[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Mitchell 8/3/98 14:18 phone conversation
- To: [email protected], art morales <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
- Subject: Mitchell 8/3/98 14:18 phone conversation
- From: bill payne <[email protected]>
- Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 16:18:24 -0600
- CC: [email protected], george breznay <[email protected]>, [email protected], Robert Nordhaus <" Robert.Nordhaus"@hq.doe.gov>, [email protected], national employee rights institute <[email protected]>, [email protected], masanori fushimi <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], john gilmore <[email protected]>, federico pena <" Federico.F.Pena"@hq.doe.gov>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
- Sender: [email protected]
Monday 8/3/98 3:41 PM
FAX
Jan Elizabeth Mitchell
Assistant U.S. Attorney
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
District of New Mexico
Post Office Box 607
Albuquerque, NM 87103
505/346-7274
505/766-2868
FAX 505/346-7205
Dear Ms Mitchell:
Purpose of the fax is to
1 review points covered in our 8/3/98 14:18 phone conversation
2 suggest settlement.
You phoned me today.
You told me that you planned to file a motion or response to the Tenth
circuit�s
request Morales and my response to the jurisdictional issue on the 21st
of August.
I told you that this was premature on your part since we had moved for a
second time
for an extension of time.
I told you also that this matter was now before congress.
You appeared to indicate to me that you were in the process of adding
both Morales and
Minihan as named parties in this appeal.
You asked me if it would be agreeable to us if you filed a response to
the Tenth circuit
21 days AFTER Morales and I filed our response to the Tenth circuit on
the jurisdictional
issue.
I AGREED.
I spoke to Morales on the phone shortly after our phone conversation.
Arguing points of law before court clerks and judges who have
outstanding criminal complaint
affidavits for crimes COMMITTED IN WRITING againtst them would be
unproductive on Morales and my part.
Therefore, we will proceed to resolve the criminal conduct on the part
of judges and court clerks
before we proceed further in this matter.
We will do this at the Congressional level.
Senate Judiciary Committe chairman Orrin Hatch, unfortunately, failed to
properly process a valid
complaint on New Mexico district court chief judge John Conway in 1995.
http://www.jya.com/whp071598.htm
Hatch�s failure to properly respond in 1995, in large part, caused our
current legal conflict with DIR NSA Minihan.
We foresee an unfortunate escalation of hostilities if this matter
proceeds as it is.
We do not wish this.
We seek settlement of the UNFORTUNATE matter at the earliest time.
We ask your and Congressional help to settle this UNFORTUNATE matter
before it gets WORSE.
If I have made any essential material errors in reporting my impression
of the contents of our conversation, then I would appreciate you giving
your impression of possible errors.
You can do this in the letter you said you would write to us.
Sincerely,
bill payne
13015 Calle de Sandias NE
Albuquerque, NM 87111
Distribution
Senate Judiciary Committee e-mail
Arthur R Morales e-mail