Common Law Court, Article III (3), how to convene.

The Article 3 US Courts are almost black market.

Yes all US courts can convene as a common law court (Article III (3) court) where the judge has no say, the jury determines the facts and the law of the case, and sets damages, the court rules can not hinder your case, a litigant can not be represented by an attorney, where you have a good chance of a fair trial. And yes that is the last thing a US court wants anyone to know.

Read below straight out of the Courts Website.

http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/UnderstandingtheFederalCourts/Jurisdiction.aspx

Before a federal court can hear a case, or “exercise its jurisdiction,” certain conditions must be met. First, under the Constitution, federal courts exercise only “judicial” powers. This means that federal judges may interpret the law only through the resolution of actual legal disputes, referred to in Article III of the Constitution as “Cases or Controversies.” A court cannot attempt to correct a problem on its own initiative, or to answer a hypothetical legal question.

((It can only answer actual questions of an actual case dispute.))

In general, federal courts may decide cases that involve the United States government, the United States Constitution or federal laws, or controversies between states or between the United States and foreign governments. A case that raises such a “federal question” may be filed in federal court. Examples of such cases might include a claim by an individual for entitlement to money under a federal government program such as Social Security, a claim by the government that someone has violated federal laws, or a challenge to actions taken by a federal agency.

((Sovereign American by birthright is a state independent of the United States.))

Congress has created several Article I or legislative courts that do not have full judicial power. Judicial power is the authority to be the final decider in all questions of Constitutional law, all questions of federal law and to hear claims at the core of habeas corpus issues.

Article I courts are U.S. Court of Veterans’ Appeals, the U.S. Court of Military Appeals, and the U.S. Tax Court.

>>

 Pay 5$ and receive MP3 on convening such courts and also become enroll for perpetual updates of those that work with us on convening common law courts. I believe that any community can convene a common law court independent of the US system as well, and no US administrator / officer has no authority to say otherwise, provided you keep your business off government (USA) owned land.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System. Counsel time and a vast array of briefs, motions, case law, legal challenges, etc.

Posted in Common Law, Common Law Jury | Leave a comment

Protected: M1S-31 How to open a ‘non-Federal Reserve Note’ bank account. US notes only.

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Posted in Bank / Credit Cards | Enter your password to view comments.

Protected: Affidavit, Notary Mailing Presentment, pass-protected

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Posted in Notary | Enter your password to view comments.

Hansen, NOT FOR HIRE Plate.

Plate, Van, Master

They follow me but never stop me.

I think they are starting to learn why it has been long past called the freeway, right of way, and the open road.

Posted in Right To Travel, Automobil v. Motor-Vehicle | Leave a comment

Grand Jury Subpoena, an Invite, or Order? Hansen Challenged

Grand Jury Subpoena, an Invite, or Order? Hansen Challenged

See attached documents: I received a subpoina to appear in Florida, I challenged the request as to be an order supported by written law or just a request.

Apparently they want to see if I filed documents under an alias name.

Now I live in Nebraska, and besides why would I want to volunteer anything to the Grand Jury.  I suspect the 5th Amendment applies.

I’ll post if they decide to press a demand by court order.  It has been a weeks now and no swat team thus far.

1.6 Hansen Response to Subpoena  < was served with Affidavit of Sovereign Authority.

Hansen Paul John GJ Subpoena HANDWRITING SAMPLE FINGERPRINTS (19424) 8-19-14 W ATTACHMENT (3)

Below are Emails between Gand Jury Employees and Hansen:

Travel to Pensacola, FL, for Grand Jury appearance on August 19, 2014
Inbox
x

Busbee, Gretchen (USAFLN) Gretchen.Busbee@usdoj.gov via hotmail.com
Aug 12

to pauljjhansen
August 12, 2014

Good afternoon Mr. Hansen -

Per my previous voicemail messages left on Monday, August 11th and today, Tuesday, August 12th, I have been informed that you were served with federal grand jury subpoena number 19424 to appear at the U.S. District Courthouse on August 19, 2014, at 9:00am in Pensacola, Florida. The instructions to the grand jury subpoena instructed you to contact me within 48 hours of being served so that prepaid flight and lodging accommodations could be made for you. Please contact me immediately so that those travel arrangements can be made at no cost to you. I can be reached via this email, my direct dial at 850-444-4069 or my cell phone number at 850-554-5991.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Gretchen P. Busbee
Victim Witness Specialist
U.S. Attorney’s Office
Northern District of Florida
21 E. Garden Street, Suite 400
Pensacola, FL 32502
Tel: 850-444-4000
Busbee, Gretchen (USAFLN) Gretchen.Busbee@usdoj.gov via hotmail.com
Aug 13

to pauljjhansen, pauljjhansen
Mr. Hansen

Below is the original email that was sent yesterday afternoon. Per your text message I am sending it again since you prefer to communicate via email. I need the following information in order to make your travel arrangements into Pensacola:

Full name as reflected on photo id (including any middle name or any suffix)

Airport
Seat preference
DOB

Thank you and please let me know if you have any questions.
Paul Hansen <pauljjjjhansen@gmail.com>
Attachments Aug 13

to Gretchen
See attached.
In no way am I refusing any duty associated with applicable law noticed upon me.
Ink signed were sent to the listed recipients.
No response has yet beed received.

2 Attachments

Preview attachment 1.6 Hansen Response to Subpoena.docx
Word
1.6 Hansen Response to Subpoena.docx
Preview attachment Affidavit, Notary Mailing, Presentment, FL IRS, Subpoena.docx
Word
Affidavit, Notary Mailing, Presentment, FL IRS, Subpoena.docx

Eggers, Tiffany (USAFLN) <Tiffany.Eggers@usdoj.gov>
Attachments Aug 14

to me, Gretchen
Mr. Hansen,

As you know, Victim Witness Specialist Gretchen Busbee has left you two voicemails and communicated directly with you via email as shown below. Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum # 19424 was served upon you requiring you to appear before the Grand Jury on Tuesday, August 19, 2014 at 9:00 am. (Another copy of the subpoena is attached hereto for you.) It is imperative that you immediately communicate with Ms. Busbee directly so she can make your travel arrangements. Your failure to communicate with Ms. Busbee will prevent her from being able to make the necessary travel for you. However, please understand that your failure to communicate with Ms. Busbee will not relieve you of the requirement that you appear and comply with the subpoena. Therefore, please do not wait any longer and contact Ms. Busbee as she has previously requested.

Thank you and good day,

Tiffany H. Eggers
Assistant U.S. Attorney
U.S. Attorney’s Office, NDFL
21 E. Garden Street, Ste. 400
Pensacola, Florida 32502
850-444-4000 p
850-434-9050 f

Please be advised that all emails sent to this address are archived and retained by the
United States Department of Justice.

From: Busbee, Gretchen (USAFLN)
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 10:48 AM
To: Eggers, Tiffany (USAFLN)
Subject: Fwd: Travel to Pensacola, FL, for Grand Jury appearance on August 19, 2014

Begin forwarded message:

From: Paul Hansen <pauljjjjhansen@gmail.com>
Date: August 13, 2014 at 10:43:12 AM CDT
To: “Busbee, Gretchen (USAFLN)” <Gretchen.Busbee@usdoj.gov>
Subject: Re: Travel to Pensacola, FL, for Grand Jury appearance on August 19, 2014
Attachments area
Preview attachment Hansen Paul John GJ Subpoena HANDWRITING SAMPLE FINGERPRINTS (19424) 8-19-14 W ATTACHMENT (3).pdf
PDF
Hansen Paul John GJ Subpoena HANDWRITING SAMPLE FINGERPRINTS (19424) 8-19-14 W ATTACHMENT (3).pdf

Paul Hansen <pauljjjjhansen@gmail.com>
Aug 14

to Tiffany, Gretchen
I have requested, in honor, the written law that the court clerk relies upon to impose the subject duty upon me to appear. Is this a communication that you have dishonored my request.
Eggers, Tiffany (USAFLN)
Aug 14

to me, Gretchen
Mr. Hansen,

You have been lawfully served with the below identified subpoena requiring your appearance. If you desire legal advice concerning the laws in which the subpoena are based, I suggest you obtain legal counsel.

Tiffany H. Eggers
Assistant U.S. Attorney
U.S. Attorney’s Office, NDFL
21 E. Garden Street, Ste. 400
Pensacola, Florida 32502
850-444-4000 p
850-434-9050 f

Please be advised that all emails sent to this address are archived and retained by the
United States Department of Justice.

From: Paul Hansen [mailto:pauljjjjhansen@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 1:34 PM
To: Eggers, Tiffany (USAFLN)
Cc: Busbee, Gretchen (USAFLN)
Paul Hansen <pauljjjjhansen@gmail.com>
Aug 14

to Tiffany
No notice of written law to appear will result in no act of consent to appear.

>>>>

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System. Counsel time and a vast array of briefs, motions, case law, legal challenges, etc.

Posted in Subpoena | Leave a comment

MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT FOR IMPROPER GRAND JURY PROCEDURES

M1S-37 MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT FOR IMPROPER GRAND JURY PROCEDURES ($2.50)

This motion is used when discovery shows that, when no evidence, insufficient evidence. or withheld evidence, is part of the Grand Jury proceeding that the case can be dismissed as a matter of law.

They say that a ham sandwich can be indicted in a US Grand Jury, which is true, unless you place the right law before the judge and remove his discretion.

Innocent people have almost no chance of winning a US processed IRS criminal case. The prosecutor frame you in the Grand Jury process, the judge does everything possible so the jury can not see the true law, and the jury votes guilty because they fear retaliation if the IRS ever found out that you voted against them.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System. Counsel time and a vast array of briefs, motions, case law, legal challenges, etc.

Posted in Grand Jury Confirmation / Proof, Indictment Dismissal | Leave a comment

Common Law Grand Jury

8/19/2014 6:30pm. Progress By National Liberty Alliance:
On Thursday morning (8/14/14), the Common Law Grand Jury in Dixie County, Florida with 25 people plus 3 alternates, approached the County Court House requesting entry and space to perform their lawful duties, were admitted, seated and heard TWO cases.

This means that one county in America is now operating in a LAWFUL manner as prescribed by the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed. 2d 352 (1992), where Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, confirmed that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people. It is in effect a fourth branch of government “governed” and administered to directly by and on behalf of the American people, and its authority emanates from the Bill of Rights. Read More:http://www.nationallibertyalliance.org/breaking-news

Comment by Paul Hansen: Just because they got a room in a courthouse says they are accepted by the US court system, but it is in my opinion a great step in the right direction. They must be careful not to act like a US court having jurisdiction in the United States, this generally leads to arrest. Keep independent and keep all activity on land not owned by The United States of America, only operate on private property. Always put disclaimers in every document that it is not a US court.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System. Counsel time and a vast array of briefs, motions, case law, legal challenges, etc.

Posted in Grand Jury Confirmation / Proof | 1 Comment

Making “Income” on US land is a claim for taxation by the US / IRS.

((( If you make income on land “of” the US they have a taxing claim. )))

What is the Federal Income Tax?

by

Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law, Federal Witness
and Private Attorney General

All Rights Reserved
(November 10, 1998)

The federal “income” tax is an excise tax which is imposed
upon profit or gain derived from sources that are INSIDE the
“United States” [sic], or from a “United States” trade or
business. In this context, the term “United States” means the
territory (land) over which Congress has exclusive legislative authority
and where Congress is the local “State” government.

Private property” be it owned by a corporation, or by a individual man, or married couple, or group of people, such property is not “of” the US unless the US is evidenced as the owner. So the vast amour of income, employment, activity is not “of” the US on American soil, and therefore is not included as taxable income by law.

Mr. IRS man what fact evidence do you have that supports any claim that the income is included territorially in the US tax code.

“Income” and “source” are two entirely different terms.
The “source” is the situs of the income-producing activity. The
items listed at IRC 61 are “sources”, NOT “income”, although the
grammar of section 61 is certainly ambiguous.

The inside/outside distinction is crucial to a correct
application of the income tax.

The several states of the Union are OUTSIDE the “United
States” [sic], and they are INSIDE the “United States of America”
[sic]. See the Guarantee Clause for constitutional authority,
and for correct use of terminology. See also the Preamble, where
“United States” and “United States of America” are both used;
these two terms define two disjoint geographic jurisdictions.

Moreover, 28 U.S.C. section 1746 makes this all-important
distinction as well, e.g. “inside the United States” and “under
the laws of the United States of America”! This statute governs
the perjury jurat on Form 1040!! Form 1040 is signed INSIDE the
“United States” [sic], and OUTSIDE the “United States of America”
(read “several states of the Union”). We never notarize Form
1040; now you know why! Yea Team!!

Got it?

The term “United States” here is synonymous with “the
federal zone,” i.e. the territory over which Congress has
exclusive legislative authority and jurisdiction. Pursuant to
the Downes Doctrine, indirect taxes need NOT be “uniform” within
the federal zone, and direct taxes need NOT be “apportioned”
within the federal zone. See the chapter entitled “16th
Amendment Post Mortem,” in the case of U.S.A. v. Knudson, in the
Supreme Law Library at Internet URL:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/knudson/judnot08.htm

for a thorough discussion of this key point.

Those two restrictions apply ONLY to taxes which Congress
imposes inside the several states of the Union, which are
“outside” (“without”) the “United States” [sic], and “inside” the
United States of America” [sic].

These findings are predicated upon the well established
proof that the IRC is a municipal Code (“internal” means
“municipal”). See the book “The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code
of Internal Revenue” for all pertinent authorities, e.g. Treasury
Decision 2313.

See also “Congresswoman Suspected of Income Tax Evasion” in
the Supreme Law Library supra, vis-a-vis IRC 3121(e). The
Legislative Counsel and Congressional Research Service both agree
with the major thesis of “The Federal Zone” [the book which I
authored].

It makes no sense to render an excise “uniform” throughout
the several states of the Union, if said excise tax is not even
imposed ANYWHERE within that territorial jurisdiction!

The graduated income tax does not need to be uniform OR
apportioned there, because those rules are entirely irrelevant
within that limited territorial jurisdiction (according to the
Downes Doctrine).

Think about it … Congress has the power to impose a
local, municipal tax, and that is exactly what they did with the
taxes imposed by Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code.

Just because Congress intermixed alcohol, tobacco, and
petroleum taxes in the same Code, does not change the nature of
the “income tax” provisions of that Code. The definition of
“State”, in these other excise taxes, clearly mentions the “50
States” [sic], but NOT at IRC 3121(e). See URL:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/4612.html (a)(4)(A)

THERE is the crux of their fraud!!!

Confer at “inclusio unius est exclusio alterius” in Black’s
Law Dictionary, to wit: what was omitted, was INTENDED to be
omitted (from those various, DIFFERENT definitions of “State”).

In the Brushaber case, that tax was an excise imposed upon
profit generated by a “domestic” (read “federal zone”)
corporation, because the Union Pacific Railroad Company was
created by an Act of Congress, to build a railroad through the
Utah Territory (BEFORE Utah joined the Union). Thus, Congress
could tax the profits of that corporation BEFORE any of those
profits were paid to stockholders, in the form of dividends.
Treasury Decision 2313 explains all of this in fine detail; this
Treasury Decision has never been repealed. The legal situs of
any corporation never changes from its original domicile.

Congress CANNOT create a corporation for the entire nation,
because to do so violates the Tenth Amendment, and invades the
province of the several states. See Daly v. The National Life
Insurance Company of the United States of America, Indiana Supreme
Court (1878), for clear authority on this crucial point. Thus,
ALL FEDERAL CORPORATIONS are domestic (read “federal zone”)
corporations, by Law. “Domestic” in this context is synonymous
with “federal zone”. “Domestic” does NOT have the same meaning
in this context as it does in the context of domestic and foreign
flights at international airports.

The state zone and the federal zone are perfectly disjoint,
in a geographic sense. The term “state zone” has now entered our
household vocabulary; for proof, search for “state zone” with
the Alta Vista search engine, particularly in documents which
also use the term “federal zone”.

Now, federal citizens [sic] are associated with a political
jurisdiction which is NOT protected by the Guarantee Clause, and
where the direct/indirect rules simply do NOT apply. Federal
citizenship is a municipal franchise, the exercise of which CAN
be taxed by the Congress, pursuant to the Downes Doctrine,
because citizenship is a term of municipal law (a/k/a “private
international law” [sic]).

Congress cannot re-define the term “Citizen” as that term
used in the Qualifications Clauses, because Congress has no power
to amend the U.S. Constitution; only three-fourths of the Union
states have that power. The term “Citizen” [sic] in the
Qualifications Clauses, in 3:2:1, and in 4:2:1, each refers to
Citizens of ONE OF the States United. See Alla v. Kornfeld for
authority (cited and discussed in the Supreme Law Forum at
http://supremelaw.org/wwwboard): i.e. federal citizens, as such,
were NOT even contemplated when the organic U.S. Constitution was
first written and ratified.

Although the Guarantee Clause appears to authorize unequal
protection of the Law here, the Eighth Circuit dropped the ball
completely when this issue was put squarely before them, in
Gilbertson’s OPENING BRIEF. That Court has now failed to rule on
an application by the People of the United States of America for
Intervention of Right, so we are presently in a Mexican Standoff,
as regards all of the far-reaching issues which arose in that
OPENING BRIEF.

If the People were to obtain leave to intervene, they would
immediately request Rehearing En Banc, on all of these issues,
and then go up to the U.S. Supreme Court “with all deliberate
speed” (a term from Brown v. Board of Education).

Instead, you have seen the U.S. House of Representatives
repeal the IRC, effective July 4, 2002. I believe this was done
because the law as explained above has begun to permeate that
House of Representatives, one Representative at a time.

The writing is definitely on the wall.

I hope this helps.

http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/taxsumm.htm See – site for links.

Sincerely yours,
Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law, Federal Witness,
Private Attorney General, and Candidate
for the U.S. House of Representatives

website: http://supremelaw.org

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System. Counsel time and a vast array of briefs, motions, case law, legal challenges, etc.

Posted in IRS, Jurisdiction / Territorial | 2 Comments

STATUS – Defined, 1889

status – L.  standing: state, condition, situation.  Compare Estate.

A corporation has no status as a citizen outside of the jurisdiction where it was created.

1889 Law Dictionary

Cornell Law

http://www.mindserpent.com/American_History/reference/1889_Anderson/1889_anderson_dictionary_of_law.pdf

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System. Counsel time and a vast array of briefs, motions, case law, legal challenges, etc.

Posted in Status | Leave a comment

Judicial activism, how to stop it with proper judicial notices.

(((Statements in triple parentheses are comments added by Paul John Hansen.)))

“The once-honorable profession of law now fully functions as a bottom-line business, driven by greed and the pursuit of power and wealth, even shaping the laws of the United States outside the elected Congress and state legislatures.”

 Justice John F. Molloy

The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion

JUSTICE JOHN F. MOLLOY

When I began practicing law in 1946, justice was much simpler. I joined a small Tucson practice at a salary of $250 a month, excellent compensation for a beginning lawyer. There was no paralegal staff or expensive artwork on the walls.
In those days, the judicial system was straightforward and efficient. Decisions were handed down by judges who applied the law as outlined by the Constitution and state legislatures. Cases went to trial in a month or two, not years. In the courtroom, the focus was on uncovering and determining truth and fact.
I charged clients by what I was able to accomplish for them. The clock did not start ticking the minute they walked through the door.
Looking back
The legal profession has evolved dramatically during my 87 years. I am a second-generation lawyer from an Irish immigrant family that settled in Yuma. My father, who passed the Bar with a fifth-grade education, ended up arguing a case before the U.S. Supreme Court during his career.
The law changed dramatically during my years in the profession. For example, when I accepted my first appointment as a Pima County judge in 1957, I saw that lawyers expected me to act more as a referee than a judge. The county court I presided over resembled a gladiator arena, with dueling lawyers jockeying for points and one-upping each other with calculated and ingenuous briefs
That was just the beginning.
By the time I ended my 50-year career as a trial attorney, judge and president of southern Arizona’s largest law firm, I no longer had confidence in the legal fraternity I had participated in and, yes, profited from.
I was the ultimate insider, but as I looked back, I felt I had to write a book about serious issues in the legal profession and the implications for clients and society as a whole. The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion was 10 years in the making and has become my call to action for legal reform.
Disturbing evolution
Our Constitution intended that only elected lawmakers be permitted to create law.
Yet judges create their own law in the judicial system based on their own opinions and rulings. It’s called case law, and it is churned out daily through the rulings of judges. When a judge hands down a ruling and that ruling survives appeal with the next tier of judges, it then becomes case law, or legal precedent. This now happens so consistently that we’ve become more subject to the case rulings of judges rather than to laws made by the lawmaking bodies outlined in our Constitution.
(((That is why one must go back to the ‘Statutes at Large – US Congressional Law, and the state ‘Legislative Bills’, for they are the foundational law of all US courts, but only when one properly gives a ‘motion for judicial notice’ to a specific law in a court proceeding, on the record. Order M1S-16 )))
This case-law system is a constitutional nightmare because it continuously modifies constitutional intent. For lawyers, however, it creates endless business opportunities. That’s because case law is technically complicated and requires a lawyer’s expertise to guide and move you through the system. The judicial system may begin with enacted laws, but the variations that result from a judge’s application of case law all too often change the ultimate meaning.
Lawyer domination
When a lawyer puts on a robe and takes the bench, he or she is called a judge. But in reality, when judges look down from the bench they are lawyers looking upon fellow members of their fraternity. In any other area of the free-enterprise system, this would be seen as a conflict of interest.
When a lawyer takes an oath as a judge, it merely enhances the ruling class of lawyers and judges. First of all, in Maricopa and Pima counties, judges are not elected but nominated by committees of lawyers, along with concerned citizens. How can they be expected not to be beholden to those who elevated them to the bench?
When they leave the bench, many return to large and successful law firms that leverage their names and relationships.
Business of law
The concept of “time” has been converted into enormous revenue for lawyers. The profession has adopted elaborate systems where clients are billed for a lawyer’s time in six-minute increments. The paralegal profession is another brainchild of the fraternity, created as an additional tracking and revenue center. High powered firms have departmentalized their services into separate profit centers for probate and trusts, trial, commercial, and so forth.
The once-honorable profession of law now fully functions as a bottom-line business, driven by greed and the pursuit of power and wealth, even shaping the laws of the United States outside the elected Congress and state legislatures.
Bureaucratic design
Today the skill and gamesmanship of lawyers, not the truth, often determine the outcome of a case. And we lawyers love it. All the tools are there to obscure and confound. The system’s process of discovery and the exclusionary rule often work to keep vital information off-limits to jurors and make cases so convoluted and complex that only lawyers and judges understand them.
The net effect has been to increase our need for lawyers, create more work for them, clog the courts and ensure that most cases never go to trial and are, instead, plea-bargained and compromised. All the while the clock is ticking, and the monster is being fed.
The sullying of American law has resulted in a fountain of money for law professionals while the common people, who are increasingly affected by lawyer-driven changes and an expensive, self-serving bureaucracy, are left confused and ill-served.
Today, it is estimated that 70 percent of low-to-middle-income citizens can no longer afford the cost of justice in America. What would our Founding Fathers think?
This devolution of lawmaking by the judiciary has been subtle, taking place incrementally over decades. But today, it’s engrained in our legal system, and few even question it. But the result is clear. Individuals can no longer participate in the legal system.
It has become too complex and too expensive, all the while feeding our dependency on lawyers.
By complicating the law, lawyers have achieved the ultimate job security. Gone are the days when American courts functioned to serve justice simply and swiftly.
It is estimated that 95 million legal actions now pass through the courts annually, and the time and expense for a plaintiff or defendant in our legal system can be absolutely overwhelming.
Surely it’s time to question what has happened to our justice system and to wonder if it is possible to return to a system that truly does protect us from wrongs.

–A lawyer from Tuscon, Arizona, John Fitzgerald Molloy (b. 1917) was elected to the Superior Court bench where he served for seven years as both a juvenile court and trial bench judge. He subsequently was elected to the Court of Appeals where he authored over 300 appellate opinions, including the final Miranda decision for the Arizona Supreme Court. During that period, he also served as president of the Arizona Judge’s Association. After 12 years, Molloy returned to private practice to become president of the largest law firm in southern Arizona. His book has received widespread praise for its candor and disquieting truths.– (Photo courtesy of Paragon House)
Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System. Counsel time and a vast array of briefs, motions, case law, legal challenges, etc.

Posted in Judicial Activism, Judicial Notice | Leave a comment