Pro Posture & Pro Procedure As a short factual intro, between 02-10-01 & 04-05-01 Bo made numerous SPEECH communications about law to class laywers in three cities: Los Angeles (L.A.), San Diego (S.D.), & Chicago (Chic). He speech picketed, by U.S. Postal 10th Amen roads (e-mail) law drafts of complaints, appeals, & briefs to them, as well as to the D.O.J., F.T.C., law schools, radio & & papers, here & abroad. Discovery removed from the file proves it.
1
A.G., 10th Ame pros, filed at Bonas UNDER-SEAL, for L.A. & Chicago esquires only, carving out fused S.D. esquires, backing a twin state action, filed days after Bonas’ 04-05-06 arrest. A.G. held Bonas for 28 months without DO-ABLE BAIL. It ignored multiple requests by Bonas to UNITE them, via standard “REMOVAL & MDL” procedure, based on the same transaction, the same communications, to the same esquires.
A.G.’s UNDER SEAL filing was lifted when it took Bonas to trial in 2002, after trying to seduce him into a “DEAL” for time served. After a few days a mistrial was declared, Bonas appealed. U.S. v. Bonas, 433 F.3d 945 (9 th Cir. ’03) provides key points. Page 947, note 1, says: WE ORDERED BONAS RELEASED.” A.G. did not release Bonas. It held him for pick-up days after his ordered release. It furnished, on request, D.A. with its trial materials TO RE-USE AGAINST HIM (A.G.’s 4 TRIAL NOTE BOOKS), & got his own S.D. P.D. T. Lave to refuse him any discovery, telling him it was too costly to make copies. Both PDs told him CONTEXT is no defense to speech crimes. Principles With regard to A.G. & D.A.’s failure to UNITE, AS ORDERED by American’s 10th Ame civil right, this seals it: Abuse of Process, to cover deep white collar treason; Malicious Prosecutions, to cover deep white collar treason; Sedition – Seditious Prosecutions, to cover deep white treason; & Prosecutorial & Judicial Indiscretion, to cover deep economic treason, e.g.
The statutory language of our 10 th Ame is crystal clear – Power To Do All Branch Stuff – Powers Not Delegated & Powers Not Prohibited Are Reserved To The States “OR” the people!
1
Louis Freeh - FBI Director 1993-2001 Began term as FBI Director on 9-1-93 - Nominated by President Clinton May 2, 2001 - "FBI Director Louis J. Freeh announced yesterday that he will resign in June, ending an eight-year tenure that was marked by ..." Louis Freeh To Resign As Director Of the FBI, Washington Post - FBI Statement on Louis Freeh's resignation - Freeh's 10-year term as FBI director would have expired on Sept. 1 2003.
1
This CANNON controls: “when the statutory language is clear & consistent with statutory scheme at issue, the statute’s PLAIN LANGUAGE is CONCLUSIVE. 2 Here, the scheme at issue is Americans’ constitution, our treaty, which delegates ALL legislative (Art-1), ALL executive (Art-1), & ALL judicial (Art-3) power, so none is reserved, & a lot is prohibited, outlined in Article 1:10, e.g.: NO STATE SHALL … COIN MONEY (BONDS-COUNTIES TOO); NO STATE SHALL, without D.C. consent, KEEP TROOPS; 3
The word OR means choice & it cannot lawfully be taken, at 18, ABSENT CONSENT. Here, Bonas, @948 is instructive: “Bonas did not consent,” and it “was not his “burden.” 4
CRIMINAL COLORS OF AUTHORITY Wednesday, August 25, 2004 JK Rowlings the 9th Circuit and Invisible Jurisprudence posted at 6:41 PM by Curtis
Today I was reading a criminal procedure case that mentioned the "Invisibility Cloak" from the Harry Potter novels. I took note that it was a 9th Circuit case and
Cal. Franchise Tax Bd. V. Jackson (In re Jackson, 184 F.3d 1046, 1051 (9th Cir. ’99). POLICE, SHERIFFS, CHP, PRISON, PAROLE, PROBATION = PRIVATE! 4 Id, @951.
3 2
2
decided to do a little research on the use of Harry Potter metaphors in the 9th Circuit jurisprudence. There was a little more than I expected: US v. Bonas (2003): After the recess, the Assistant United States Attorney Yang advised the district court that it could dismiss simply by "uttering the magic words.” But this is not a Harry Potter novel; there is no charm for making a defendant's constitutional rights disappear. By bypassing the opportunity to joint all related claims together, the persecutors, all pro esquires, government actors, forfeited the right to try the D ever again. Un-wisely, after trying to seduce D into a plea, G. Bush’s Yang refused to wing the State twin action into the deal, then turned around & verfied to the appellate court that she is unaware of any related action! And FBI Mueller had his J.D. Agent Medrano re-testify against D, on the record! My PD –Ex-Fed: Law Office of Kenly Kiya Kato Law Firm in Beverly Hills, California Location 468 N. Camden Drive, Suite 200 Beverly Hills, California 902104520 (Los Angeles Co.) View Map Contact Information Phone: 310-860-5665 Fax: 310-860-5668 Email: Contact Us
Request Info (Main Office) Law Office of Kenly Kiya Kato practices in the following areas of law: Federal Criminal Law, White Collar Crimes, Civil Rights, Drug Crimes and Securities Fraud. Firm Size: 1 Kenly Kiya Kato (Member) born Los Angeles, California, 1972; admitted to bar, 1997, California. Education: University of California at Los Angeles (B.A., summa cum laude, 1993); Harvard University (J.D., cum laude, 1996). Phi Beta Kappa. Law Clerk, Honorable Robert M. Takasugi, U.S. District Court, Central District of
3
California, 1996-1997. Deputy Federal Public Defender, Central District of California, 1997-2003. Member, Criminal Justice Act Indigent Defense Panel for the U.S. States District Court for the Central District of California. Member: Los Angeles County and National Asian Pacific American Bar Associations; National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Reported Cases: United States v. Bonas, 344 F.3d 945 (9th Cir. 20030). Practice Areas: Federal Criminal Law; White Collar Criminal Defense; Criminal Defense; Civil Rights.
4