Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS

[JosephSHaas]

Thank you Phil Christiano for reminding me of the deadline! 

Re: http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/09-17-07/discussion.cgi.72.html

From: The GOOGLE Search of the words: "Stephen R. Monier" retired Marshal
over at: http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=%22Stephen+R.+Monier%22+retired+Marshal&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=%22Stephen+R.+Monier%22+retired+Marshal&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=5673716d440c1f33 [ page 1, #9 of 9 ]

[JosephSHaas]

Jeanne,

To send the Sheriff Mack hyperlink to Belknap County Sheriff Craig H. Wiggin http://www.belknapcounty.org/pages/BelknapCounty_sheriff/Index  as the only R & D candidate for the Sept. 14th Primary in Laconia (County Seat), http://www.sos.nh.gov/electioninformation--2010.htm   so that he can be educated to what Mack does out west, to see if he will do same here of to check and balance the Feds to our States Rights by the 10th Amendment, so as NOT to have to go to the County Commissioners on Wed., Sept. 22nd (as they meet the 2nd + 4th Wednesdays of the month), to establish some Executive policy for to back up the Sheriff's RSA Ch. 92:2 oath of office http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/92/92-2.htm

Reference the citizens arrest that may occur with his police-back-up of some of these Federal officers as parasites in our County needing to be dealt with to what is the law! for to be processed by booking and bail on felony charges of stealing over $500.00 for illegal* and unlawful** trip money to, at and back from Maine. And so over to the County Attorney to seek at indictment before the Grand Jury.

* 18USC3232
** The Sixth Amendment.

- - Joe
_______________________________________________
Mod:

Re: http://www.belknapcounty.org/pages/belknapcounty_webdocs/SendUsComments
from:

of: "Does the Sheriff Wiggin take his RSA Ch. 92:2 oath of office to the full amount to include protecting us Art. 12 inhabitants from Federalists? "

"Thank You!
Printer-Friendly Version   
We have received your submission"
http://www.belknapcounty.org/pages/BelknapCounty_WebDocs/ThankYou

[armlaw]

Sheriff Mack will be here in Hooksett, N.H. on the 18th as keynote speaker. See program below


   

"America's founders declared that our republic and its Constitution were established by the hand of God. They emphasized that He will continue to bless our land only if we are a moral and religious people who govern ourselves by the inspired principles of liberty and union."

_National Center for Constitutional Studies.







The National Heritage Center for Constitutional Studies adopts the mission statement of the National Center for Constitutional Studies. We are "dedicated to teaching the principles of liberty and union in the tradition of America's Founding Fathers."  May we help reconnect you to the roots of the American Republic?
NHCCS Online Product Catalog

"The President of the United States cannot tell your
County Sheriff what to do!"

_Sheriff Richard Mack



Advocate For:

Federalism

States' Rights

Personal Liberty

The 2nd Amendment

Constitutional Government
   
Announcing...
Constitution Day 2010
Progressivism's Mark: "The Activist Presidency"

With Keynote Speaker...

Sheriff Richard Mack
"The County Sheriff...America's Last Hope!"

And with...
Jeff Chidester as Emcee
96.7 FM ~ Radio Talk Show Host
When: Saturday, September 18th
Where: Southern N.H. University Conference Center
North River Rd ~ Manchester, NH

Doors Open: 1PM ~ Closing Ceremonies: 8:30PM
Registration Fee:  $65.00 Covers All Activities & Dinner
?Constitution Day 2010  Features?
?Exciting Exhibits
   
?Plated 3-Course Dinner
   
?Door Prizes & Raffles

Plus...An Exciting Lineup of Speakers On Constitutional Issues:
§ Sarah Field: Chief Counsel for LibertyCentral.org.
§ Garrett Lear:  New Hampshire's Patriot Pastor
§ Dr. Edwin Vieira Jr.: Constitutional Attorney, Professor of Law
  SPECIAL FEATURE:
The Founding Fathers:
Ben Franklin, James Madison, Gouvernor Morris,George Washington,
plus... the "Useful Idiots"  in...
"A Republic...IF you can keep it!"

An hilarious spoof portraying how today's cast of progressive "thinkers,"those who currently fill out the role of the modern day "journalist," might be seen and heard reacting at a White House Press conference were the Framers to announce the details of their plan for a limited government today.

Constitution Day is Educational, Entertaining and Patriotic!
Registration Information:
? Click here to Register Online:                 ? To Register by phone: Call: 603-679-2444
? Mail-in Registrations:
NHCCS ~PO Box 906 ~ Raymond, NH 03077
Mailed Registrations must be received no later than
9/10/10 to guarantee seating.
?Click Here to Print a Flyer
?Click Here to Print Directions

Pre-Registration Required ~ Registration Fee: $ 65.00 ~ One Fee Covers All Activities & Dinner

Registrations Close 9/14/10 ~ No Refunds After 9/10/10

Limited Space Available for Vendor Exhibits ~ Please Call Early to Reserve


Are You Receiving  ORIGINAL INTENT ?
eCopy versions of the most recent issues of our educational newsletter are available by clicking the paper and quill icon below.           
eMAIL us Your Name and Address. We will be happy to add you to our list of current subscribers.

Click on paper and quill to read OI online.



        America Has A Glorious Heritage - Study It!
         Click Here To Schedule A Customized Training

         Call or eMAIL Us To Set Up
         A Seminar Tailored  To Meet Your Needs
        And To Have It Delivered
        Onsite To You!
        CHOOSE:
        YOUR OWN DATE
        Then contact us at:
        603-679-2444
           
        America Has A Glorious Heritage
        She Is A Role Model For World Freedom

            *

              WHY IS AMERICA FREE?
            *

              WHY IS AMERICAN GOVERNMENT SO STABLE?
            *

              WHAT MAKES OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT UNIQUE?

        This IS what every American needs to know.
        It is the DUTY of every American to know!

        Do You Understand the Basics of
        American Constitutional Government ?

Study the American Founding ~ Constitutional Government: The Making of America Seminar
Check out NHCCS Services and Training
Important Sites For Students of The U.S. Constitution

Judiciary Branch Page:  List of all Supreme Court Judges since 1789
Read the U.S. Constitution
Discover American Law: 1774-1873
Visit the The Library of Congress
Read Madison's notes on the Constitutional Convention
Read: Primary Sources & Transcripts
Read The Fates of The Signers of The Declaration of Independence
Visit the Plymouth Rock Foundation
Visit the James Madison Institute
Visit the Patrick Henry Homestead: "Give me liberty or give me death!"
Visit a View from 1776: Thomas Brewton
Walk through Colonial America
Visit the U.S. Senate
Find out what congress is up to U.S. House of Representatives, 110th Congress
Visit the Federal Judiciary
Lesson In Government Charity With Congressman Davy Crockett:  "Not Yours To Give!"


Click Here To Help Spread The Truth
   
Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers

Stay Informed with CNHT

The American Policy Center.org
   

Vindicating The Founders.com

    Yorktown University 

      Putting Tradition Back Into Education.

   

May we help reconnect YOU to the roots of the
American Republic?
   

    Please join us in this positive educational campaign
     to strengthen America by visiting :
      NCCS
    The National Center for Constitutional Studies

    Better Your Knowledge of U.S. History
    Play The Making of America Game


Board of Directors & Advisors
   
Statement of Purpose
TO REACH US:
   

Send Email to NHCCS
[Email Icon]
By Phone:    

603-679-2444
By FAX:    

603-679-5551
By eMail:    

chat@nhccs.org
[Line Image]
America Needs Your Help!

Your generous Tax Deductible donation will help us to
continue our mission of creating future statesmen!
Make checks payable to:  NHCCS
PO Box 906
Raymond, NH 03077
NHCCS Accepts NO Government  Funding
We do accept your personal checks, VISA - Mastercard - Discover & American Express
Donate Using PayPal
Click on the Make A Donation  button to contribute today!

[Line Image]

Copyright © 2010 National Heritage Center for Constitutional Studies, Inc. (NHCCS) All rights reserved.
No portion of this site may be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed
without the prior written authority of NHCCS.



GO TO TOP
Site Meter

[littlehawk]

Mack is the man...da macman.

check out his webpage.  Oathkeepers.

[JosephSHaas]

WHO of the candidates for U.S. Senate in N.H. to vote for?

See: http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/215185/market-binnies-prime-concern#comment-143774

[JosephSHaas]

Show Ed the list.     __________________________________________________

Thanks Mike , but no search box for old articles.

Michigan gold currency @ GOOGLE = http://www.zerohedge.com/article/michigan-says-enough-fed-takes-matters-own-hands-it-starts-using-own-currencyand-gold

The article doesn't say much, other than only in mid - Michigan. (part = 1/3rd).    -- Joe

P.S. See also: http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=17259,25856,25900,26262,26446,26515&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=Michican+gold+currency&cp=22&pf=p&sclient=psy&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=Michican+gold+currency&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=ab5cdb1806fef4aa

over to: http://www.thedailycrux.com/content/5303/Gold and

http://www.connectmidmichigan.com/news/story.aspx?id=481793

for more details: "The U.S. Treasury Department says the Coinage Act of 1965 says "private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash, unless there is a state law which says otherwise."

That allows gas stations to say they don't accept 50- or $100 bills after a certain time of day in hopes of not getting robbed."
- - - - - - - - - - -
Idea: For The _________ business-man to say that he will ONLY accept FRNs that are proven to be on the _____ list of those notes "monetized", re: WHERE be the Section 16 bullion? supposedly put on deposit for that particular pallet of $1.00 bills, $5 bills, etc. bought by the Fed from the Feds for 6-cents a note to PROVE that it is not FIAT money! The P.O. has a list of stolen Money Orders BEFORE they cash one, why not similar for these? Part 15 of Sec. 16 of their contract with us: The Federal Reserve Act of 1913.  When you cash your next paycheck and they want to pay you in something other than coins, such as this commercial paper: ask them to prove it's been monetized. SHOW ED THE LIST! (;-)

-- Joe

> Subject: Michigan Says Enough To Fed: Takes Matters Into Own Hands As It Starts Using Own Currency.And Gold >> Four Winds 10 - fourwinds10.com
> Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 19:25:24 -0400
> From: Michael
> To: josephshaas
> CC: armlaw
>
> Joe,
>
> Try this:
>
> http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/business/currency/news.php?q=128
> 1988041
>
> Mike

[JosephSHaas]

Would somebody PLEASE find a link to whatever website I could copy and paste to send to Ed who just sent me an e-mail earlier this morning:

From: EDWARD BROWN (03923049)

Date: 9/16/2010 8:28:09 AM

Subject: Progressive

Message: "September 16th
Joe,
Do you know what a Progressive is?
Teddy Roosevelt Created them during his Administration.

I would like the history of them from the internet.
Thanks Ed...end"

I think he gets this stuff from watching Glen Beck who I have only seen a few times, like when he had his show on a few weeks ago about the first black "slave" so-called of actually an indentured servant in America being that one as "owned" by the black man in Boston and when the owner died his estate was escheated to the state; and of L.B.J. getting credit for the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s when he it passed Congress when he was President, but that when he was a U.S. Senator from Texas he voted AGAINST it as it was presented by the WRONG political party of for the Dems to have gotten the credit is what he wanted and nobody else!

Thank you, -- Joe

[JosephSHaas]

Judge Jeanne Shaheen in the U.S. Senate (Impeachment Panel):

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/N/NH_SHAHEEN_JUDGE_IMPEACHMENT_NHOL-?SITE=NHCON&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[JosephSHaas]

For the words: "Court Rule" "Motion to Dismiss" government bias

at GOOGLE =  http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=17259,26102,26262,26633,26645,26781,26799&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=%22Court+Rule%22+%22Motion+to+Dismiss%22+government+bias&cp=48&pf=p&sclient=psy&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=%22Court+Rule%22+%22Motion+to+Dismiss%22+government+bias&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=6ec01e9e6f5489ed

over to:

http://sharonstephens.blogspot.com/2010/07/motion-to-recuse-judge-shala-s-sabet.html

this is listed as #2 on page one. - - Joe

[JosephSHaas]

Local News in Concord:

1.) http://www.prisonplanet.com/government-seizes-newborn-baby-over-political-beliefs-of-parents.html

2.) http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1214470/pg1

- - Joe

Update: I see that The "Concord Monitor" has a story of this over at:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/219670/couple-state-took-our-baby

+ http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/219670/couple-state-took-our-baby#comment-151239

[JosephSHaas]

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

Check it out.

In 1969 I was making $1.50/ hour silver;

now, in order to buy the "average" of those same goods and services you've got to be making FRN 8.93 per hour.

Actually to get that same silver dollar and Ben Franklin/ Liberty Bell half dollar you've got to be making FRN42.00 an hour...

...since you can "get" (notice that I don't use the word "buy", as the coin dealer is actually purchasing your commercial paper of the Federal Reserve Notes) one silver dollar for FRN 28.00 so add to that of half = 14.00 (for the 50-cent piece) = FRN42.00. 

No wonder attorneys charge FRN200 an hour, that's like making about 40 x 5 = 200, or $5.00 silver per hour.  *

Get it?

Hey! The State Employees Association (S.E.A.) or Union ought to do something about this, as some State Legislators are doing too: to get their $100/year pay in what is prescribed by the law, in Article 97, Part 2, N.H. Constitution.  Let's start up some Private Employees Association (P.E.A.) eh? You wanna join?

- - Joe H.

* correction: About FRN40 per each $1.50, so x 5 (to 200) = $7.50 silver per hour.

[JosephSHaas]

...Section 372, Count 1, makes it criminal for

two or more persons in any State, Territory, Possession, or District [to] conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof, or to induce by like means any officer of the United States to leave the place, where his duties as an officer are required to be performed, or to injure him in his person or property on account of his LAWFUL* discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the LAWFUL* discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties.
18 U.S.C. § 372.

* emphasis ADDed, as in Dan Riley's attorney Sven Wieberg from Portsmouth tried to get Reno to admit that he had signed that June 20, 2007 petition at the Brown's house that Haas delivered a certified copy of same to the governor's office the next day @ 4:29 p.m. but that the judged called for a side bar instructing the attorney to "lay a foundation" upon which to THEN present it, but that Sven FAILed to do so, and that is why I, Joseph S. Haas, did make a "Point of Order" but that is NOT on the record! of which could have been put into the equation, because what follows of some "routine" exercise of the U.S. Marshals is NOT "lawful"!

Yours truly, - - Joe Haas

[JosephSHaas]

B. Arguments Related to the Trial
Defendants' objections to their trial fall into five general categories: (1) a frivolous challenge by Riley and Gonzalez to federal jurisdiction over their crimes, ... Each of defendants' trial claims, which we address in roughly chronological order, lacks merit.

2. The United States Had "Territorial Jurisdiction" to Prosecute Defendants
Riley, joined by Gonzalez, makes an argument that by any objective measure could not have been advanced in good faith nor advanced consistently with the obligations of counsel to the court. See, e.g., Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259, 272 (2000) ("[A]n attorney is under an ethical obligation to refuse to prosecute a frivolous appeal." (internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Pimentel v. Jacobsen Fishing Co., Inc., 102 F.3d 638, 640 (1st Cir. 1996) ("An appeal is frivolous if the . . . arguments are wholly without merit." (internal quotation marks omitted)).

[Noting the case of Attorney David H. Bownes of Laconia v. Attorneys Sven Wieberg of Portsmouth and Joshua Gordon of Concord, at the N.H. Professional Conduct Committee (P.C.C.) aka The Attorney Discipline System, see: http://nhattyreg.org/ from: http://www.courts.state.nh.us/committees/attydiscip/index.htm and before that of: http://www.courts.state.nh.us/ and http://www.nh.gov/government/state.html for Case #________ (still hidden as a "grievance" BEFORE it becomes an official "complaint") ]

They primarily argue that only New Hampshire, and not the United States, has jurisdiction to prosecute crimes occurring in Plainfield, New Hampshire. They also argue that there is no venue in a federal courthouse in Concord, New Hampshire. Their theory is that either the United States must buy the land on which the offense occurred or the land must have been ceded by New Hampshire to the federal government for federal criminal laws to attach. Defendants' murky and confused argument seems to posit that this federal prosecution entails a violation of the sovereignty of the state of New Hampshire and that these defendants may assert whatever sovereign rights New Hampshire has. The claim is utterly frivolous and has been rejected before by this court and others.[ 10 ] See, e.g., United States v. Lussier, 929 F.2d 25, 27 (1st Cir. 1991).

[ Note: the word "murky"because  Souter is right, that the attorneys did a lousy job in presenting their case to leave him thinking that the "land" spoken of is that of WHERE the offense occurred.  The land is NOT that of in Plainfield of either bought (past tense of the word "buy") or "ceded" FROM the state TO the Feds, BUT that of WHERE the Feds do "buy" their land and build their buildings, as an anthill from where their ants do march out into the territory of the state, so declared their territory too by them of the District of New Hampshire, but that by the Adams case at the U.S. Supreme Court of 1943: an offer of Consent by N.H. R.S.A. Chapter 123:1 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm  from our State Legislature or General Court so as to be THE offer of a TYPE of Consent being Conditional in the 2-part 1-8-17 of the U.S. Constitution of an offer AND acceptance, is NOT Consent, with NO jurisdictional AUTHORITY to be able to LAWfully exert in this state AND Federal territory called by them The District of New Hampshire UNTIL the offer is accepted that it was NOT, as even the U.S. Attorney KNOWS has to be done by his own U.S. Attorney Manual #664:  http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00664.htm The offer was made on June 14, 1883 but never accepted.  That was when the Federal court was in Exeter and Portsmouth dealing with violations only and not that of misdemeanors and felonies as we have on the books today. Of YES, the offer made pursuant to the law, but that not Article VI, Section 2 "in pursuance thereof" with the letter "c" and not a "t" UNTIL it is put into effect.  The it being the required paperwork from that Federal "officer" being the 40USC255 to 3112 "head" of the "agency", and in this case the GSA/ General Services Administration landlord or landlady, Martha Johnson to have to file her papers with Bill Gardner, our N.H. Secretary of State (compared to Florida over at http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm thanks to Attorney Lowell "Larry" Becraft of Huntsville, Alabama to where the Feds file NOT to the Secretary there of the State, but to the governor's office.) See my Reply # _____ on page no. ____ here to Danny about those two New York delegates who walked out of the Convention on the Articles of Confederation who were invited back in when this Art. VI, Sec. 2 was put in there. Thus leading over to what Souter next writes of:]

The argument ignores the fact that New Hampshire chose to enter into a national union governed by the Constitution. In United States v. Worrall, 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 384 (1798), the Supreme Court affirmed that the enumerated powers granted to Congress in Article I, § 8, included the general power "to create, define, and punish, crimes and offences, whenever they shall deem it necessary and proper by law to do so, for effectuating the objects of the [federal] government." Id. at 394; see also United States v. Comstock, 130 S. Ct. 1949, 1957-58 (2010) (noting that the Constitution "grants Congress broad authority" to create federal crimes, which Congress "routinely exercises," and collecting examples).

[Noting of: yes, N.H. with the delegates of: John Langdon and Nicholas Gilman were the first of the nine States to vote in Convention on Sept. 17, 1787 to have Ratified the U.S. Constitution and on Jan. 25, 1790 for N.H. to have approved of the First Ten Amendments called The Bill of Rights, but that of HOW these "foregoing Powers" of Congress as indicated in Art. I, Sec. 8, Clause 18 are to be effected is spelled out in 1-8-17 of there having to be the Consent of each state and of HOW they/ the state directs, NOT that of what the Feds THINK is what is or are the laws they enact in Washington, to have no control over us N.H. Article 12 "inhabitants"  http://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html UNTIL we give our Consent! See also Article 7 for "State Sovereignty", and back to that word "forgoing" of to the BEFORE powers including Section 1 of "To lay and collect Taxes" as long as they be "uniform" of equally paid by all, like a head or poll tax.  The un-uniform taxes in the 16th Amendment says also of to "lay and collect".  But what does the word lay mean?  It can be either of to apply or impose. For me and my friends it's NOT of to impose as a levy to thus read of to collect and collect, as that would be like George Orwellian "Nineteen Eighty Four" what they call "Doublespeak" redundancy, BUT that of to apply as in a request to say: DENIED!  And WHO to enforce such of them the Feds to say that we have to take the impose definition?  WHERE be the Enforcement Clause in this Sixteenth Amendment?  There is none like the surrounding ones.  Thus any attempt to collect such be NOT lawful! So what Souter writes below is also WRONG:]

There is no offense to state sovereignty by this federal prosecution, nor has New Hampshire claimed that there is. In fact, New Hampshire deployed its own law enforcement to help federal authorities arrest the Browns. It is black-letter law that an act defined as a crime by both national and state sovereignties is "an offense against the peace and dignity of both and may be punished by each." United States v. Lanza, 260 U.S. 377, 382 (1922). This dual-sovereignty doctrine allows for a federal prosecution even after a prior state prosecution for the same conduct. E.g., Abbate v. United States, 359 U.S. 187, 195-96 (1959).

Congress has chosen to vest jurisdiction and venue over federal crimes in the federal courts. Congress has given the U.S. district courts exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses against the laws of the United States. 18 U.S.C. § 3231. That jurisdiction is not limited to crimes which occur on federally owned property, nor is a state's permission needed for federal prosecution. See United States v. Hamilton, 263 F.3d 645, 655 (6th Cir. 2001); United States v. Sitton, 968 F.2d 947, 953 (9th Cir. 1992), abrogated on other grounds by Koon v. United States, 518 U.S. 81 (1996); see also Cantrell v. Reno, 36 F. App'x 651, 652 (1st Cir. 2002).
Defendants' argument depends upon severely misreading the text of the U.S. Constitution. Defendants point to clause 17 of Article I, § 8, the Exclusive Legislation Clause, which vests Congress with the power

[t]o exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases . . . . and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.
Id. The argument misses the point that the United States has not claimed it has the exclusive right to promulgate laws over the lands where the crimes were committed; New Hampshire also has jurisdiction. So the clause is not at issue.
The Exclusive Legislation Clause has been used to limit a state's authority to regulate activities on U.S. military bases and similarly exclusive federal areas/buildings absent permission from Congress. See, e.g., United States v. State Tax Comm'n, 412 U.S. 363, 372-73 (1973); Collins v. Yosemite Park & Curry Co., 304 U.S. 518, 527-30 (1938); see also S. Lipsky, The Citizen's Constitution 81 (2009) ("In 43 Federalist, Madison offers a straightforward explanation for this clause: `The public money expended on such places, and the public property deposited in them, require that they should be exempt from the authority of the particular State.'").
Finally, there is no basis for a venue objection when the trial took place in Concord, New Hampshire, and a judge* from the District of Maine sat because the New Hampshire judges were recused. See, e.g., United States v. Scott, 270 F.3d 30, 35 (1st Cir. 2001).

* but was that judge properly designated by the Chief Judge of the First Circuit? See the answer in my e-mail to Danny Riley of: __________ in the F.C.I. in Terra Haute, Indiana to follow AFTER he gets all the data as so-called "corrected".
Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - Joe  / Joseph S. Haas, P. O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059, e-mail: JosephSHaas at hotmail dot com

[JosephSHaas]

Re: Plainfield case.

______ ,

Thanks again for the formatting of the complaint I did just send in yesterday by mail to the Sullivan County Superior Court in Newport with the Deputy Sheriff Returns of having served the Town Clerk and Selectman Taylor (son of Stephen, our former N.H. Agriculture Commissioner, retired).

At about 5:15 p.m. I was told by a friend that he read about this court case in the newspaper.  Which one? I asked, and so it being either the UNION LEADER and/or The CONCORD MONITOR, as yes, it was in both.  The UNION News having a chopped version without that comment* from the Town Administrator and shortened to only the filing fee paragraph**; but that did have that A.P. June 2007 picture of Ed & Elaine of him sitting in his chair on the porch looking off into the distance, and Elaine lower and in front of him also sitting down and in what I call that "Dobie Gillis" statute of The Thinker pose with elbow on knee and hand to chin from that 1960s TV show.

Another friend told me that he heard "them" talking about this on NPR too (National Public Radio - N.H.) as he heard it on his car radio. So I guessed that it might be on the WMUR-TV Channel 9 news at 11:00 p.m. but wasn't.  Maybe on the early news?

Here's a typing of this article from page A5+6 of The "Concord Monitor", as a re-print from The "Valley News" that might have more? See:    http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=17259,26637,27156,27208,27404,27428&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=%22Valley+News%22+%22Ed+Brown%22+%22Casey+Conley%22&cp=38&pf=p&sclient=psy&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=%22Valley+News%22+%22Ed+Brown%22+%22Casey+Conley&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=6e8733203d1b4e27     as NOT on the internet by a GOOGLE search for these words of: "Valley News" "Ed Brown" "Casey Conley".   [The UNION News is on page B2, and with the headline of: "Browns file suit against town of Plainfield" with the sub-headline of: "In jail: Convicted tax evaders claim town should have prevented their arrest by federal agents in 2007."  _______________

"PLAINFIELD   Tax-protesting couple sue town    Browns: Officials failed to protect us   BY CASEY CONLEY  Valley News 
--From federal prisons Ed and Elaine Brown have filed a lawsuit claiming the town of Plainfield should have prevented their arrest by federal agents in 2007.
--Based on one interpretation of the state constitution, the suit claims that because the Browns paid their Plainfield property taxes, the town should have shielded them from federal authorities.  They had gone into hiding after being convicted of federal tax evasion.
--The town 'should have acted to stop this false arrest and should not have cooperated with the agents in this arrest and transfer of the [end of page A5, now to page A6: ___________  plaintiffs,' according to the suit, which was filed last month in Sullivan County Superior Court.
--Town officials say they'll respond to the lawsuit in due time, but otherwise don't seen terribly concerned.
--'We're not anticipating it as being a lawsuit that goes very far,' said Plainfield Town Manager Stephen Halleran.
-- [* This in the Monitor one, but not the UNION News of:] 'It just sort of never ends with Ed.  We don't believe the town had a duty to send police to protect Ed from the federal government,' Halleran added. 'We don't really have an army, as you know.' _______
--Ed and Elaine Brown don't recognize the federal government or its authority to collect income taxes. _____  The couple holed up for nine months in their home on Center of Town Road in 2007, taunting and occasionally threatening federal officials sent to arrest them.

[continued on e-mail page #2 so that you can have a print-out of this at ___%.]

[JosephSHaas]

Re: Plainfield case.
....

Re: Plainfield case - page 2 of 2.

____, Here's the second page of typing the rest of the article.  Plus ______  My typing here from yesterday's newspapers: Fri., Nov. 5th:

--Undercover agents arrested the couple in October 2007.
--In separate trials, Elaine and Ed Brown were sentenced within the past year to 35 and 37 years in prison, respectfully, for conspiracy and weapons charges in connection with the standoff.  Elaine Brown is being held at a federal prison medical center in Fort Worth, Texas.  Ed Brown is being held at a medium security federal prison in Marion, Ill.
--In a handwritten letter to Sullivan County Superior Court Clerk Barbara Hogan and filled with misspellings, Ed Brown rehashes many old beefs with the federal government.  He also asks that a jury decide the suit.
--Brown says in the letter that he was tortured, and 'nearly murdered' by federal authorities, and that he was 'given a systemic disease by officer of the U.S. prison system.'
--At the end of the letter, Brown claims his and Elaine's name have ben copyrighted.  As proof, Brown drew a trademark symbol next to their names.  He seeks $100,000 in licensing fees each time their names are used.
--The court agreed to waive a $205 filing fee after the Browns demonstrated they had less than that amount between them.
** [ end of UNION News story, now for the rest of what The "Monitor" printed as ___% of the original in The "Valley News":]

--Apparently the Browns have not hired a lawyer to handle the suit.
--Hogan said yesterday that it's not uncommon for court proceedings to be conducted by phone or video, but she said it was too soon to know if that would happen in this case.  She said it was extremely unlikely that the Browns would be released from prison for any proceedings if the suit reaches that point.
--'Undoubtedly, they will want to be here, but we have no say,' she said. 'They are incarcerated.  We can't get them out.' _______
--Plainfield officials learned of the suit last week.  Select-board member Judy Belyea said the board is awaiting a report on the matter from town attorney Barry Schuster.
--Reached by telephone yesterday, Schuster declined to comment on the suit but said the town would respond by Dec. 7 as required by the courts.
--Halleran, the town manager, expected Schuster would try to get the suit dismissed."

End of typing from the newspaper article. -- Joe

_____ "