12/28/06 Arraignment. I wanted to dismiss for want of jurisdiction. They had other things in mind. Two contempt charges and 3 trials scheduled.
F1523230 on 3/1/07
F1525159 on 2/28/07
F1678532 on 3/16/07

The stroy of what happened is in the statement of the case in the Appeal

1/22/07 This is the original appeal to the Louisiana Supreme Court from the "arraignment" on cases F1523230, F1525159, F1678532. Here I still believed that the First Parish Court, Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana was a Louisiana State Court. It's not. It's a federal admiralty court. Hence, all my complaining about the court procedure and asking for a stay is a waste of time. A State court has no power over a federal court. The issues are clearly stated and valid.

1/22/07 The Clerk insisted that I needed some proof that a judgment had been rendered. I sent her copies of the notice of trials and this cover letter. Obviously, if a trial has been ordered, jurisdiction has been ruled on. Ditto for the cause of action, right of action and standing of the Plaintiff. If an arraignment has been called, jurisdiction has been considered and is now presumed. No actions until jurisdiction has been established. Jurisdiction also depends upon the cause of action, right of action and standing of the plaintiff, among other things

1/24/07 This is the notice from the Louisiana Supreme Court telling me that the case has been received and docketed as 2007-KH-131.

1/25/07 This is the envelope the notice, docketing case 200t-KH-131, came in. I had it. I scanned it.

2/28/07 This is the day I was scheduled for a trial on case number F1525159. My arraignment for caes number F1681551 was scheduled for the 22nd, but walking distance prison was getting confining. I decided to show up on the 28th when I was scheduled for trial and handle the arraignment then. Curiously, traffic court is not on a bus route.

This case was stayed (F1525159) and I asked that the other 2 be stayed also. The three trials I had asked the Louisiana Supreme Court to stay. The new arraignment was for case number F1681551 which will eventually become 2007-KH-866 in the Louisiana Supreme Court.

It was when I was gathering my documents preparing to leave that I noticed the Federal Court Order and put the pieces together. Forget that it says First Parish Court, Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana. This is an admiralty lien, Admiralty jurisdiction is federal. I must be in a federal admiralty court and, under article 1251(b)(3), I must be a citizen of another State or an alien.

2/28/07 Appeared in court and was eventually called up. I was told that on motion of the court this trial would be postponed until the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled. All three were eventually stayed.

Now, we are going to have an arraignment on the other similar charge.

They were going to try and force jurisdiction on me. The story is in the appeal. I'll get to that later. I am about to be very busy.

Do you know that the judge would not tell me if I were in a federal admiralty court. I kept asking him in as many ways as I could think of. He wouldn't tell me in what jurisdiction I stood and what type of action I was standing against. If you have nothing to hide, why are you hiding it?

3/5/07 The Louisiana Supreme Court sent me a notice telling me that they had transferred jurisdiction of this case to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, State of Louisiana. It had a nice cover letter on it.

Now I realize that if the First Parish Court, Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana is a federal admiralty court and I must be a citizen of another State or an alien. Then, obviously, the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, State of Louisiana must also be a federal admiralty court. I am not going there. I am a Citizen of the State of Louisiana not a citizen of another State or an alien.

3/12/07 I did the only thing that I could do. I objected to the transfer of Jurisdiction.

I am a Citizen of the State of Louisiana. I am not a citizen of another State or an alien. That court has no jurisdiction.

Besides, the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, State of Louisiana can not effect a remedy. They can't decide if the Admiralty lien is valid, they can only ask the Louisiana Supreme Court if Article VII Section 5 of the Louisiana Constitution is valid.

3/12/07 The Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, State of Lousiaiana gave the case a docket number of 07-KH-154 and denied what they are calling a writ. And, they can not order the State to give me back my vehicle.

If you'll notice the dates? Our paperwork crossed in the mail. Of course they didn't ask the Louisiana Supreme Court if the lien was valid. Just shut the subject up. He'll take the beating then maybe he'll get back to work.

Notice that I don't talk to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, State of Louisiana. I notice them by copies filed in the correct court. I have no business talking to them. They have no jurisdiction and I have no standing (no right to stand before them.) I am not a citizen of another State or an alien.

3/12/07 This is the envelope the notice, denying the writ numbered 07-KH-154 on the docket of the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, State of Louisiana, came in. I had it. I scanned it.

3/15/07 Here is the objection to the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, State of Louisiana. It was sent to the Louisiana Supreme Court. They tried to transfer it, they have to fix it. The court they tried to transferred it to has no jurisdiction and can not effect a remedy.

3/17/07 Needed more. Sent it.

3/19/07 The central staff of the Louisiana Supreme Court sent back my objection to the transfer of jurisdiction. They claimed that my paperwork was incorrect because I called the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, State of Louisiana the United States Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit.

What I was doing was trying to make the point that the appeal court that they had mistakenly tried to transfer this case was indeed a United States Court of Appeal for the Fifth Circuit in the State of Louisiana. Everyone knew where they transferred the case.

But, Hey, you need some reason to return it and keep it off of the record.

3/26/07 What else could I do? I objected to the ruling of the central staff and sent everything back to them.

3/30/07 There is a time limit on submitting of briefs. I surely didn't want to screw up on such an obvious mistake. I sent briefs. Plus, activity in a case they are trying to hide can't hurt.

I also told them that because they have been so negligent in the performance of their duty that I was still being persecuted by this tyrant enforcing an invalid lien.

4/2/07 I told them it was coming. I started a new appeal. This time I left the State of Louisiana out of it. I was coming after the body corporate with the power to sue and be sued, sole agent for the State of Louisiana in charge of state property.

The Department of Public Safety and Corrections

This Appeal is on the ruling of Jurisdiction in case number F1681551. Case number F1681551 will magically disappear from the record.

4/13/07 I've waited long enough. It's time to demand Summary Judgment.

I'm starting to wonder why no one is answering. A challenge to the Louisiana Constitution is the Attorney General's job.

4/19/07 When I called or went down to the Louisiana Supreme Court I found that there were documents that were still not listed in the record. I sent them more copies and took the opportunity to set the record that documents were missing.

4/27/07 The Louisiana Supreme Court acknowledges the receipt of the appeal from case number F1681551. Mailed on 4/2/07 and received on 4/27/07.

The docket number is 2007-KH-866.

But, look at who they noticed.

What happened to case number F1681551? The case number this appeal is about.

How did 2007-KH-131's cases leak in here?

5/7/07 I objected. I have been bitten by an incorrect record before.

5/21/07 I needed a way to bypass the clerk. Documents were still not showing up in the official record.

I found a rule in the Louisiana Supreme Court rules that allows you to make a motion in open court before the first case is called. I found out that the court would be in session for three consecutive days.

I went, in coat and tie, to the Louisiana Supreme Court. Joked with the security. Went to the court and, on my best behavior, I told the clerk what I wanted and sited the rule. Sure enough I filed my motion in open court and left.

I filed a motion for summary judgment in case 2007-KH-866.

I had been wondering why the Attorney General hadn't responded. It is, after all, his job. I had been digging and found out that he was a citizen of a foreign state or an alien. He has no standing in the Louisiana Supreme Court nor right to hold this office.

5/22/07 The next day I went back to the Louisiana Supreme Court. We all now knew that the rules were good and I could do this. This time I filed a motion for summary judgment in case 2007-KH-131 and left. We wouldn't want to forget that there are differences in these cases.

5/23/07 The third day I went back to the Louisiana Supreme Court. Still, well dressed and very respectful, I went to the clerk and gave him a copy of my motions. I have been taught to give the judges a heads up when something is going to happen. I told the clerk that I was going to file these in open court and that I had every intention of fighting about it.

The clerk went away and came back a little while latter. He called me out of the court room and had a security guard grab each arm and escort me out of the back door of the court. This was their highest and best legal option. The guards did release me long enough for me to hand the motions to the clerk to be filed.

6/7/07 This is the "We'll rule when pigs fly." letter.

Notice the fictitious chain of appeal. I have never been in the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit. We're still arguing about that.

I have never, ever, been in the 24th Judicial District Court Div. "G"

Notice also that case number F1681551 is still missing. It doesn't fit the Fifth Circuit Records.

Notice too that the motion for summary judgment is referred to the merits of the application. No one has responded. What happened to the merit of the issues?

6/7/07 This is the envelope the referral came in. I had it. I scanned it.

BLANK

I'm not going to get anywhere with the Louisiana Supreme Court. I can't appeal. They haven't decided. Also, the record is hopelessly fraudulent. The Supreme Court of the United States will just say, "On the face of the record, you're wrong."

It is still an uncontested fact that I am a Citizen of the State of Louisiana. Let's see how I'll do going to them as a Citizen of the State of Louisiana.

7/9/07 Leave to file? This bothered me. It's required by the Supreme Court rules. A motion for leave to file is a conference of jurisdiction. If I have a right to file, why do I need your permission? Think like a King.

If the First Parish Court, Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana is a federal admiralty Court and the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, State of Louisiana is a federal court, could the Supreme Court of the United States be the highest court that congress created?

Is there a United States Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court. and a Supreme Court of the United States, the highest congressional court?

I did not ask for permission to file. I have a right to file. I asked for permission to file as a person incapable of paying the filing fees.

1. Article VII Section 5 of the Louisiana State Constitution is unconstitutional.
2. The Department of Public Safety and Corrections is unconstitutional.
3. The Department of Public Safety and Corrections is stealing the property of Citizens by knowingly enforcing an invalid lien.
4. Invaders from a foreign state, aliens, have stolen the representation of Citizens of the State of Louisiana.
5. Invaders from a foreign state, aliens, have stolen the property and rights of Citizens of the State of Louisiana and reduced them to slavery.

7/13/07 Everything was sent back with a letter from the clerk.

My paper does not comply with the rules. This is not a writ of certiorari.

My case must first be reviewed by the highest State court in which a decision could be had.

Hasn't it been reviewed by the Louisiana Supreme Court? Unfortunately, the Louisiana Supreme Court is set with citizens of another state or aliens. Foreign invaders. What other court can rule on the validity of the Louisiana State Constitution?

7/23/07 I sent everything back with an objection to the return of legally filed documents.

I went through the rules and showed that my documents do comply.

It's good to know the rules.

This time they sent everything back, including the objection, with a copy of the July 13th letter.

8/3/07 I objected again in the Second Objection to the Return of Legally filed Documents.

This time I sent everything to Mr. Suter himself with a cover letter of a demand notice. I wanted to make sure that he, personally, knew about this.

8/21/07 This time I got a new letter from the clerk.

The clerk told me that the Supreme Court of the United States does not have jurisdiction.

The clerk told me to go and see 28 U.S.C. 1251, the eleventh amendment and Hans v. Louisiana.

Dred Scott, Hans and I have no business in this court.

At least we now agree that my filings do comply with the rules.

9/6/07 I sent everthing back again. Covering it is a 2nd demand letter to Mr. Suter. There is a also a third objection to the return of legally filed documents. I am persistent.

9/6/07 I also sent an application directly to Justice Scalia. Maybe I can get around the clerk and make sure that Justice Scalia knows what is going on.

9/12/07 This time I got everything back again, but with a different letter and a copy of the no jurisdiction letter.

This letter told me that this court could not assist me. This court's jurisdiction extends only to the consideration of cases properly brought before it from lower courts in accordance with federal law and filed pursuant to the rules of this court.

9/21/07 I came at them again. This time I had discovered the Scire Facias complaint. It is a complaint against someone who disposed of land he did not have clear title to.

Return title of the land to it's rightful owners and I have the Character of a King.

Did I mention that I was persistent?

9-28-07 Everything was sent back again. This time there was just a copy of the no assistance letter and a copy of the no jurisdiction letter. No other letters.

I read them again.

Are they telling me that this is not the Supreme Court mentioned in the Constitution?

Are they telling me that this is not the Supreme Court that Publius talks about in the Federalist Papers?

Could the United States Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of the United States be two different courts?

10/11/07 I came at them again. This time with a heading of United States Supreme Court and a footnote saying that this was meant to be construed as a reference to the same Supreme Court referenced in the United States Constitution and referenced by Publius in the Federalist Papers, address and/or name correction requested.

Did I mention that I was persistent?

I had also found more information by this time and expanded my complaints.

10/11/07 Complaint 1. The State of Louisiana did, by enactment of Article VII Section 5 of the Louisiana State Constitution, steal, without compensation nor due process, by bill of credit, every "device by which persons or things may be transported upon a public highway or bridge." La R.S. 32:1(92) to include bicycles and ridden animals for the expressed purpose of stealing the unalienable right to pursue happiness, among others, from this Citizen of the State of Louisiana and all Citizens of the State. The State of Louisiana did then hide this lien and claim of ownership.

10/11/07 Complaint 2. The State of Louisiana did create a body corporate known as the Department of Public Safety and Corrections. This body corporate did then, under the guise of police power, demand that this Citizen of the State of Louisiana, and all Citizens of the State of Louisiana surrender their right to be free and did force them to be bound to service for a term of years to the Department of Public Safety and Corrections and any corporations in the insurance industry or be confined, absent charge and trial, to a prison the bounding walls of which are described by the distance one could walk in a day and did forbid them from owning and/or operating any conveyance with which one could flee for one's life hence sentencing us to prison and execution by natural or man made disaster.

10/11/07 Complaint 3. The Department of Public Safety and Corrections, alias of the State of Louisiana, did further conspire to hide its illegal claim of ownership (jus in re) by stating on its document entitled "Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections Official Notice of Withdrawal of Vehicle Registration Notice of Violation" (Exhibit 2) and other official documents that the Plaintiff, Michael E. DiRosa, was the owner of the vehicle while knowing full well that this was a lie.

10/11/07 Complaint 4. Invaders from a state foreign to the State of Louisiana did steal and conspire to steal from this Citizen of the State of Louisiana and all Citizens of the State of Louisiana their guaranteed Republican form of Government by enacting Article IV Section 2 of the Louisiana State Constitution which forbids any Citizen of the State of Louisiana from holding any statewide elective office leaving us unrepresented and our interests uncared for.

10/11/07 Complaint 5. Invaders from a state foreign to the State of Louisiana did steal and conspire to steal from this Citizen of the State of Louisiana and all Citizens of the State of Louisiana the unalienable rights and virtually all rights guaranteed by the Federal and State Constitutions and reduce them to slavery.

10/11/07 Complaint 6. The State of Louisiana did illegally, by letter patent or other means, alienate its territory or a portion thereof which did have the effect of alienating my right to be a Citizen of the State of Louisiana by making it impossible to become a Citizen of the State of Louisiana by a bona fide residence therein. [shortened]

10/11/07 Complaint 7. The State of Louisiana did illegally, by letter patent or similar means of another name, alienate its Sovereignty or a portion thereof which did have the effect of alienating my rights pertaining thereto. [shortened]

Everything was sent back again. This time there was just a copy of the no assistance letter and a copy of the no jurisdiction letter. No other letters.

If there is redress of grievance for Dred Scott, Hans and I, I haven't found it yet.

Maybe someone out there can climb on my shoulders as I have stood on the shoulders of so many before me. Is there an error in my ways or are we subjects of the United States forever?

I plan to be King. How about you?

I believe that the only way out of this mess is to inform We, the People. Don't forget we still need enough informed people to make sure that it gets fixed correctly.

If I have convinced you, let someone else know. How hard is that?

1/25/08 Eventually, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled. One word, denied.

Case number 2007-KH-866 is now a writ and bears the case numbers of 2007-KH-131.

I still have never been to the 24th Judicial District Court Div. G,

In Case number 2007-KH-131 we are still arguing over the illegal transfer of jurisdiction to the Court of Appeal and the corruption of the record.

In Case number 2007-KH-866 we are still fighting about the illegal and selective conjoining of actions, the corruption of the record and what ever happened to case number F1681551 that 2007-KH-866 was appealing?

Yet, STILL, who owns the vehicle? How hard of a question is that?

If you have nothing to hide, Why are you hiding it?

7/30/08 They have decided to come at me again.

I received notices of 4 trials and 2 contempt notices by mail. I also received 4 notices of trial served on a residence.

One would hope that they sent it to a bona fide address of a bona fide residence? But, in what state?

8/26/08 I responded with a demand for time to prepare for a defense in each of the 4 cases.

I even came up with a schedule of trial dates that would afford me enough time to adequately defend myself against these infamous charges.

If you are going to proceed without even the pretense of jurisdiction and completely ignore the fraud, I have no choice but to defend.

9/16/08 I still haven't heard any response from anybody and my court date was coming up. I decided to try and provoke a response of any kind.

I filed the formal accusation of treason, attempted murder and theft.

10/28/08 I went to see the clerk. Here are the minute entries

11/1/08 The Court date came and I showed up. I checked in with the receptionist. Checked in with the Bailiff. The Bailiff disappeared and came back and said that he couldn't find my file. I asked if it would be all right to leave for a few minutes and went to see the Clerk's office. The Clerk told me that everything had been postponed and that she would notify the bailiff. I got some copies of the minute entries and left.

I later became worried that the court might say that I did not appear in violation of their order. I had proof that I was in the building, but no proof that anyone had told me that anything was postponed.

I filed a constructive notice and detailed the events of my appearance in First Parish Court. The last time I couldn't prove I had been in court they arrested me and refused to bring forth the evidence that would prove I had been there, the court reporter's record.

This time I wanted something more than a conversation.

3/13/09 It was time to do something again. The last time I heard from any court was in October, 2008 and now they are picking on my daughter again. She has been the repeated target of frame ups and harassment by the police. (If you think New Orleans is corrupt, you should see Shreveport.)

My daughter has cases that follow the same general track as the documents on this website. The truth of my claims are just as apparent in her cases, but, there is a third party involved in those cases and, hence, those documents have have not been included on this site.

I had to find some way of knocking on the Supreme Court's door that Congress couldn't screw with.

"Congress can neither extend, nor restrict, nor define the crime. Its power over the subject is limited to prescribing the punishment. Field, j., in 4 Sawy, 465" Bouviers Law Dictionary Vol II Pg 1188.

My daughter has nothing left to loose. So, by necessity, she became the second witness to the same overt acts of Treason.

"No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court." Article III Section 3 [1] of the United States Constitution

Citation
U.S.C. title 28 Sec. 1254-1257

4/2/09 Failed to comply with the rules of this court. - Returned.

Review of a decision only by writ of certiorari.

This is not a writ of certiorari

Case must first be reviewed by a United States court of appeals or by the highest state court in which a decision could by had. 28 USC 1254 and 1257.

BLANK
4/21/09

4/21/09 Arrest for breaking the rules of the owner of the vehicle. Remember, we can't get anyone to say who owns the vehicle. We claim to be the owner of the vehicle, the occupational government claims to be the owner. Why is this a difficult question for doctors of law? Who owns the vehicle?

6/03/09 Challenge the jurisdiction of the court, the cause of action, right of action and standing of the entity calling itself the State of Louisiana. Prove fraud and treason by the entity calling itself the State of Louisiana.

BLANK
6/03/09

6/03/09 What will the judge do?

6/24/09 Dismissal denied.

Most important is what he didn't say. For instance, are any of the claims that I have made valid? Are the rules he recites the will of the Sovereign people or the dictates of the occupational government?

We conquered you fair and square and we will abide by the rules of the occupational government. Pay no attention to the Hitler behind the curtain.

7/2/09 Writ of Habeas Corpus to the One supreme Court in which the jurisdiction of the United States shall be vested.

Resubmitted the formal accusation of treason modified for what I now believe to be the true name of the court. The supreme Court.

Demanded clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States to forward the documents.

7/8/09 Appearance demanded

Wrong judge. Continued.

7/08/09 This is a jpg of the resubmit letter with the note from the clerk it is responding to copied on the bottom.

7/08/09 This is the cover letter only resubmitting the copies of the Habeas Corpus.

7/15/09 I had sent the original Habeas Corpus on 7/2/09 and I haven't heard any word. Could I have reached the supreme Court or is the Supreme Court of the United States waiting to see if the 26th judicial district court can snag me as a subject so that either one can rule? Time to stir the pot.

7/17/09 I had sent the amended Habeas Corpus next day mail on the 15th so it arrived on the 16th . On the 17th they sent the amendment back stating that there was no such case pending before the court. Which court? The Supreme Court of the United States or the circuit courts of appeals, hereby established by act of congress.

I still hadn't heard anything on the original Habeas Corpus. Could they have forwarded the first one because I had specifically asked them to and not forwarded the amendment because I had not specifically asked them to? (See note to the clerk 7/2/09 )

7/20/09 The 26th judicial district court will file any documents from another court system that have been certified as copies of the original documents. (The Certificate of Service certifies the documents as copies of the original documents.)

Just what do they mean from another court system? You could see from the judiciary act of March 3, 1891 all complaints go to the Supreme Court of the United States or the courts of appeal, hereby established.

Could they be telling me that when the supreme Court of the constitution tell us you've found them, then we will file your copies?

7/20/09 RE: Formal Accusation of Treason

We can't help you. the jurisdiction of this Court extends only to the consideration of cases or controversies properly brought before it form lower courts in accordance with federal law.

Treason: "Congress can neither extend, nor restrict, nor define the crime. Its power over the subject is limited to prescribing the punishment." Bouviers Law Dictionary

"The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." Article III. U.S. Constitution.

Act of Congress 1891. Supreme Court of the United States or the circuit courts of appeals, hereby established, according to the provisions of this act regulating the same.

Of course. Wrong court.

7/20/09 RE: Malinda Nicole DiRosa

They are just trying to get jurisdiction under the judiciary Act of Congress of 1891 which says that writs of error are the jurisdiction of the inferior congressional court called the Supreme Court of the United States. A writ of Habeas Corpus is just a faster version of a writ of error. (It's still pretended to be a legal act until someone rules that it's not.)

Again, luckily, I am not an attorney seeking to file a document in this court in a representative capacity.

7/21/09 Our paperwork crossed in the mail.

I put the documents for the supreme Court in an envelope with a cover letter to the clerk of the one supreme Court in which the judicial power of the United States shall be vested and addressed the envelope to the clerk of the one supreme Court in which the judicial power of the United States shall be vested. The cover letter asks him to send me, in the self addressed stamped envelope, the correct name and postal address of the court.

Sent a cover letter to the clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States asking him to forward the packet addressed to the clerk of the one supreme Court in which the judicial power of the United States shall be vested and to send me, in the self addressed stamped envelope, the correct name and postal address of the court. Asking for a phone call didn't work.

7/23/09 The clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States returned all of the paperwork, both envelopes and both address requests (BLANK) with a copy of the 7/20/09 RE: Malinda Nicole DiRosa letter. The copy was highlighted by the clerk to remind us that we might need the assistance of one of the officers of our conqueror and master to make sure that we are convicted correctly. You know, like the ones the butchers and Hans had.

7/24/09 Considering the foregoing and after a review of the record, Petitioner's pro se Motion is hereby DENIED.

We are preparing our next attempt to find the one supreme Court in which the judicial power of the United States Shall be vested. We've come up with a new approach. Check back after August 5th 2009. (The third eclipse in Leo.)

9/8/09 We have a heading which is unmistakable.

We have found an action of an Sovereign. Judicial Process is but the command of the Sovereign.

Let us bow to the people who say that a zip code denotes a territorial address.

9/8/09 Here is the proof of mailing without a zip code and receipt information from the post office web site.

16 days from New Orleans to Washington, D.C. 9/8/09 -> 9/24/09 - First Class mail

9/19/09 Court date coming up. Mail has not arrived in Washington. How about a new approach?

9/19/09 Again proof of mailing - Priority mail

9 days from New Orleans to Washington, D.C. 9/19/09 -> 9/28/09 - Priority mail

9/23/09 The Rape of Dignity. The Victim goes to court

This victim stands mute before this inquisition and its pretend charges.

9/30/09 Judicial Process returned with a copy of the July 20, 2009 rejection of the Treason paperwork. This court can not help you.

The clerk is still pretending that the Supreme Court of the United States and the one supreme Court of our Constitution are the same court. But, notice he never says.

It is too clear for argument that they are different courts.

9/30/09 Habeas Corpus returned. You did not make the changes we wanted from our letter of July 20, 2009. (Re:MND)

10/23/09 They want an appeal from a lower court, we'll give them one.

Appeal to force the judge to obey the law. Force this entity calling itself the State of Louisiana to prove its cause of action, right of action, standing and jurisdiction of this court. It is required by law.

How hard is this? I can prove you do not have a right to do this to us. Prove that you do have a right to do this to us.

It is amazing how hard of a question this is for doctors of law. "Who owns this vehicle?"

11/20/09 We know we don't have the right, but we do have the power.

Law be damned.

Now we have a decision of a lower court.

12/21/09 Appeal to the inferior congressional court known as the Supreme Court of the United States with attachment to be forwarded to the one supreme Court of our Constitution.

Who owns this vehicle? Is the Louisiana State Constitution valid?

12/30/09 The Supreme Court of the United States betrays us all, again.

The traitors in control of congress say we can't rule and we fully support their position. You Negroes will just have to take the beating.

There is nothing wrong with the form. It is the controversy that is not in accordance with federal law.

It turns out that this is a position the Supreme Court adopted as willing participants (then and now) in the conspiracy which overthrew our nation. The confession documented in the South Carolina Law Quarterly goes into this in detail. The threat of the 14th amendment.

1/20/10
The United States Supreme Court betrayed us, again. The fix is in.
Here is the prediction of exactly what this mockery of justice is going to do.

1/22/10 Here is the statement of the accuracy of the prediction.

What is the problem? The issue is clear.
The Admiralty lien is invalid.
Submit the question to a court competent to rule on this issue or dismiss the charges.

Who owns this vehicle? Why is this such a tough question for doctors of law?

The problem is that I am exactly right about everything I have claimed.

The lawyers have sold us out for profit and power.

"The truth is the truth, it will withstand scrutiny." Buddha

Why are these such difficult questions?

1) Who owns this vehicle?
2) Is the Louisiana State Constitution valid?
3) What makes you think that We are Negroes?

I have been trying to get a ruling on these questions since March of 2004. As of January 26, 2010 my proof is uncontested. You have no right to do this to us.

Why is it against federal law to answer these questions?

How much more proof do you need?

BLANK

The scariest thing you should be asking yourself is why are you sitting there wondering if I am right or crazy? Why aren't the rules common knowledge?

It takes 3 years of trade school to train a lawyer. High School takes 4 years. College takes 4 years. Barrister's Inn got me well on the way in 90 hours of video tape and a pretty fair amount of reading to see if they were right.

Maybe instead of a leap test to get out of high school, you should have to prosecute or defend a legal action, from Grand Jury indictment on, and pass a legal exam.

How many classes in law did you have?

The test of freedom is your ability to protect yourself and your property. The test of civilization is how little violence plays a role.

BLANK

This is the end of the guided tour of the paperwork.

If more becomes available I will update this page.

Don't count me out yet. I may still have some more surprises left in me.

End the tyranny and free this prisoner. Tell someone else. It's just that easy.

I am here to reclaim my Kingdom. Subject or King, you choose.