8.) **** The word: yield meaning to concede, or: "To acknowledge as true, just or proper", but that because there is no acknowledgment of federal filing to N.H. R.S.A. Ch. 123:21, but just the opposite! then for to proceed onto this pursuance*** word of "A carrying out or putting into effect" the manner of such must be done according to BOTH the Const. AND this state statute.  The end does NOT justify the means, because we are supposed to have 5th & 14 Amendment "procedural" due process of law too! Thus any U.S. Code not approved by such as "pursuant" to the Const. it is unlawful as not in agreement or conformity with, as defined as in conformance, as for to comply or in compliance: A yielding to a wish or demand.

9.) And thus I demand that since the Feds are OUT OF ORDER, that this case proceed to default judgment, so that this finding here can be made over there that it was not a "public trial" as this member of the public was kept out from such for no good reason, to result in, like I've said above too: for a declaration of mistrial leading to either double-jeopardy or a re-trial.

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

pc: Assistant U.S. Attorney Serth R. Aframe.

P.S. On the re-trial, if any, to emphasize the fact and law that the "enforce"ment clause 18 and last in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Const. ONLY applies to the "foregoing Powers" of taxation in the "uniform" type, but NOT those un-uniformed by the 16th Amendment, that does NOT have an enforcement section 2 as the surrounding Amendments do, check it out: see for yourself AND the jury, plus the fact and the law of the to "lay and collect" phrase, with the lay word meaning NOT to impose as a levy since that word means to collect, and so to collect and collect being redundant George Orwellian "1984" double-speak, as against the Ninth Amendment, and so to "apply" (rather than impose), meaning to request, and so to do as I did in the I.R.S. case against me in #M.83-50-D for Shane Devine (using Martin J. "Red" Beckman's book when he was here in our state running for President) of: request denied! that I won! 

Here's a typing of my hand-printed MOTION:

"- - - - - - - - - - - - -  STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Merrimack County ..................................................  Superior Court
_________________________________________________ No. 08-C-175

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Joseph S. Haas vs. Stephen R. Monier, U.S. Marshal at al

The Plaintiff Haas moves as follows:

1.) In his letter of April 30 '08 Seth R. Aframe did write and request a certified copy of ALL RECORDS and proceedings; but

2.) my filing of May 1st '08 @ 3:55 PM was NOT included in the Z certificate; +

3.) Whereas this court must operate in a 'frugal' manner by Art. 38, N.H. Const. & Bill of Rights; but

4.) Whereas no payment by the Rule #___ was paid by the U.S. Attny Ast, +

5.) Whereas jurisdiction must be proven when challenged; +

6.) Whereas there has been no federal hearing nor opinion in this case; +

7.) Whereas it is way past the May __ APPEARANCE DAY + June ___ ANSWER DAY;

NOW THEREFORE by my NINTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS to include Roberts Rules of Order, with the Marshal + his Deputy 'Out of Order' would the judge please grant this Motion within ten (10) days.

I hereby certify that a duplicate of this motion is being delivered to: Seth R. Aframe, Assistant U.S. Attny., 55 Pleasant Street, Concord, N.H. 03301, 225-1552 on Friday, August 22nd, 2008 @ 3:57 PM

Thank you, Signed Joe Haas  /  Joseph S. Haas, Address: P. O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, Telephone: 603: 848-6059"

Form #AOC-607-245

Attached are two documents:

1.) the 2-page copy @ 64% of 4-pages from: http://freethebrowns.com/?page_id=27

2.) The first two pages @ the 70% print-=out of Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim, with the "frugality" highlighted in the sentence: "He was also forced to read his uncle's and other relatives' numerous exhortations to frugality and good conduct" (footnote #6 = Jagerskiold, Stig: 'Nuori Mannerheim' (1965) pp. 93-94. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mannerheim

JSH

[JosephSHaas]

Here's an interesting story on my http://www.hotmail.com/ main page #1 today:

"Man dives in to save dog from Fla. shark attack"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26956958/?GT1=43001

Suggestion: replace the shark character with that of this Federal Judge Geo. Z. Singal

and the dog with these victims of Federal "militant" actions! [Case #07-cr-189]

Or in other words: it's about time this Singal got a fistful of the one-two punch too

of THE 10 Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, as Reno let him have it last Friday!

[JosephSHaas]

Update: Cindy Mason called me this morning to leave a message on my answering machine of to call William Kent, the Postal Inspector in Manchester(?) at 603: 644-4035 who I did call and left a half-message, getting cut-off so an immediate call back at 3:55 p.m. getting the man himself live questioning WHY I would bother to put in a claim for a measly 41-cents postage stamp + $cost of having it insured, me answering of not just that but of what it could have accomplished, him saying that the end result would have been the same, me saying: maybe not, but should have also added that anybody thinking that the end justifies the means is a Bozo, or technically a sociopath in extreme denial needing to have their head examined by the Natural Law Party per this plank on their political platform, the denial in this case to NOT do their job! of to deliver the mail.  Inspector Kent saying that there was a "Court Order" (document no. __ in Ed's Docket #_______) to halt the mail, me saying: oh yeah! then let me see it, because such an order does not exist.  There was no lawful order nor lawful manner to halt the mail, and would you please send me the form to get this process started.  He said to check with any Post Office. I said: thank you, then hung up the phone. Later I sent out the latest #10 envelopes of five pages each gets to exactly 1 oz. for the 42-cent stamp to Ed & Elaine, plus Danny, Reno,, Jason + Bob asking them all IF they have EVER seen this Order.  To check the oath of the Postmaster General to see if it reads similar to Monier's as the Marshal to execute only "lawful precepts", or in this case to honor only lawful orders. Either way the fact remains that they rely on such to their detriment for the task paid for but unlawfully and/or illegal stolen by them and others in the 1st and 2nd degree.  He that is partners with a thief heareth cursings, and bewrayeth it not. Proverbs 29:24. So let the banshee scream middle-woman deliver to his ears morning, noon and night!  - - Joe

Breach of Duty for Specific Performance.

Reference: the currency I sent to Ed insured last year (Sept. '07) for his legal defense.

The tracking # showed it as having NEVER left the Concord Post Office!

The mail was NOT delivered to the intended recipient, and because of that fact, there was no furtherance toward Ed obtaining legal counsel BEFORE his arrest Thu., Oct. 4th '08 @ about 7:30 p.m. of almost a year ago.

Say what for $damages to the U.S. Court of Claims?* I say $616 million (six hundred and sixteen million dollars!) The details of that exact $figure later AFTER it is collected.

To get the paperwork started I called David Papa @ 644-4074, who referred me over to Cindy Mason "again" @ 644-3802 who is Kathy or Cathy Roy's supervisor, me having already dealt with them in TRYing to get the envelope back to me, that eventually arrived when the Feds let loose of Ed's mail having been put on hold someWHERE (un-tracked) for whatever unknown excuse there being NONE of lawful variety, for them to explain themselves in this forum!

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

[JosephSHaas]

... He that is partners with a thief heareth cursings, and bewrayeth it not. Proverbs 29:24. So let the banshee scream middle-woman deliver to his ears morning, noon and night!  - - Joe

Breach of Duty for Specific Performance....

Diet Pepsi Max & The Banshee Scream:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9torw8ceu1w

See also:

1.) http://www.hauntedamericatours.com/ghosts/Banshees/Banshees.php

2.) http://theparanormaldimension.wordpress.com/2008/03/17/the_scream-of-the-banshee/

3.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banshee_(comics)

[JosephSHaas]

....

....

To: The Grafton County Superior Court, 3785 Dartmouth College Highway, North Haverhill, New Hampshire 03774, Clerk: Rbt. B. Muh, 603: 787-6961 M-F 8-4 http://www.courts.state.nh.us/courtlocations/grafsupedir.htm

My first-draft lawsuit:

Joseph S. Haas         v.s.   The New Hampshire Electric Co-op
P. O. Box 3842                  579 Tenney Mountain Highway
Concord, N.H. 03302          http://www.city-data.com/picfilesv/picv6631.php
603: 848-6059                  Plymouth, N.H. 03264-3154
Merrimack County              Grafton County 1-800-698-2007 http://www.nhec.com/

COMPLAINT For Theft of : $7.29 to be paid to the N.H. General Fund, and $_________ damages to be determined by a jury for theft of my rights of: Free Speech and Assembly with my friends Ed & Elaine Brown of Plainfield, N.H.

NOW COMES, the citizen/taxpayer, Joseph S. Haas, and a member/customer (of the N.H. Electric Co-op) with residence in Gilmanton, N.H. and states as follows:

1. On or about June 7, 2007 the Co-Op did receive some either verbal or written communication from the Feds* to unbolt the lines connecting the PRIVATE residential line from the Brown's residence to the PRIVATE company line from the grid supplying electrical power to the Brown's computer;

2. From January to June, for a time of about four (4) entire months, I was in communication with the Browns via telephone (land line and cell) "and" internet connection between my computer here in Belknap County, and their computer over there is Sullivan County;

3. By the unlawful** and illegal** unbolting of this connection on a request of Marshal Stephen R. Monier (of Goffstown) and/or Deputy Marshal _________ of the U.S. Marshals Office*, etc. I was denied my free speech rights to give information TO the Browns, and their free speech rights to me and others, which when combined violated our rights to a freedom of association, that is against the law, and more precisely: the First Amendment to the United States Const. of Sept. 17, 1787, with the ratification by New Hampshire as the ninth (9th) state on June 21, 1787, leading onto other states with the Government under the Const. declared in effect on the first Wednesday in March, 1789 and that all N.H. officers take an RSA Ch. 92:2 oath to, http://www.state.nh.us/ with violation there for Article 12 protection that is supposed to be reciprocal to the tax, but that complaint of June 20, 2007 against the Town of Plainfield Selectmen at Town Hall maybe to add in for another day, but what the heck: why not sue them now too, since this property tax was paid in full but no protection given! so a lawsuit to Sullivan County right after this! 

4. The exact amount of: $7.29 is determined to be the 8,900 kilowatts/year amount for the average home (according to: http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2003/BoiLu.shtml ) x the Business Enterprise Tax (BET) of $ .00082 per kilowatt http://www.nh.gov/revenue/

Thus for the Co-op to pay this $7.29 to the N.H. Legislature & General Court for its victims*** of the entire state of New Hampshire, and $________ to me as a victim of their theft of my rights to Free Speech & Assembly.

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - -  Joseph S. Haas

October __, 2008 [looking for a written apology from the Co-op of having been duped by the Feds, as proven by my presentation of the evidence to them on Tue., Aug. 26 '08, whereupon IF no such apology right then and there this Tue., Oct. 28th @ _:_ o'clock am/pm will be filing the double-spaced petition from this first-draft with the court by Fri., Oct. 31st, to give the Sheriff 15 days to serve them so as to be 15 days before the first Tuesday of December: Dec. 2 '08 for an Answer within 30 days, and so by: Fri., Jan. 2, 2009. [Or should I file this now?, for a Return day of Tue., Nov. 4th, and non-suit upon the re-payment of my filing fee and costs plus receipt of this apology, and a V.I.S./ Victim Impact Statement, that any member thereof the Co-Op can file in Case #07-cr-189 in Concord of U.S.A. v. Dan Riley, sentencing day of: Nov. ___, 2008.]*** Because the real perpetrators of the crimes of trespass, assault and kidnapping of Ed & Elaine Brown were done by four (4) Deputy U.S. Marshals and others on Oct. 4, 2007 @ 7:30 p.m. + using force as evidence is THE definition of the term: militant, v.s. THE evidence of the certificate of federal non-filing but that the jury was NOT allowed to see after the Art. 49 Petition was dis-allowed to be marked as such in the trial!: to have the governor assert his Art. 41 duty in his job description, of which he "shall" be "responsible" for, and if not in the Small Claims Court case #525 in Concord, then to the RSA Ch. 541-B:1-23 State Board of Claims getting a copy of this along with my Petition there maybe to file by this afternoon.

** See Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Const. for the "Consent" word, and N.H. R.S.A. Ch. 123:1 for the "Consent" of June 14, 1883 when the Feds were operating in both: Exeter & Portsmouth dealing with "minor" crimes of violations, before they moved to Littleton and now just Concord for "major" crimes of felonies, and so now to see if all the t's are crossed and i's dotted, that they are NOT! since the "Consent" was of a certain type: a conditional consent that a certain federal officer having knowledge of the plan and description of the land (re: the blueprints) file them under oath over at our N.H. Office of Secretary of State, but that as proven by the certificate of non-filing, on the gold-sealed document attached hereto, with a duplicate to enter into evidence for an Exhibit to the jury to weigh by this right as guaranteed by Article 20, N.H. Const. & Bill of Rights, the Feds do NOT have any jurisdictional authority to operate in their declared jurisdictional territory of New Hampshire, and certainly not to drag our subjects here to outside the district against the law! That's assault and kidnapping!! against the U.S. Criminal Code: Title 18 U.S.C. 3232 since there is no Rule 18 Motion to waive this right! but done anyway on orders of that outlaw judge George Z. Singal of Portland, Maine, the U.S. Attorney, Paula D. Silsby of Portland looking into having him arrested before her Fri., Oct. 17th forum on the "Rule of Law" from 4:30-7:30 p.m. at the Portland High School. We're in the First Judicial "Circuit" not First district as lied to me by Paul Broder, Investigator/ Cover-up man for the N.H. Attorney General, with firing process in the State Personnel Board at the Annex, hearing on: Nov. __, 2008. See http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm

*** cc: The Office of N.H. Attorney General, since ALL the citizens and subjects of New Hampshire are victims to this $7.29 that would have been collected as the BET from the Browns IF this power had not been unlawfully and illegally turned off, and so giving Kelly Ayotte, Attorney General the first chance to file a V.I.S. in this case #07-cr-189, but if not, then I ought to, despite that order to what? be found in contempt-of-court (up to a 6-month sentence for a "petty" offense) hey! This judge has violated my rights here, and so I demand his impeachment! cc: my two M.O.C./ Members of Congress of: Hodes and Shea-Porter, where I work and live respectfully to file such a bill right away before they get voted out, for my two new Reps to endorse and carry forward to that 2009 trial in the Senate. Maybe a fellow member of the 80,000+ Co-op members reading this could file such a V.I.S.? And/or as one of the 1,314,895 state citizens to that infinitesimal $amount of their share to the $7.29, reference that N.H. Population 2006 estimate over at http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/33000.html