lastlady wrote:I am sorry I have yet to figure out how to quote as you do.
No problem. Start with the "QUOTE" button, then either block the text you want to quote internally and hit the "Quote" button or manually type the "quote" tags. Hit the "QUOTE" button for this post to see how I did it.
But let me say Thank you for your Welcome.
No problem. Anyone who acts respectfully is treated respectfully, and (unlike certain other sites) no one who does so has posts edited or deleted. For that matter, no one who acts
disrespectfully has posts edited or deleted, but will very likely be treated in kind.
Thanks for the explanation on the point of the thread. Reno's friends aren't influencing him. His father acts on his own behalf, I don't want to go into detail but please don't assume what Jose does is by Reno's direction.
Then "Jose" really ought to mind his own business. In any event, if he doesn't stop signing his son's name to court documents, he may well be arrested.
I don't feel able to expand but Reno has not supported the UCC stuff from the beginning.
Nonetheless, he is filing the gibberish. If you have any influence over him, you would be doing him a big favor by convincing him to knock it off and listen to (let alone stop trying to fire) his very experienced lawyer. All he's doing is hurting himself.
I care so much for Reno, and he is not an idiot,
Maybe not. As I said, I don't know him. But he's acting like an idiot. The best thing he can do for himself at this point is to take responsibility for what he did. I really can't emphasize that enough.
He did not supply a 50 Caliber Rifle to anyone.
Once again, I don't have personal knowledge. But he is widely reported to have done so, by respected sources and in his own words. See
here for one, and
here for his own words on a supporter's site.
Reno never hurt anyone, he never threatened anyone, and I know him to be a decent good person, even if you disagree with his politics, feelings about the Federal Reserve or Federal Income tax, he never hurt anyone.
Nothing in the law says that you actually must hurt someone before being charged with crimes of violence. Were this not the case, law enforcement would have to wait until someone dies before making an arrest.
And lastly as far as superior access to information, maybe I can learn from you and that is in part why I am here.
Fine. Why don't we start with Haas' nonsense about "kidnapping". BTW, when you write that
Frankly I am not as educated or informed to really start a diologue with respect to the UCC and other actions by Joe Haas (which mostly I don't understand.)
well - it's not you, and your education has nothing to do with it. Haas may as well be a chimp at a keyboard for the absence of content in his stuff. Legally, it's gibberish. That's why you don't understand it.
For example, the account (and legality) of how some of the proceedings in Gonzalez' case are held in Maine: It begin with the threats which some (perhaps not Gonzalez) in the case made against the New Hampshire judiciary, which led to all of the NH district judges recusing themselves. The absence of NH judges to hear the case does not mean (not surprisingly) that it must be dismissed. By
this order, the Chief Judge of NH referred Gonzalez' case to the District of Maine "sitting by designation". That last phrase means that, for the purpose of this case, Judge Singal is actually a New Hampshire District Judge. As for the proceedings held in Portland: there are certain actions (even in indictments for federal crimes) which the law permits someone who is not a Title III judge to perform, even without a defendant's consent. See 18 USC 636(a)-(c). In the case of an "emergency" as agreed by the chief judges of the districts involved, those actions (and only those actions) may be performed out of the district. See 18 USC 636(f). All other actions must be performed in the district where venue is laid, unless the defendant consents otherwise. Thus Gonzalez' trial was in NH, his sentencing will be in NH, any plea would have to be in NH.
Gonzalez does in fact have much of merit to present for sentencing and (of course) was not convicted of the weapons counts. It's a particularly bad time to do things which have no legal purpose, but will piss off the sentencing judge.
