mandamus, habeas and attorneys

[David Merrill]

Weishaupt shut down the thread about preparing a mandamus when it became an off-topic debate. In my opinion I had plenty of pages where I told my stance there.

The striking item to me about the thread was that clearly the Writs of mandamus and habeas corpus are now within the domain of attorneys and more importantly, it is only members here who are attorneys that I was arguing with when the thread got shut off.

I agree that the thread has served its purpose. It was very entertaining and I hope that as things develop that intrepid poster keeps writing for us. One item that would seem without the scope of the Writs is right to a fair and impartial probable cause hearing. I was granted one in 2000 but only after what the court considered arraignment. In the PC hearing I asked if the judge was a registered attorney and what her registration number was. The prosecutor objected saying I had been properly arraigned and the court had no obligation to answer any of my questions about the nature and cause of the action and/or accusations. The attorney-in-the-black-robe of course upheld his objection.

So we can track that item to the top; Mary J. Mullarkey, the chief justice of the State of Colorado corporation Supreme Court is active attorney #5430. The sanctity of the Bar once proven defines a private court system and actually a secret society in progress.

I did not want to let that go unnoticed; that the members here who debate the facts I document for all the Readers are exclusively attorneys. Brian Rookard and others became childish with sarcasm and that should not be tolerated. I agree. I am hopeful that the pleas that you all be subject to the International Bar Association were plenty warning to beware.

For myself I will be asking these folks who dispute my documented evidence if they are attorneys. If they fail to answer, I will presume they are and simply point out the doctrine in thier posts that stands evidence of my presumption.

To find the attorney # and status (active or not) for the State of Colorado call (303) 866-6554 and mention whoever by name.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[charlesa6]

I believe,Weis is using his power as moderator to shut down the thread, because opinion or suggestion is not allowed for some meticulous input by him.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by charlesa6

I believe,Weis is using his power as moderator to shut down the thread, because opinion or suggestion is not allowed for some meticulous input by him.

I think a word or two is incorrect (noting you live in Chinatown, of Chicago). However the thread about mandamus was just reduced into an insult match by what I consider a Quatloos attitude (attorney protectionism of the status quo).

My post is that I am determined not to let that happen again. I will refine a process to determine whether or not we are listening to a trained attorney. And then I will simply point out the doctrinal problems instead of warning Readers to quit listening to so-and-so. I was in a hurry so I gave the post no explanation.

Please consider all my posts explanation why the attorneys spin abracadabra to keep people mentally enslaved to conditioning.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

....I will refine a process to determine whether or not we are listening to a trained attorney.

Let me help you here, David, that would be just about anyone who disagrees with you. There's a reason for that as a measuring stick. It surrounds education, experience and simple intellectual reasoning unclouded by bouts of hysteria and utter disregard for reality.

Originally Posted by David Merrill

....And then I will simply point out the doctrinal problems....

Correction, you will simply generate more misleading drivel designed to portray yourself as some kind of rebel authority.

Originally Posted by David Merrill

....instead of warning Readers to quit listening to so-and-so. I was in a hurry so I gave the post no explanation.

Please consider all my posts explanation why the attorneys spin abracadabra to keep people mentally enslaved to conditioning.

The content of your posts is sufficiently obtuse and laughable in so many cases that no explanation or justification should be required.

Entertainment is, after all, what it is.

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Regards,

David Merrill.

[charlesa6]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I think a word or two is incorrect (noting you live in Chinatown, of Chicago). However the thread about mandamus was just reduced into an insult match by what I consider a Quatloos attitude (attorney protectionism of the status quo).

Misleading, I don't live in Chinatown. Iam not going to duo, argue, Name calling, Point fingers etc., because that is not what I stand for or believe in.

My post is that I am determined not to let that happen again. I will refine a process to determine whether or not we are listening to a trained attorney. And then I will simply point out the doctrinal problems instead of warning Readers to quit listening to so-and-so. I was in a hurry so I gave the post no explanation.

David, you misunderstand the whole point, Iam not refering to you, It just happen with your thread, and my commentary at the wrong place,and time. I don't mean any bias against you or anybody else.

Please consider all my posts explanation why the attorneys spin abracadabra to keep people mentally enslaved to conditioning.

David, relax, I don't have anything against you.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by charlesa6

Misleading, I don't live in Chinatown. Iam not going to duo, argue, Name calling, Point fingers etc., because that is not what I stand for or believe in.



David, you misunderstand the whole point, Iam not refering to you, It just happen with your thread, and my commentary at the wrong place,and time. I don't mean any bias against you or anybody else.

David, relax, I don't have anything against you.

Nor I you. The syntax of some of your sentences gives me the impression English is a second language for you. I got Chinatown from your bio:

State:
Illinois(chi-town)

And so I put it together Chicago has a Chinatown like San Francisco. I certainly meant nothing racial about it and I enjoy reading your posts.

Judge Roy Bean said:

Let me help you here, David, that would be just about anyone who disagrees with you. There's a reason for that as a measuring stick. It surrounds education, experience and simple intellectual reasoning unclouded by bouts of hysteria and utter disregard for reality.

But I do not read any supporting documentation that refutes my point, which is basically this. Some of the Readers here are aware that attorneys will screw you while they screw you out of your money. They are municipal officers calling themselves judges while collecting in receivership of the United States corporation in bankruptcy. Just the other day Congress voted to raise the debt ceiling again to avoid default; only weeks after doing that same thing, again. The defaults are happening more and more frequently since the first true default following the Thirty-One Day Government Shutdown in late 1995. That Shutdown is corporate restructure.

So I probably wont be reading much more of JRB's trash. I understand him to be an attorney in a black robe, maybe retired. My plan is not to wear it all out - to wear it to death until it becomes boring. If asked here on the forum whether a poster is an attorney or not, I expect an evasive answer is a yes. I believe I have indicted attorneys as Brethren at the very least. And I believe I am viewing the world realistically when I say so. [I even read an interlocutory appeal from the Tenth Circuit where the justices said they could not pursue the matter because they would be attacking thier "Brethren" - meaning fellow judges (who are proven to be fellow attorneys).]

I happen to have some more evidence in my pocket. And considering it is money that makes the world go around; that all disputes that make it into any court are about damages and in FRNs:

http://friends-n-family-research.inf..._12_TWEA_1.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf..._12_TWEA_2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf..._12_TWEA_3.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf..._12_TWEA_4.jpg

Pay particular attention to Section 95(b) about the authority of the Trading With the Enemy Act delegating authority equally to the Secretary a/k/a the Governor of the International Monetary Fund, an organ of the United Nations.

I imagine if I am sounding like a broken record, it is only because I am concerned that some of you Readers may believe a clown like JRB when he tries to convince you I am making all this up in my head.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[mrg]

David Merrill]Nor I you. The syntax of some of your sentences gives me the impression English is a second language for you. I got Chinatown from your bio: Illinois Chi-town

Hey David, we call Chicago Chi-town. LOLOL!!!

Bean seems to have some kind of sick twisted intense personal hatred for you, for whatever reason.

Ulimately it will eat at his own guts.

Did you burn down his saloon?

[mrg]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I believe I have indicted attorneys as Brethren at the very least.

And I believe I am viewing the world realistically when I say so.

[I even read an interlocutory appeal from the Tenth Circuit where the justices said they could not pursue the matter because they would be attacking thier "Brethren" - meaning fellow judges (who are proven to be fellow attorneys).]

Peter MacDonald
465 Packersfalls Rd
Lee, N.H. 03824
(603) 659-6217
FreedominNH@aol.com
Former Sgt., USMC:

A Madbury, New Hampshire family (strangers to me) called me on the phone.

They were having a zoning issue problem and wanted me to help them.

Their lawyers had depleted their savings and hung them out to dry.

They read my letters to the editor and asked me for help.

It seemed that the Madbury, N.H. elected officials were trying to run this family out of Madbury.

I went to court with this family before Judge Peter Fauver in Strafford Superior Court who made me the attorney of record to represent this family. ....

I took the case to the N.H. Supreme Court. This court, knowing all the criminal violations of the N.H. and United States Constitutions, ruled the Case “Moot”. ....

Judge Fauver made a statement in court that “Attorneys take an oath to protect each others character and that oath will not be violated in his court”

The N.H. Supreme Court ruling clearly honored this illegal, biased, and criminal act.

I took the case to the First District Court in Concord N.H.

Federal Judge McAuliffe ruled that judges have immunity from criminal acts made by their decisions.

Discrimination is a criminal violation of our Constitution. Judge Fauver ruled it was legal for the Madbury government to use the power intrusted in them by the voters to seek personal revenge against other citizens.

The N.H. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Judge Fauver.

Now a federal judge rules to protect other judges.

A judge’s first act in all decisions from the bench must be to protect the Constitutional rights of all citizens against abusive government acts.

I fought this case to the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston.

They ruled the case the same.

The N.H. State police came to my house to order me to stop representing this Madbury N.H. family. I did not. The N.H. State Police then came to my house a second time and arrested me under the U.S. Patriot Act.

I am now declared to be a Terrorist because I dared to defy the government's orders to stop representing a fellow American who is exposing corrupt government actions. I was arrested and placed in jail as a Terrorist for 6 months.

Governor Benson, N.H., wrote the Veterans Hospital to declare that I was a Terrorist, and that they were to have my V.A. medical benefits discontinued. I wrote Governor Benson to ask why he would do such a criminal act. I was arrested again a placed back in jail for speaking out.

Our Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to petition our public officials for redress of grievances at any time and that right can not be diminished even by a judge. ....

And is this what happens, Bean, when a fellow lawyer violates "the code?"

[charlesa6]

[/quote]=David merrill Nor I you. The syntax of some of your sentences gives me the impression English is a second language for you. I got Chinatown from your bio:

Assumption is a mother of cloud-up.
We are all in the same boat, because I don't understand what you are saying either, far worst than I.
A lot of peoples in this forum complaint about your writing skill,they cannot even coherent with what you are saying.




[quote]And so I put it together Chicago has a Chinatown like San Francisco. I certainly meant nothing racial about it and I enjoy reading your posts.

You don't have to mean jack sh$t, because I don't give a flying cloud. If you so damn good about yourself, you should, be able to identify the CHI-town as a Chicago -Town instead of Chinatown.

Look at you!

The heat is on, so dress warm.

[charlesa6]

Originally Posted by mrg

Hey David, we call Chicago Chi-town. LOLOL!!!

Bean seems to have some kind of sick twisted intense personal hatred for you, for whatever reason.

Ulimately it will eat at his own guts.

Did you burn down his saloon?

Thanx Mrg for your clarification.
This guy is a piece of shipwrecked.