America: Pay Attention to the spirit of those who create an - America: Pay Attention to the spirit of those who create and control the Internet Forums (Was: Typical Example of Satanic conditioned Ignorance on the Internet) Brandon Dean wrote: Raymond Karczewski (arkent3k@earthlink.net) wrote: bd: :>

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:55 pm

Ed and Elaine Brown: Response to U.S. Attorney’s Objection to Interview

May 27, 2009 UCC-1#20070029134K
009821

To: Michael J. Gunnison
Acting U.S. Attorney
Terry L. Ollila
Asst. U.S. Attorney
55 Pleasant St.
Concord, N.H. [03301]

From: Edward-Lewis:Brown©, Creditor
Elaine-Alice-Brown©, Creditor
c/o 266 County Farm Rd.
Dover, N.H. [03820]

Re: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EDWARD BROWN and ELAINE BROWN
Case #09-CR-00030-01/02-GZS

Response to U.S. Attorney’s Objection to Interview

For years the government has been using the media to demonize us to the public. The U.S. Attorney’s statement that we will be unduly influencing the public before trial shows that he feels it is acceptable for the government to influence the public, but not for the accused to do so. Again this only shows an unlevel playing field where the U.S. Attorney’s uses the court in collusion to suppress any truth or fact. The court’s system is adversarial rather than seeking the truth.

The U.S. Attorney assumes to know the motivations behind the request for the interview. The history of us shows that for years we have been outspoken about the truth; he thus has no basis for his statement.

The U.S. Attorney states that we waited until this late hour to request an interview. He assumes we have not done so previously. We have.

The U.S. Attorney falsely assumes we have not publicized anything prior to the open letter. We have.

The U.S. Attorney uses the main stream media to publicize negative articles about us and other victims, while we are not able to access the same, as he knows sensationalism sells.

The U.S. Attorney seems disturbed by the article printed in the New Hampshire Free Press, which has a very small circulation, while all articles about us appearing in main stream media with huge circulations, have all been negative.

The U.S. Attorney wrongly presumes to know our motivations, which he claims is to influence the jury, while our motivation is only to inform the public of the truth.

a. The U.S. Attorney refers to the 6th Amendment; he must know that we have been denied “Assistance of Counsel” as guaranteed by this amendment, which does not state that said Counsel must be bar attorneys.
b. The U.S. Attorney must also be aware that we were not allowed our witnesses in our first trial, from which this trial stems.
c. The U.S. Attorney must also be aware that we were not allowed our evidence in the first trial, from which this trial stems.
The U.S. Attorney must also be aware of the jury tampering done in the first trial when the jury was told by the Judge McAuliffe that our testimony was our opinion of the law, and he would tell them what the law, when in fact our entire defense was the fact and application of lawful and legal law.

The U.S. Attorney is aware that we never received a fair trial in 2007, and it appears we are not receiving lawful due process considerations in these current allegations against our legal fictions.

The U.S. Attorney should be aware that either constitution does not confer rights, as all rights come from God. The constitutions only guarantees rights conferred by God.

The U.S. Attorney should be aware that the constitution was written to tell the government what they cannot do to the people. Do you understand, Counselor?

The U.S. Attorney, in view of the above statements, appears to be trying to keep us in a position of impossibility by trying to over-control every aspect of all sides, and using the court to achieve his purposes. The U.S. Attorney should go back to his canons, and conduct himself in an ethical and fair manner.

The U.S. Attorney wants it both ways; he wants to allow the years of negative reporting about us, yet disallow a small bit of possibly positive reporting about two heads-up Americans. (How does he know it would be positive? To date any interview with main stream media has been turned around by the media to be negative and sensational. We have never been able to get positive legitimate reporting with them).
Why do you all fear the truth?

The U.S. Attorney states that “although litigants do not surrender their first amendment rights at the courthouse door, those rights may be subordinate to other interests that arise” (emphasis added). What interests could supersede the God-given rights protected by the constitution? Could it possibly be that the interests that are subordinating a right is a private Illuminated agenda of a government out of control? Of course it is!

The U.S. Attorney mentions that a fair trial must be maintained at all costs; we have yet to see anything close to a fair trial in our cases.

The U.S. Attorney must be aware, as he has received several Affidavits of Truth, and has not responded to a single one to date, that there is no way that we could anticipate a fair trial. An affidavit not rebutted stands as truth, yet no rebuttals have been forthcoming; he is now in dishonor and in default, and by law must depart, yet he has been allowed by the court to continue. Collusion!

The U.S. Attorney claims that he and the courts are trying “to protect the interests of the public through the fair administration of criminal justice.” We claim that the public has not been damaged, the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA has not been damaged, as there is no law requiring us to pay an income tax on our earnings, from which these allegations arise. The best way to protect the interests of the public is to publicize the truth; this is supposed to be the main goal of the U.S. Attorney’s office and the court. But that is not the case, is it?

The U.S. Attorney refers to pre-trial publicity; so far any such publicity we have seen has been in the Concord Monitor, the Union Leader, and WMUR-TV, stemming from the U.S. Attorney’s office. Is this not tainting? Collusion!

The U.S. Attorney should be aware in regards to the jury venire as being biased by one party or another, that the U.S. Attorney absolutely biased the Grand Jury and the judges bias the petit jury in any way they decide.

Justice Edna Jones of the third circuit appellate court stated, in a presentation to the students at Harvard Law School, that we no longer have any courts; they are all corrupt. Thus we have no confidence or faith in this court or the U. S. Attorney’s office/DOJ any longer.

As the U.S. Attorney is aware of the business that is being orchestrated by the courts/U.S. Attorney/county attorney, underwritten by the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA/UBS FINANCIAL GROUP by the issuance of bonds with each civil and criminal case, he can not deny that the courts et al are operating in commerce. Thus all cases, as so stated in 27CFR72.11, are commercial crimes. Therefore, all fall under Uniform Commercial Code. Collusion!

The U.S. Attorney is aware that all juries must be fully informed; however, the judges continuously mis-inform the jurors as to what their powers are. The jury is to decide on both facts and law; the judge tells the jury that they will find on fact and he will find on law. He is not supposed to enter the case; he is merely there as an arbiter. The judge’s manual of jury instructions states that the judge is not to tell the jurors that they have the power to judge the law; however, the judges go too far by telling the jurors that they cannot judge the law. Collusion!

The U.S. Attorney is aware that Mr. Muirhead cannot enter the “defendant’s” box, or the prosecutor’s; however, Magistrate Muirhead took the defendants’ position, he pled “not guilty.” Thus Mr. Muirhead is the responsible party to your claim of arraignment. Collusion!

The U.S. Attorney should be aware that we reluctantly submit to doing any kind of interview with any media, as they have almost always taken everything we say out of context in order to show us in the worst possible light – sensationalism sells.

The U.S. Attorney is aware that “defendants” are fictional STRAWMAN by the court’s own description, and cannot speak or do anything else in a real world. He uses the word ‘defendant’ like confetti. His legal fiction interpretation of who we are is not appreciated, is noted, and is also copyrighted.

To quote Martin Luther, “Every institution in which men are not unceasingly occupied with the word of God, must become corrupt.” God has not been in these courtrooms for many years. (Note missing Bible, which was the reason for standing when the judge entered the courtroom with the Bible under his arm.)

The U.S. Attorney’s objection should be denied.

God bless.

By Order of: EDWARD BROWN© By Order of: ELAINE BROWN©

___________________________ __________________________
By: Edward-Lewis:Brown©, Creditor By: Elaine-Alice:Brown©, Creditor