Government Threat Made On Internet Regarding the Ed and Elai - Government Threat Made On Internet Regarding the Ed and Elaine Brown Trial: Google Groups Home Invalid profile Government Disinfo Agent AKA Invalid Profile Wrote: Raymond Karczewski (arkent3@earthlink.net) wrote: gda: > Note: The au

Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 5:33 pm

Big jury pool for Brown trial Request brought on by publicity

The Battle Lines are being drawn. On What Side of the line will the American People Stand?. Will they understand their True Sovereignty, that of being the True Government, and put an end to the nonsense and expense by a limited sovereign powers of a servant government paid to carry out the aims of their Master, the Sovereign People?.

Ed & Elaine Brown personify a man and woman of the Sovereign People. They understand that by Law, (not the federal, legislative, "color or law" corporate policy which presently masquerades as law) they, as a Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient natural Man and Woman of the Sovereign People are the creators of the present fictional government and courts which have overstepped their limited sovereignty and unlawfully stripped Ed and Elaine of their Freedom, their Liberty, and their lifelong acquired property, WITHOUT ever having answered the question of whether a Fictional Court has JURISDICTION over their creators, the Sovereign men and women of the People of America.

Instead the servant government has declared war upon them as "Wards of the State" 14th Amendment counterfeit, second class citizens, i.e., Slaves when in fact Ed and Elaine Brown have pointedly asked the courts to SHOW THEM THE LAW, that declared them to be subject to the the IRS laws. They have also asked the fictional court to prove JURISDICTION over them, the Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural men and Women who created them which the court has refused to do. So far ALL COURTS have remained MUM on the question.

Servant governments don't like it when the Sovereign People assert their responsibility. That is what is behind this present unlawful persecution/prosecution of Ed and Elaine Brown.

Why do I speak so authoritatively about this matter of Jurisdiction?
Because the STATE OF OREGON and COUNTY OF JOSEPHINE, threatened me with 30 years as a paper terrorist for holding my public servants accountable for their crimes and misconduct through UCC Commercial Liens. Two days before the first of two trials were to ensue, The government offered to drop all charges from the threat of 30 years in prison to time served plus 2 year probation. What a deal huh?

I rejected the deal, stood Sui Juris as Ed and Elaine are in order to retain their Sovereignty. Though my "Trademark/Tradename JURISTIC PERSON was convicted in both Kangaroo Trials, when it came time for sentencing, I REFUSED to accept their offer of contract until they proved Jurisdiction.

I was sent back to jail but released shortly thereafter. No Probation, No Jail, No Prison. That is what it took for me to retain my Freedom as a Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man of the Sovereign People.

Sorry New Hampshire government, the "Jig is UP", Save the Taxpayers money. Before any further Legal proceeding ensue, Answer the damned question, Ed and Elaine have put to you by demanding you prove (as present law dictates) your JURISDICTION over Ed and Elaine, a Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural man and woman who are rightfully asserting their rights and operating at full legal capacity and are not "wards of the state."

Raymond Ronald Karczewski©
Cave Junction, Oregon

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Big jury pool for Brown trial Request brought on by publicity

By Margot Sanger-Katz Monitor staff

May 18, 2009 - 12:00 am

A federal court has asked for nearly triple its usual jury pool to select jurors for the conspiracy and weapons case against Ed and Elaine Brown of Plainfield.

The couple, whose extended standoff with federal officials was widely publicized, are well known in New Hampshire. That fact will make it more difficult to select an impartial jury than in a typical criminal case, said U.S. District Court clerk James Starr.

"A normal criminal case with two defendants, we'd probably bring in 80," Starr said. "This case has got a little more coverage, so we bring in a few more jurors just to make sure, again, that we can pick a jury on that day."

Court officials are expecting about 230 potential jurors in late June. That's not a record for the federal court; at times civil cases involving major local institutions such as Concord Hospital have attracted more. The number is similar to the jury pools in two recent high-profile criminal cases - last year's trial of four Brown supporters and the 2005 trial of Jim Tobin in the Republican National Committee phone jamming case. But it is a large enough jury pool that the court has made special arrangements for transportation and logistics.

The Browns were convicted of tax-related felonies in January 2007 but avoided capture for months by holing up in their concrete home, stockpiling weapons and threatening violence against federal agents. They were arrested in October of that year by undercover U.S. marshals. The couple are now accused of a combined 11 felonies, including conspiring to interfere with the federal government, obstruction of justice and illegally possessing firearms. The most serious charge, for making and possessing improvised explosive devices, carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 30 years in prison.

Throughout the standoff, the Browns were the subject of extensive local and national news coverage. They also appeared regularly on an online radio show and publicized their situation on social networking sites, discussion forums and anti-government websites.

Four of their most prominent supporters were tried last year. During jury selection for that case, nearly half of all possible jurors said they had heard of Ed and Elaine Brown and read news coverage of their case.

The Browns were charged with the new crimes in February. Though at separate arraignments, both Browns said they did not wish to participate in the court proceedings, they have filed more than 20 motions with the court so far. Nearly all have been dismissed by the judge as frivolous. The Browns have met regularly in jail to plan their defense, but they have rejected discovery materials provided by prosecutors and have missed deadlines to file evidentiary motions.

The judge, George Singal, did grant two requests from the couple. He allowed their near-daily meetings and delayed their trial from its original date in April to late June.

In a recent letter to supporters, published in the sympathetic New Hampshire Free Press, the Browns explained why they can't participate in their trial. The letter said the Browns operate under "God's law," not the laws of the court.

"Going into the courtroom which operates as a fiction, would require us, flesh-and-blood man and woman created by God, to present ourselves as legal fictions, known as the 'strawman,' " the letter said. "This would be a dishonor to God."

Jury selection is expected to take one day. The trial is scheduled to begin June 30 and is likely to last three weeks.