Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS, Part 32

[DonnaVanMeter]

The only difference between the these two criminals, the man posing as a Marshal, and any ordinary US MARSHAL is, well an Oath that was sworn. which has gone out the window, meaning very little to those that carry such shinny badges. In fact when they as a majority ignore the laws of the Land, as well as the Constitution they swore to protect and uphold, well then they themselves are truly the impostors and should be locked away!

[JosephSHaas]

The only difference between the these two criminals, the man posing as a Marshal, and any ordinary US MARSHAL is, well an Oath that was sworn. which has gone out the window, meaning very little to those that carry such shinny badges. In fact when they as a majority ignore the laws of the Land, as well as the Constitution they swore to protect and uphold, well then they themselves are truly the impostors and should be locked away!

I could not have said it better, thanks! Maybe to copy and paste what you did just write with a link to this page over at: http://www.backgroundnow.com/background-check/john-baldasaro-arrested-by-us-marshals-fugitive-task-force-in-new-york-city/#comment-808

Here's my "8:55 am" Comment "awaiting moderat"or approval:

"MrTideman
on May 15th, 2009 at 8:55 am Your comment is awaiting moderation.

Great work guys! The N.Y. Marshals, that is, for finding him, now to see if you will live up to your reputation as being law-enforcement officers or mere stoolies / as in to betray your oath of office to both procedural and substantive due process of law, as the end does NOT justify the means, per the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. To say otherwise is from one who is technically a sociopath in extreme denial needing medical attention. And to this I mean, to check out to see IF this Warrant from New Hampshire is lawful. Monier's oath reads of to execute all "lawful precepts". But that I've found out that he is not dealing with a full deck, and have learned from the Ed Brown v.s. the IRS case where Ed sued the IRS in County Court (Grafton Co. in North Haverhill) that the judge there (Mrs. Peter Hoe/ Jean K. Burling, retired wife of State Senator retired too) did NOT honor her RSA Ch. 92:2 oath of office http://www.state.nh.us/ to abide by the last sentence of Article 12 of our Bill of Rights in that: "Nor are the inhabitants of this state controllable by any other laws than those to which they, or their representative body, have given their consent"; as in the Art. I, Sec. 8, Clause 17 "Consent" in the U.S. Constitution that we did give to the Feds on June 14, 1883 here in New Hampshire, but that it was not a gift but for an exchange, there being no N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1 federal filing at the N.H. Office of Secretary of State, as required by 40USC255. Thus the Removal by the Feds using 28USC1441(b), 28USC1442(a)(1) + 28USC1446 on Ed's case was unlawful! Thus to Art. 73 "address" this, if not to outright Art. 17 Impeach this state judge/retired collecting 3/4 of her salary, as against Art. 36, Pt. 1, for an Art. 38 trial in the State Senate. [73, 17+38 BTW in Part 2]. John: cc: to you of this, to please exercise your right to contest a transfer back to where the law is not being honored by your protest to whoever and wherever they take you, and that includes Maine and MAss.achusetts too as evidenced by no Constitutional grant of authority by an Amendment to the Maine Constitution, nor any paperwork to the MAss. Secretary of State either, as I've proven with documents I can send you to be entered into evidence and an Exhibit for if it makes it that far to a trial by jury. This info as it regards the federal charges only are provided by Attorney Lowell "Larry" Becraft over at http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm from Huntsville, Alabama. Good luck, from Yours truly, - - JSH P.S. Thus this leaves only the Parole Violation in Vermont for which to deal with any federal charges there as legit, but not in N.H., Maine nor Mass., but to have to deal with the State charges. Your effort in the process of exposing these goons who do in-justice as hypocrites is highly commendable., because as they say: a page of history is worth a volume of logic."

- - Joe

[JosephSHaas]

Watch out! - - - - "Don't Fall into the sheeple pit"!   

http://casazaza.blogspot.com/2009/03/emergency-broadcast-new-world-order.html

To watch this 10-minute video later, and report back. _____

BTW According to "The Keene Sentinel"* Reporter, Phillip Bantz, http://www.keenesentinel.com/ whose report about John P. Baldasaro appeared on pages B1+6 of the actual http://www.concordmonitor.com/ newspaper today (but not the internet on-line version?), his residence is:

John P. Baldasoro
#___ __________ (St.)
Somerville, MAss. _________
(____) _______________

I'd like to find his mailing address to forward a letter (or direct to where is he currently incarcerated) to help him fight extradition back to the unlawful and illegal non-jurisdiction of the Feds in New Hampshire (Maine and MAss.)!!! 
_______________________________________________________-

Mod: http://www.keenesentinel.com/articles/2009/05/15/news/local/free/id_355993.txt

[JosephSHaas]

Notice the loose wording of "money" over here at The "Brattleboro Reformer" by Chris(topher, or -tine?) Garofolo, Staff Reporter.

http://www.reformer.com/greenfield/ci_12357482

Obviously the slang of this "paper money" claimed to be "false currency" and "counterfeit".  They had better dot all i's and cross all t's in both the indictment AND the WAY of doing business!

Mark my words; to the Feds: you will be watched closely on this one as you KNOW the law, and to do otherwise, you will pay! Pay with you turning in your badge to Obama! 

The last of this George Orwell-ian "Nineteen Eighty Four" crowd is about to take their last curtain call!

[JosephSHaas]

Here's another one:

From The "Rutland Herald":

http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20090514/THISJUSTIN/905149977 and

http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090514/THISJUSTIN/905149977&template=printart

See also, this interesting detailed account of May 13th by Phillip Bantz too:

http://phillipbantz.wordpress.com/  scroll down to find it, plus a copy and paste here:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"Con Man On The Run After Three-State Crime Spree
Posted in CRIME on May 13, 2009 by phillipbantz

By PHILLIP BANTZ
Sentinel Staff
The Keene Sentinel: May 13, 2009

CHESTERFIELD — The man accused of swindling two business owners in Chesterfield has been tied to a scam and vehicle theft in Maine and an armed robbery in Massachusetts.

John P. Baldasaro, 45, of Somerville, Mass., has posed as a businessman, a federal agent and a U.S. Marshal while committing the string of crimes in three states, authorities said.

Baldasaro's mug shot is posted among Massachusetts' most wanted and he is being sought by more than a dozen police agencies, along with the U.S. Secret Service, Homeland Security and the U.S. Marshals Service.

"We're already getting a ton of tips from various government agencies and police agencies and a lot of citizens," Chesterfield police Lt. Duane M. Chickering said. "Our hopes are that we are going to locate him soon."

Baldasaro convinced a pair of Chesterfield business owners that he was a U.S. Marshal investigating a counterfeit money operation Monday morning, Chickering said.

Baldasaro allegedly duped Fayyaz Awan, owner of Khyber Convenience Store, and Paul Saba, owner of Big Deal, into handing over cash from their stores on Route 9 and talked Awan into giving him cash from his bank account.

"The guy was professional. He was just really, really smart," Saba said. "I was working with him as an agent. I was trying to help this federal agent with what he was trying to do."

While the robber was running the con, he displayed a holstered handgun and pretended to speak with a team of other U.S. Marshals on a Bluetooth-type device attached to his ear, Saba said.

Saba said he felt threatened only once during the ordeal, when the robber requested that he hand over identification.

"He forced me to give it to him," he said. "He put his hand on the gun like he was getting ready to pull it and I said, 'No, no, here's my ID.' "

Even after the con artist took cash from both stores and drove away with Awan to pilfer his bank account, he repeatedly called Saba's cell phone to update him on the "operation," saying the counterfeiting suspect was under surveillance and on the verge of being arrested.

"He kept calling me every two, three minutes. He'd say, 'We're watching the other guy, he's coming out of his house now,' " Saba said. "He told me to wait at Khyber and I was supposed to meet with him there and he would bring back my money."

While it's not clear why the robber targeted Khyber — an employee declined comment and Awan did not return a message — it appears that he scoped out the location before making a move, Chickering said.

"It's apparent that the suspect had done his homework on the area," he said. "I don't know 100 percent why he focused on Khyber, but I know that Route 9 is easily traveled and it takes you to Vermont, Massachusetts and Canada."

Baldasaro is wanted in Massachusetts for posing as a federal agent and luring a robbery victim with a vehicle he said he was trying to sell, according to the Cambridge Police Department.

While riding in the bait vehicle with the victim, Baldasaro ordered the man to pull over, placed a gun against his head, stole $4,000 cash and an iPhone from him, and then told him to run away or be shot, police said.

In Maine, Baldasaro is accused of posing as a Bay State businessman and defrauding a family out of $7,000 in a fraudulent investment deal, according to the Sagadahoc County Sheriff's Office.

He also stole a 2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo from a dealership in Maine, and was driving the vehicle during the Chesterfield robberies, Chickering said. The Jeep has shiny black paint and a rear license plate with "GOV" written at an angle on its left side.

Baldasaro was last seen at about 11:30 the night of the convenience store robberies at the Riverside Hotel in West Chesterfield near the Brattleboro town line. The hotel, which is owned by Saba's brother, was not robbed and Baldasaro's motive in going there remains unknown.

"If he'd rented a room, we would've caught him," Chickering said.

Leave A Comment » "

[JosephSHaas]

He's also interested in "iPod"s.

http://www.timesargus.com/article/RH/20090513/NEWS02/905130369/0/SPORTS

called an "I-Phone" over at:

http://www.massmostwanted.org/index.cfm?ac=casedetails&CaseID=20090294

So ends the "John P. Baldasaro" at Google, page 1 of 1. http://www.google.com/

[JosephSHaas]

...
Mod: http://www.keenesentinel.com/articles/2009/05/15/news/local/free/id_355993.txt

Here's a copy and paste of what they might print over there:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"Yes, congratulations to the police from the town to where Al Capone took the train to from New York to spend a few of his summers there on vacation.

Congrats for finding him, and now to test out the metal in their medals or badges to make sure that they are not tarnished with rust.*

*To that I mean that the end does not justify the means.  More on that in detail  later other than to summarize now that the N.H. Feds have yet to file their 40USC255 papers with Bill Gardner's Office of Secretary of State as required by the law! The law being in both N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1 and from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution.  Yes, we gave them this "Consent" back on June 14, 1883 when they were operating those violation courts in Exeter and Portsmouth, but now that they've gone full speed ahead with the big guns to felonies, I remind them of this conditional consent of not a gift but for an exchange.

I also say to the defendant here of not to be "another" victim of this federal goon squad mentality that the end justifies the means because it does not when there be real law enforcement officers on duty, to execute only lawful precepts, and to that I mean to honor the oath to the due process clauses in both the 5th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution for not only substantive but procedural due process of law.  To deny this is to place one in an extreme denial of the truth needing your head examined for this mental deprivation resulting in this sociopath condition.

Then if and when brought to justice for trial Mr. Baldasaro can argue that it was not "money" that was stolen, but the mere claim tickets to such, as this "paper money" be really notes, or promises to pay (like a check is an order to pay), but to pay what?  I commend, not condemn him in this counterfeit investigation, as sometimes you've got to go to extremes like in the Article 10 Right to Revolt here in N.H. that I also call brinkmanship, and even if he did step over the line, two wrongs do not make a right.

These notes are not counterfeit on their face, but surely so in when they are offered for 12USC411 redemption, all we get from the banks is that verbal excuse that we have gone off the "gold standard", [here are some more paper "notes" for your "check" forever remaining on the paper Merry-Go-Round.] Hey! that's not the point.  The point is the contract. Before these notes are monetized, so much gold bullion per pallet of FRNs (Federal Reserve Notes) bought by this PRIVATE Bank from the United States Bureau of Engraving & Printing at about 2-cents each x 32 = 64-cents per sheet, made of cotton fibers from The Crane Paper Company in Dalton, MAss.  has to be deposited with the Treasury (into Fort Knox) by Section 16 of The Federal Reserve Act of 1913.  Was it done?  Nobody knows because by a FOIA to the Treasury they answered me that they do not have to disclose these records. Then HOW to force the issue? By an Audit as called for by Federal Rep. Ron Paul, and the pressure put on the Feds doing battle in the arena of a trial?  Then so be it. Great.  Now we will be getting down to brass tacks, or should I say the circulation "dollars" of silver coin as mandated by Section 20 of the Coinage Act of 1792, to where a dollar is defined as so many grains of silver, so that the state can honor their contract too, Art. I, Sec. 10, put in there by "Founding Father" Roger Sherman to crush paper money, see also N.H. Art. 97, N.H. Constitution, and Ch. 28 Laws of N.H., Vol. 6 of 1794 at page 155, plus Ch. 7 Laws of N.H., at page 109 "for settling the depreciation of the paper currency".

The sandwich metal coins in your pocket are only commerce dollars, as told to Congress by LBJ back in 1965 to run "together" or con-current with the constitutional coin, not to replace it.  So who is the real "con" in this case? (;-) "
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Because:        "Your comment has been submitted and will be viewable once it is approved."

[JosephSHaas]

Danny writes that:

"I am in the Communication Management Unit (CMU) at the old F.C.I. in Terre Haute Indiana.  It is basically a suppression and control unit to impede and control our performance. It is mostly guys of middle Eastern decent. Many people here are innocent.  There is survailence cameras throughout and microphones recording my every move.  I am allowed one phone call a week, if it is approved. I am allowed e-mail, the recepient has to approve the monitoring of their e-mail communication with me.  I sent you an e-mail, it's waiting for your approval so you can be added to my list, if you want* to.  Keep all talk to the bear minimum, who knows how they may construe things."

* Wanted: yes, but allowed? no, because it's a "free" hotmail account. See copy and paste:

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

From: josephshaas at hotmail dot com
To: [ Keith ]
CC: [ Bill ]
Subject: FW: Inmate: RILEY, DANIEL
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 15:31:11 -0400

Keith: Just like what Jason tried, as Outlook express does NOT allow for free Hotmail accounts it says when I press the send button. So any messages to me from Jason or Danny will have to come to me by either you or Bill. -- Joe

Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 11:51:24 +0000
From: admin at inmatemessage dot com
To: josephshaas at hotmail dot com
Subject: Inmate: RILEY, DANIEL

This is a system generated message informing you that the above-named person is a federal prisoner who seeks to add you to his/her contact list for exchanging electronic messages. There is no message from the prisoner.

You have only the following options in response to this message.

* You may APPROVE this prisoner for message exchanges by clicking here and then clicking the Send button; or

* You may REFUSE this specific prisoner's request for message exchanges by clicking here and then clicking the Send button; or

* You may REFUSE this and all future federal prisoners' requests for message exchanges by clicking here and then clicking the Send button.

Any additional response will not be delivered to the prisoner or the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

By approving this transaction, you consent to have Bureau of Prisons staff monitor the content of all electronic messages exchanged.

Once you have been approved by the Bureau of Prisons to correspond with the prisoner, the prisoner will be notified and must initiate messaging.

For additional information related to this program, please visit the http://www.bop.gov/inmate_programs/trulincs_faq.jsp FAQ page.

********************************************************
See Below for Spanish/Ver abajo para leer en español
********************************************************

Este es un mensaje generado por un sistema electronico que le informa que la persona susodicha es un preso federal que intenta agregarle a su lista de contactos para intercambiar mensajes electrónicos. No hay mensaje del preso...."

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

Here's his address for where to send him any regular mail:

c/o Daniel-John: Riley
(14528-052)
Federal Correctional Institution
P. O. Box 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808

- - Joe

[DonnaVanMeter]

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090518/NEWS01/905180312/1043/NEWS01
Big jury pool for Brown trial
Request brought on by publicity

[JosephSHaas]

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090518/NEWS01/905180312/1043/NEWS01
Big jury pool for Brown trial
Request brought on by publicity

Thanks Donna, Plus see my comment there, as in the copy and paste here:

"Comments
230 - 12 = 218 more victims to sue for theft of their time to a court withOUT jurisdiction!
By JosephSHaas on Mon, 05/18/2009 - 10:01
20090518/NEWS01/905180312
905180312
article_title:
Big jury pool for Brown trial
article_pubdate:
20090518

Thank you Margot, but that you've got it wrong again: they were not "convicted" in January '07 but merely found guilty then by the jury; as F. Tupper Saussy told me, http://www.tuppersaussy.com/ who went through this in the 1990s, R.I.P. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupper_Saussy "they" were not convinced or convicted of their guilt until the sentence in April.

At that time a "belief" system of the government was the actual convincer of who? but the government itself, because there was no refuting* the RSA Ch. 123:1 certificate*** of non-filing by the Feds from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm to prove guilt. Read the very definition of to convince: "To bring to belief by argument and evidence; persuade." From the Latin word convincere of to overcome**, refute*, prove guity. "The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language", (c)1973 @ page 159.

This certificate*** of information was never put into evidence to be marked as an exhibit because the Prosecutor Wm. Morse refused to abide by Federal Rule 16 (see also Rule 3.8 in N.H. to also provide a copy to the Defendant) to present it to the judge as exculpatory evidence! I gave it to him (indirectly by way of his office receptionist) with two witnesses (you and former State Rep. Henry McElroy of Nashua) as I did report over at the nhunderground on Feb. 8, 2007 and have yet to file that complaint against him with the Washington, D.C. Bar Association, http://www.dcbar.org/ **** as I just found out April 25th by http://lawyers.justia.com/lawyer/william-morse-611104 finally after years of asking that is where he is licensed to do business, not dirty-business!

A document*** NOT needing to overcome** or offset the fact that Ed did claim that the government prove their jurisdiction, (Where are your "ceding" papers? he did ask in the courtroom, and me one of the witnesses to this statement at page #__ of the transcript if ever made) because that IS the law over any rule, and spelled out in Title 40 U.S. Code Section 255 http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=393575 as further cited by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Adams case of 1943 http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Misc/PressStatementSchulz9-16-03... See paragraph #7 of that even when Consent be "given" by the state, as N.H. did on June 14, 1883 that does not cut the mustard, as they say, because our giving was not as a gift, but for an exchange that never took place! A "conditional consent". The burden of proof is on the Feds to prove jurisdiction over Ed & Elaine, and every juror ought to ask this question too, and maybe sue for theft of their time in reporting there to the jury pool. A copy of this to give to each and all of them as they depart too to maybe form some class-action suit in state court against the Feds! like what I've done against Monier for giving me a bounced check!

Or will I be arrested for trying to hand this to them by being on the Concord Public Sidewalk? As the Feds did harass me back then when I was merely walking the dog on a leash by there as the jurors were being loaded into the bus to get back to their cars at the secret parking lot. Deputy Marshal Gene, the in-you-face guy, asking me: what was I doing on public property! (;-)

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

P.S. Watch out for Ed's Motion of June __, 2009 right after the RSA Ch. 541-B:1-23 State Board of Claims slams the hammer of freedom down on Gov. John H. Lynch's head for he was and is "responsible" by his RSA Ch. 92:2 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/92/92-2.htm Art. 41 + 51 duty in the N.H. Constitution, Part 2 http://www.nh.gov/constitution/governor.html to enforce all legislative mandates by the "shall" word in RSA 123:1 and so for him to "suffer default". See also Art. 84 at: http://www.nh.gov/constitution/oaths.html Their quarterly hearing on this is set for Friday June 12th, 2009 just two full weeks before the start of this trial, leaving ten (10) full days for which to answer.

cc: **** http://www.dcbar.org/
The District of Columbia Bar, 1250 H Street NW, Sixth Floor, Washington, DC 20005-5937 Phone: 202-737-4700; 1-877-333-2227 (Toll Free) by way of their form to print-out later, as "the system is down" according to the woman I just spoke with at the transfer number of 202: 638-1501 "Office of Bar Counsel", 515 5th Street, Zip Code 20001by pressing not 1 for dues, 2 for certificates of good standing, 3 The Rules of Professional Conduct, 4 the list of DC services, 5 staff directory, nor 6 to repeat, but 0= zero for other.

Newspaper footnote: Dan: The end does not justify the means. It's called "procedural" due process of law (beyond the mere substantive) and is in the United States Constitution that my ancestors fought for these 5th & 14th Amendments. I suggest that you: (1) salute what flag? and; (2) schedule an appointment with your doctor to examine you for your sociopathetic attitude. As a "Hunter" with license, I would have thought that at least you, of all people, would realize this! Wise up! (;-)

Hunter Dan's picture
Oh please, pick me . . . PICK ME!!!!!!!!
By Hunter Dan on Mon, 05/18/2009 - 09:22
20090518/NEWS01/905180312
905180312
article_title:
Big jury pool for Brown trial
article_pubdate:
20090518

I'd love to go in there and say, "Who's Ed Brown? What case? I've heard nothing of such a case?" just to get a seat on the jury so I can vote against this A-HOLE!!!!!"

[JosephSHaas]

How's this?

"Would you please send me the address for:

John P. Baldasaro
#____ ____________ (Street)
Somerville, MAss.achusetts ___________
(617) __________________

The reason for writing is that I have some photocopies I'd like to send to him with a letter and some currency for commissary, etc. in buying postage, and a return envelope, pen with ink +/or pencil, etc. in which to answer a few questions I have plus his comments on the subject of U.S. Notes v.s. Federal Reserve Notes, the former "spent" into circulation, while the latter involved the middleman "system" that are loaned into circulation.  He professes to be an expert at detecting counterfeits on their face, but that I'd like to see how much he knows about this "buried treasure" of what is supposed to be put on deposit by this PRIVATE Bank and their Board of Governors with "our" Fort Knox, by Section 16 of the 1913 contract. Thank you."

[JosephSHaas]

1.) From the e-mail:

USDC v. dcUS URGENT !!!!?
From:    ____________________
Sent:    Mon 5/18/09 6:27 PM
To:    Joe Haas ________________________-
Joe...

It is extremely important that this be studied, modified and applied individually by both Elaine and Ed before any further action takes place.

Click on this:     http://www.geocities.com/tthor.geo/coramnonjudice.html

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

2.) Coram non judice
"In the presence of a person not a judge. When a suit is brought and determined in a court which has no jurisdiction in the matter, then it is said to be coram non judice, and the judgement is void."
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, 13th Reprint (1998).

Thomas Murrell Thornhill III
c/o Box 1755, U.S.P.S.
Nevada City, California, United States of America
In my own person, without assistance of counsel
No telephone service maintained
[Date]

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT
OF CALIFORNIA (28 U.S.C.A. 84)

THE UNITED STATES   )   
   )    Declaration/Affidavit
   )   of
versus   )   Thomas Murrell Thornhill III
   )   
THOMAS M. THORNHILL, III   )   Case number:
(a fictitious entity)   )   Date:
   )   Location:
   )   
   )   
   )   

OFFICIAL NOTICE REQUESTED (West's Ann.Cal.Gov. Code (2001), § 11515)
JUDICIAL NOTICE REQUIRED (West's Ann.Cal.Evid. Code (2001), §§ 451, 453, 459).

Declarant, with all Due Respect, does Declare and Affirm that:

A. Declarant,_________________________________________, is a natural born, white Man, one of the People of the United States of America and one of the People of California; is here Special Visitation only, and without the benefit of the Assistance of Counsel; for the sole and exclusive purpose of Noticing this purported court as to its lack of lawful or legal Jurisdiction as to the subject matter and to my person.

B. One of the fundamental and essential basics of a valid judicial proceeding sufficient to comply with the Due Process requirements of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America is that of a 'court of competent jurisdiction'.

1. Declarant is not now, and never has been, a licensed or trained Attorney and must pray the court's reasonable indulgence and waiver of any perceived or imputed deficiencies as to the form of this Declaration.

2.a. Declarant, after reasonable inquiry believes that the subject matter of this proceeding, the legal fiction THOMAS M. THORNHILL III, is a creation of, and the property of, THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.

2.b. Declarant is not knowingly the Attorney, nor the Accountant, nor the Fiduciary, nor Withholding Agent, nor any other legal representative for the legal fiction entity, THOMAS M. THORNHILL, III; and will not, does not, and cannot, undertake said task.

3.a. Declarant has personally diligently read the official UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE documents: Army Regulation 840-10 (1979), Heraldic Activities: Flags, Guidons, Streamers, Tabards, and Automobile and Aircraft Plates and its supersede Army Regulation 840-10 (Revised 1 June 1998), Heraldic Activities: Flags, Guidons, Streamers, Tabards, and Automobile and Aircraft Plates [library Of Congress call number D 101.9:840-10|998, GPO PIN 004641-000] attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit 1.

3.b. In reasonable reliance upon the information contained in the afore-referenced official documents, Declarant reasonably infers that this court appears to be openly and notoriously sitting as some form of court-martial/military tribunal of The United States.

4. Declarant reasonably infers, based upon the following information, that the statutory authority of this 'court' to sit as a court-martial/military tribunal appears to have expired September 14, 1978.

    50 USC Sec. 1601 01/26/98
    TITLE 50 - WAR AND NATIONAL DEFENSE
    CHAPTER 34 - NATIONAL EMERGENCIES
    SUBCHAPTER I - TERMINATING EXISTING DECLARED EMERGENCIES
    Sec. 1601. Termination of existing declared emergencies

    (a) All powers and authorities possessed by the President, any other officer or employee of the Federal Government, or any executive agency, as defined in section 105 of title 5, as a result of the existence of any declaration of national emergency in effect on September 14, 1976, are terminated two years from September 14, 1976. Such termination shall not affect-
    (1) any action taken or proceeding pending not finally concluded or determined on such date;
    (2) any action or proceeding based on any act committed prior to such date; or
    (3) any rights or duties that matured or penalties that were incurred prior to such date.
    (b) For the purpose of this section, the words "any national emergency in effect" means a general declaration of emergency made by the President.
    (Pub. L. 94-412, title I, Sec. 101, Sept. 14, 1976, 90 Stat. 1255.)

5. It is an undisputed fact that the opposing attorney has introduced no Evidence into the Record that any court-martial or military court, provisional court, provost court, territorial court, military tribunal, or military commission has been authorized by act of Congress, by statute, by Executive Order, or by Proclamation of the President of United States to lawfully sit within the physical boundaries of the State of California since the State of California was admitted with full rights into the Union of the United States of America.

6.a. Declarant has knowledge certain that Declarant is not currently, and never has been, an enlisted or commissioned member of the armed forces of The United States or of the State of California.

6.b. It is an undisputed fact that Declarant, at age 52, is too old to be a member of the statutory militia, per 10 U.S.C.A. 311(a):

    The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

7.a. It is an undisputed fact that Declarant is not currently an officer/employee of The United States nor of The State of California.

7.b. It is an undisputed fact that Declarant is not an officer of any corporation created by either The United States or The State of California.

B.1. Declarant knows of no lawful reason why or how this court, while openly and notoriously sitting in the form of a court-martial/military tribunal, could have, or should acquire, lawful or legal jurisdiction over said Declarant, a private American man.

B.2. Declarant declares and affirms that to the extent that this court is openly and notoriously sitting in form as a court-martial/military tribunal, it is in relation to Declarant coram non judice (i.e., not a court of competent jurisdiction), lacking both subject matter [military personnel] and personal jurisdiction [service of process].

B.3. Declarant does NOT Consent to trial, under any pretext or pretense, before a United States "summary", "special", or "general" court-martial/tribunal/commission/etc.

C. Declarant reserves the Right to remove this matter to the nearest Article III district court of the United States, sitting as a civilian court, as soon as this court shall disclose to Declarant where said civilian court is located.

    1. "The federal district courts are created and established by Congress pursuant to the authority vested in it by the Constutution,[68. Seligmans, Inc. v. U.S., D.C.La., 30 F.Supp. 895] and the words "district court of the United States" are commonly used to describe constitutional courts created under Article III of the Constitution, [68.5. International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen Union v. Juneau Spruce Corp., Alaska, 72 S.Ct. 235, 342 U.S. 237, 96 L.Ed. 275] and not the legislative courts which have long been the courts of the Territories.[68.10. [same case]]"
    36A CORPUS JURIS SECUNDUM (1995), FEDERAL COURTS, § 302.

2. Also:

    "A district court of the United States is a creature of Congress; [87.50. Cochran v. St. Paul & Tacoma Lumber Co., D.C. Wash., 73 F.Supp. 288] a creature of the legislative branch of the government. [87.55. [same case]] While it is generally provided for by the Constitution, it is not, in a stricter sense, a constitutional court, [87.60. [same case] ]...
    "The federal district courts are courts of record. [88. In re Columbia Real-Estate Co., D.C.Ind., 101 F. 965, app. dism. 112 F. 643, 50 C.C.A. 406 ] They are not inferior courts in the technical sense of the term, [89. M'cormick v. Sullivant, Ohio, 10 Wheat. 192, 6 L.Ed. 300.] although they have been said to be inferior in the sense that their jurisdiction is limited to that conferred by Congress. [90. Cole v. Blankenship, C.C.A.W.Va. 30 F.2d 211]"
    36A CORPUS JURIS SECUNDUM (1995), FEDERAL COURTS, § 305.

3. And yet:

    "In the exercise of the power, granted to it by the Constitution, to make all needful rules and regulations with respect to the territory or other property belonging to the United States, Congress may, as shown supra sec. 2, create territorial courts and confer on them judicial power. The courts so created are legislative courts [28. Mookini v. U. S., Hawaii, 58 S.Ct. 543, 303 U.S. 201, 82 L.Ed 748, conformed to C.C.A. 95 F.2d. 960; Williams v. U. S., Ct.Cl., 53 S.Ct. 751, 289 U.S 553, 77 L.Ed. 1372; O'Donoghue v. U. S., Ct.Cl., 53 S.Ct. 740, 289 U.S. 516, 77 L.Ed. 1356] rather than constitutional courts created under the judiciary article of the Constitution, [29. Mookini...; International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen Union v. Juneau Spruce Corp., 170 F.2d. 183; cert. den. 69 S.Ct. 641, 336 U.S. 919, 93 L.Ed. 1082; reh. den. 69 S.Ct. 936, 336 U.S. 971, 93 L.Ed. 1121]...
    While a territorial court may be considered a "court of the United States" for some purposes, [32.5] or a "district court of the United States" in the context of particular legislation, [32.10] the words "court of the United States" [32.15] or "district court of the United States" [32.20] commonly describe constitutional courts created under the judiciary article of the Constitution and not territorial courts. Most sections of Title 28 referring to the district courts are applicable to constitutional courts of the United States only and are not applicable to the territorial courts created by Congress. [32.25. Callwood v. callwood, D.C.Virgin Islands, 127 F.Supp. 179.]"
    36A CORPUS JURIS SECUNDUM (1995), FEDERAL COURTS, § 312.

D. Declarant declares and affirms that Declarant's position is amply and consistently supported by the United States Supreme Court in the following cases: Ex Parte Milligan (1866), 71 U.S. 2, 18 L. Ed. 281, 291-297; United States v. Yasui (1942), 48 F. Supp. 40, 45-51, modified by 320 U.S. 115, 87 L.Ed. 1793, 63 S. Ct. 1393; Ex parte Endo (1944), 323 U.S. 283, 304; and Duncan v. Kahanamoku (1946), 327 U.S. 304, 318-324.

E. This court is Presumed to know these cases and is requested to take Judicial Notice of them.

I certify the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct.

Subscribed and Sworn this Day, the ______________ day of___________________ in the year of Our Lord, two thousand and two at ____________________________city, ________________________county, ____________________________State, United States of America.

_______________________________________

END

E-mail me here; tthor@mail.com

See also:
An analysis of the State Bar of California

The Oath of Office in California

If the California courts behave like the English Star Chamber, we get to treat them like the Star Chamber.

[Previous, Part 5] [BACK to My Work] [Come Visit My Home Page]

1 "  00055

[JosephSHaas]

...
John P. Baldasaro
....

http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFinderServlet?Transaction=NameSearch&needingMoreList=false&FirstName=John&Middle=P.&LastName=Baldasaro&Race=W&Sex=M&Age=45&x=55&y=18

[JosephSHaas]

www.usmarshals.gov

500 Pearl St # 400
New York, NY 10007
(212) 637-6000

http://www.usmarshals.gov/district/ny-e/general/marshal.htm

Mod: http://www.usmarshals.gov/investigations/taskfrcs/rftfs/ny-nj/nynjrftf.htm

[JosephSHaas]

Disconnected:

US District Court Judge
ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov

225 Cadman Plz E # 640
Brooklyn, NY 11201
(718) 260-2410
Get directions

Mod: http://www1.nysd.uscourts.gov/site_manhattan.php

press 4 for dockets, 2 for criminal = no J.P.B.
to call U.S. Marshals new # 212: 331-7070

Extradition Court at: _______________