Being your own private Attorney General

I know this is something that we can do, but cannot find the information on it.



Can anyone point me to the premise for being one's own private AG?



Thanks



HB

you could try first talking with paul andrew mitchell - he claims to be such (i think). just do a search on his name and you'll find him...

jon

[Akira]

HB,

Paul Andrew Mitchell
Private Attorney General
http://www.supremelaw.org/

Both statutes [RICO and Clayton Act] bring to bear the pressure of “private attorneys general” on a serious national problem for which public prosecutorial resources are deemed inadequate; the mechanism chosen to reach the objective in both the Clayton Act and RICO <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/unframed/18/1964.html> is the carrot of treble damages. [Agency Holding Corp. v. Malley-Duff & Associates] [107 S.Ct. 2759, 483 U.S. 143, 151 (1987) <http://laws.findlaw.com/us/483/143.html>)] [bold emphasis added]

In rejecting a significantly different focus under RICO, therefore, we are honoring an analogy that Congress itself accepted and relied upon, and one that promotes the objectives of civil RICO as readily as it furthers the objects of the Clayton Act. Both statutes share a common congressional objective of encouraging civil litigation to supplement Government efforts to deter and penalize the respectively prohibited practices. The object of civil RICO is thus not merely to compensate victims but to turn them into prosecutors, "private attorneys general," dedicated to eliminating racketeering activity. 3 <http://laws.findlaw.com/us/528/549.html>Id., at 187 (citing Malley-Duff, 483 U.S., at 151 <http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=483&page=151>) (civil RICO specifically has a "further purpose [of] encouraging potential private plaintiffs diligently to investigate"). The provision for treble damages is accordingly justified by the expected benefit of suppressing racketeering activity, an object pursued the sooner the better. [Rotella v. Wood et al., 528 U.S. 549 (2000 <http://laws.findlaw.com/us/528/549.html>)] [bold and underline emphases added]

Attorney General, Private
The “private attorney general” concept holds that a successful private party plaintiff is entitled to recovery of his legal expenses, including attorney fees, if he has advanced the policy inherent in public interest legislation on behalf of a significant class of persons. Dasher v. Housing Authority of City of Atlanta, Ga., D.C.Ga., 64 F.R.D. 720, 722. See also Equal Access to Justice Act. [Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition] [bold emphasis added]

Private Attorney General statutes, California Business and Professions Code

Section 17204.
Actions for any relief pursuant to this chapter shall be prosecuted exclusively in a court of competent jurisdiction by the Attorney General or any district attorney or by any county counsel authorized by agreement with the district attorney in actions involving violation of a county ordinance, or any city attorney of a city, or city and county, having a population in excess of 750,000, and, with the consent of the district attorney, by a city prosecutor in any city having a full-time city prosecutor or, with the consent of the district attorney, by a city attorney in any city and county in the name of the people of the State of California upon their own complaint or upon the complaint of any board, officer, person, corporation or association or by any person acting for the interests of itself, its members or the general public. [bold emphasis added]

Section 17535. Any person, corporation, firm, partnership, joint stock company, or any other association or organization which violates or proposes to violate this chapter may be enjoined by any court of competent jurisdiction.

The court may make such orders or judgments, including the appointment of a receiver, as may be necessary to prevent the use or employment by any person, corporation, firm, partnership, joint stock company, or any other association or organization of any practices which violate this chapter, or which may be necessary to restore to any person in interest any money or property, real or personal, which may have been acquired by means of any practice in this chapter declared to be unlawful.

Actions for injunction under this section may be prosecuted by the Attorney General or any district attorney, county counsel, city attorney, or city prosecutor in this state in the name of the people of the State of California upon their own complaint or upon the complaint of any board, officer, person, corporation or association or by any person acting for the interests of itself, its members or the general public. [bold emphasis added]

Just a quick cut/paste... hope it helps..

For HIS Glory,
Akira

Thank you very much.

I appreciate it!

who would want to be a private ATTORNEY? why not private COUNSELOR or private prosecutor?

[Akira]

KG,

Unless you, "the sovereign King" have delegated some authority to someone else IN YOUR KINGDOM (family), aren't you, as King, personally filling all traditional "offices" within YOUR sovereignty?

To quote Ice, "Think about it" lol

For HIS Glory,
Akira

[KaosTheory]

Are you guys talking about invoking Quo Warrento? This was discussed by John Jennings as something he either did or would invoke if the AG refused to prosecute. Jennings says, you basically take the AG's place during the trial but after the trial, he is out of a job.

KT

[Akira]

Here's another,

When a citizen is attempting to enforce the Constitution, as herein shown, he is doing so "not for himself alone but also [for others] as a 'private attorney general' vindicating a policy that [the Constitution writers] considered of the highest priority." Newman v Piggie Park Enterprises, 390 US 400; 88 S Ct 964, 966; 19 L Ed 2d 1263, 1265 (1969); Oatis v Crown Zellerbach Corp, 398 F2d 496, 499 (CA 5, 1968); and Jenkins v United Gas Corp, 400 F2d 28, 33 n 10 (CA 5, 1968).

On the flip side, there is this:

States and state officials acting officially are held not to be "persons"
subject to liability under 42 USCS section 1983. Wills v. Michigan Dept. of
State Police, 105 L.Ed. 2nd 45 (1989).

This is why BB has to fire the 'wrongdoer' and return them to the office of 'person' before they can be prosecuted. Which is quite amusing when you think about it. They are found guilty by their peers, before they are cut loose, so their guilt can be determined, by due process, in a court of law. lol

For HIS Glory,
Akira

Another question? What is a competent juristiction, bearing on the fact that we have a corporate power that is acting in a fictious government? Another forum.

It is the corporate acting in the public arena being forced to concede to the constitution.

In effect I see a domino effect happening or a house of cards falling apart. There is going to be a great need for private Attorney Generals pursuing the Rico act.

Oh just as aside have any of you seen the poster of the little girl with a swastka behind her and the caption: Deliver Us From Evil. It could be one of my sisters or even me. The little girl could have been me. She looks like one of my daughters and a grandson. I'm not joking.

And I know I am being long winded tonight but being the history, psychology, anthropology, education and just out right curious type, can you imagine the astonishment when I came upon the manual written by the government. A manual written for judges, a how to discredit these people who believed in the constitutional government.

Why the very idea that the manual was written and taken credit by the government itself, (of the corporate type). It would appear to me that, it is an outright admission of guilt of Treason against the people. Surely someone was very smart or very stupid. I started to read and I could not believe my eyes. For sure this was not history I have ever heard of. What kind of incompetent person wrote this garbage. One minor in history gives me an edge.

In addition, a little story if you haven't heard it before: I just had this urge to look at these books I have aguired about my family. Adoption did not stop me from finding them. This is just in one of my lines on my fathers side: There is a point to this story and its true. In 1651 one of my earliest relatives of the european type came to this island. He was a CONTRACT worker for the Dutch West India Company. It was called New Netherlands now known as Manhattan. This story was recorded by a Movarian Monk, about these white men who came to the island. They wore RED clothes. They gave the indians beads, axes, hoes and other tools and said they would be back later and would need some of their land. Well sure enough they came back and they found the indians wearing the implements around their necks for adornment. The white men said they would like to claim a spot of land big enough to cover the bulls hide they were carrying. The indians laughed and agreed. They carved out markings on the hide. Yep, and the people of that community had the same problems with the funding, shortages, and excuse from the powers that be, etc.This has been going on for a long time. I could see the restitution going way back, once it gets in gear. Tell me I can't spread a rumor.