Category Archives: Jury

Obama trial, May 14, 2010, Dr. James David Manning, Columbia University Treason and Sedition Trial, Obama not natural born citizen, Obama did not attend Columbia University

Obama trial, May 145, 2010, Dr. James David Manning, Columbia University

In what could be a precursor to the indictment, impeachment and removal of Barack Obama from office, Dr. James David Manning is conducting a trial on May 14, 2010, empowered by the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution.

From The Post & Email, April 27, 2010.

“We have proof of Obama’s ineligibility”

“Today The Post & Email welcomed back Dr. James David Manning, Ph.D., to speak about the upcoming Columbia University Treason and Sedition Trial which he is conducting in Harlem, NY, from May 14-19, 2010.  Dr. Manning reports that he has documented evidence that Barack Hussein Obama II is not a “natural born Citizen” as required by the U.S. Constitution to be President of the United States, and that Obama also did not attend Columbia University from 1981-83 as Obama has claimed.

MRS. RONDEAU: In your most recent video, you stated that a highly-placed government official will be testifying at the trial.  How did you get him to agree to testify, and will he be there in person or submitting something written?

DR. MANNING: Right now, we are anticipating at least two government officials will testify.  One will be through statements that will be uttered that will be documented, and the other will be a physical presentation where he will actually take the stand.

MRS. RONDEAU: And are they in government now or were they past employees of the federal government?

DR. MANNING: One is in government now, and one is a past employee.

MRS. RONDEAU: How did you reach out to them and when?

DR. MANNING: Actually, one reached out to me and the other became a matter of my investigation discovery.

MRS. RONDEAU: How long has the investigation lasted?

DR. MANNING: I have been following the Obama ineligibility issue from 2007, quite frankly, but more emphatically since the election on November 4, 2008.  That is when I began observing the issue of ineligibility more closely.  I have been on this matter for a couple of years now.

MRS. RONDEAU: How long have you had a formal investigation going on?

DR. MANNING: Six months or so.

MRS. RONDEAU: I know that the trial will take place May 14-19.  You’ve also mentioned a march around Columbia University.  Does that coincide with those dates, or will that be at a separate time?

DR. MANNING: The two are synonymous.

MRS. RONDEAU: Do you have any other key witnesses coming?

DR. MANNING: I have some very interesting witnesses that I have subpoenaed such that if they show up, it will be explosive.  If they don’t show up, we’re going to have them testify based on previous statements they have made, carefully observing the rules of evidence to enter those statements into evidence.  Having said that, I have subpoenaed George Stephanopoulos, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Condolezza Rice; I have subpoenaed Michael Sovern, the President of Columbia University at the hour when the breach and the infractions took place; and I have subpoenaed Rod Blagojevich, whom I think is integral to a number of things that went on with the surrender of Barack Obama’s law license back in the spring of 2008 when Blagojevich was still governor; I want to talk to him about that.  I’ve subpoenaed all of the faculty that were a part of the Political Science program during the years that Obama would have been a student at Columbia University.

More recently, I have subpoenaed Louis Farrakhan and Jesse Jackson mainly because they were in Chicago in an eminent way during the years that Obama was an alleged community organizer.  Jesse Jackson was running PUSH and the Rainbow Coalition, and Louis Farrakhan was eminent in  forming the Million Man March, and Obama was allegedly a community organizer during a stretch of years.  I want to know what their relationship was and why they did not know him until he rolled into the Senate seat in Illinois some years later.  More specifically, the tenor of Chicago needs to be outlined by those two leaders.

I have also subpoenaed James Cone, who is a professor and the founder of the whole idea of Black Theology.  He wrote a very explosive book in the early ’80s outlining black theology.  He was the mentor of Jeremiah Wright, who was Obama’s pastor for 20 years.  Jeremiah Wright has developed his theology out of James Cone’s Black Theology; all the tenets which Wright preaches are based on Cone’s philosophical, religious and cultural outline.  I’ve subpoenaed him for two reasons.  One is that Dr. James Cone was an eminent professor at the Union Theological Seminary, which had a very close relationship with Columbia University.  During the years that Obama would have studied at Columbia, James Cone was right across the street as the most eminent black theologian in 1979-81.  Everyone on the planet was talking about James Cone then.  I want to ask James Cone this one question:  Why is it that he and Obama never knew each other with Obama being a black person searching for his roots, and James Cone right there  with everyone wanting an interview with him.  Why didn’t Obama take any classes with him?  The Union Theological Seminary and Columbia University were connected.”

“DR. MANNING: The  Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution gives us the absolute, mandated right to call for a trial with a jury of we the people sanctioned by the Constitution if we discover that the courts or government officials are not executing their duties and allowing the people due process.  Thusly, the Constitution empowers our courts.  We, at times, will present evidence that crimes have taken place.  At that point, it becomes the responsibility of the officials to arrest those who have been charged with crimes in a public and duly-authorized hearing or court.  We will point out that crimes did take place.  If the court is duly authorized, then the contempt of that court is also an infraction, and you can be arrested for that as well.  So anyone who does not show up can be in contempt of a duly-authorized, Tenth Amendment, constitutionally-mandated court.  That’s the best way to answer that.”

“DR. MANNING: The trial, at present, is being structured by me, as a prosecutor, in three phases.   Phase One will demonstrate unequivocally with proof, with documentation, with statements, with a plethora of evidence that Obama is indeed not a natural born Citizen.  That would be the objective, and we will have evidence that will substantiate that at least 12 different acceptable ways.  From there, we will demonstrate that since he isn’t natural born, he violates the U.S. Constitution.  That’s No. 1.

The second stage of the trial will demonstrate that the alleged Columbia years were not spent at Columbia University and the issuance of the degree all over the place demonstrates that Obama did not attend Columbia in a traditional or non-traditional, satellite or correspondence course.  He was not enrolled in any of those courses.  We will demonstrate the type of program that Columbia had and the requirements for a political science major to complete and that Obama did not participate at that level, yet he was issued a degree.  We have the documentation at Stage 2 of the trial to demonstrate that both Columbia and Obama were in a criminal conspiracy to issue and to accept, respectively, knowing that he had not completed the required courses to have done so.”

 Read more:

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/04/27/dr-manning-we-have-proof-of-obamas-ineligibility/

Blagojevich trial, Update, April 22, 2010, Judge James Zagel criticizes Blagojevich, Zagel unhappy with defense team, The only person who can admit evidence is me

Blagojevich trial, Update, April 22, 2010, Judge James Zagel criticizes Blagojevich

From The Christian Science Monitor

“Judge in Rod Blagojevich case takes the former governor to task”

“Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich tried to use a hearing in federal court Wednesday to confront his nemesis in his pending June trial: US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald.
Mr. Blagojevich had angrily described the federal prosecutor as a “liar” late Tuesday, challenging him through local television cameras to “be man enough to be in court” the next day.

Mr. Fitzgerald did not show. But US District Judge James Zagel told Blagojevich and his lawyers that he was unhappy with the combative nature of the defense. His courtroom would not “permit the legal equivalent of head butts,” he said.

“Those rules are enforced by the referee, not by the boxers. I am that referee – no one else,” Judge Zagel said.”

“Zagel criticized the former governor for repeated remarks in the media about prosecutors suppressing wiretaps that Blagojevich says, if aired, would reveal a “smoking gun” pointing at his innocence.”

“Zagel made it clear that it wasn’t up to the prosecution team regarding what would be allowed in the trial. Rather, the admittance of all evidence is under Zagel’s domain. “The only person who can admit evidence is me,” he said.

He gave Blagojevich’s legal team until May 14 to provide a list of all the tapes it wants played at the trial. But he warned that he would monitor whether the requested tapes were relevant to the case so that jurors aren’t “needlessly consumed” by evidence that has no bearing on the trial.”

Read more:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2010/0421/Judge-in-Rod-Blagojevich-case-takes-the-former-governor-to-task

Blagojevich trial, April 21, 2010, Rod Blagojevich history of corruption, Blagojevich rants and deception, Rezko Levine Obama

Blagojevich trial, April 21, 2010, Rod Blagojevich history of corruption

Lest we forget.

Rod Blagojevich, steeped in many years of corruption and crime with the likes of Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine, Barack Obama and many others, would have you believe, with the assistance of the MSM, that he is only caught up in the controversy surrounding the selling of Obama’s seat and that he is not guilty.

From the Chicago Tribune, April 21, 2010.
“Blagojevich calls federal prosecutors ‘cowards and liars’ in angry rant”
 

“Former Gov. Rod Blagojevich described the federal prosecutors who have brought racketeering and fraud charges against him as “cowards and liars” Tuesday and challenged Chicago’s U.S. attorney to meet him face to face in court if he is “man enough.”

In an extraordinary outburst timed to go live on evening news shows, Blagojevich said prosecutors had treated his wife unfairly and were now “sneaking into court” in an effort to prevent jurors from hearing all of the tapes the FBI made of his telephone conversations.

“They are cowards and they are liars,” Blagojevich said, raising his voice to a full throated shout as he stood before a battery of cameras in front of his lawyer’s South Side office.

“They know when all those tapes will be played they will show I’ve done nothing wrong and will prove my innocence,” the impeached former governor said. He and his attorneys left without taking questions.

Addressing U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald through the cameras, Blagojevich said: “I’ll be in court tomorrow and I hope you are man enough to be there, too.”

A spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office, Randall Samborn, had no comment on Blagojevich’s remarks.

U.S. District Judge James B. Zagel has scheduled a hearing for Wednesday to discuss motions being filed as preparations for the trial go into their final six weeks.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-ap-us-blagojevich-corruption-case,0,2581741.story

Nine months before Rod Blagojevich was arrested.

From the Chicago Tribune, March 7, 2008.

“Blagojevich’s name surfaces early in case”

“Prosecutors wasted little time Thursday dragging Gov. Rod Blagojevich front and center in the corruption trial of his friend and fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko.

With an overflow crowd on hand for the politically charged trial, the first government witnesses painted a portrait of Rezko as someone with extraordinary access to the governor and his administration, attending strategy sessions and sitting in on job interviews for key positions.

Testimony from an FBI analyst pointed to a reason behind Rezko’s influence: money. Special Agent Charles Willenborg said that internal Blagojevich campaign documents credited Rezko with raising more than $1.4 million for the governor between June 2001 and August 2004.

That is nearly three times what Rezko has publicly acknowledged raising for Blagojevich. In a 2005 interview with the Tribune, he put the number at about $500,000.

The Rezko case is fraught with political peril not only for Blagojevich but also for Democratic presidential front-runner Barack Obama, another friend of Rezko. Obama has little connection to the criminal case against Rezko. But the link between the two has fanned national interest in a trial that already was receiving outsized attention in Chicago.”

“Levine was a member of two state panels at the heart of the government’s case, reappointed to both in 2003 by Blagojevich after input from Rezko. One board was responsible for investing $30 billion in teacher pension assets; the other had the power to approve hospital expansion projects throughout the state.”

“Rezko has raised money for many politicians , Duffy said, among them former Chicago Mayor Harold Washington, former Gov. Jim Edgar and Obama.

That was the only reference Thursday to the senator, whose presidential campaign has been hounded by questions about his ties to Rezko. Prosecutors say at least $20,000 of teacher pension fund money allegedly looted by Rezko found its way through a middleman into Obama’s 2004 U.S. Senate campaign.”

“Susan Lichtenstein, once the Blagojevich administration’s top lawyer, testified that Rezko enjoyed unusual influence for someone with no official state position. Lichtenstein said Rezko was present when she interviewed with Blagojevich about her job.

And, she said, Rezko was on hand at several strategy retreats where key Blagojevich aides and the governor hashed out administration strategy.”

“Many large contributions to the governor came from donors already linked to the case against Rezko, including two appointees to the state hospital board. Each gave Blagojevich $25,000 shortly after their appointments.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-tony-rezko-trial-07mar07,0,77138.story

Blagojevich trial, Update, April 20, 2010, Christopher Kelly suicide, Prosecution seeks to limit defense arguments, Robert Blagojevich

Blagojevich trial, Update, April 20, 2010

From the Chicago Tribune, April 19, 2010
“Feds say Blagojevich lawyers should not tell jury about chief fundraiser’s suicide”

“Prosecutors in Chicago are urging a federal judge to bar former Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s lawyers from telling the jury at his corruption trial about his chief fundraiser’s suicide.

In court papers Monday, prosecutors say Blagojevich and his attorneys have made remarks suggesting they might bring up fundraiser Christopher Kelly’s suicide at the trial.

The south suburban contractor headed Blagojevich’s campaign committee and was found dead of an apparent overdose last September. He had been a defendant in three different corruption cases and was set to enter prison within days.”

Read more:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/sns-ap-il–blagojevich-corruptioncase,0,2396658.story
“Prosecution seeks to limit defense arguments in upcoming Blagojevich trial”

“But the government maintains it is simply trying to keep issues irrelevant to the criminal charges from jurors.

On that same note, prosecutors said the defense shouldn’t be allowed to raise Blagojevich’s impeachment or any positive actions he took as governor.

Blagojevich has long called for all the undercover tapes to be played, not just the ones preferred by prosecutors, saying he is confident he would be vindicated if the entire record was heard.

But prosecutors said it would improper for Blagojevich’s attorney to make reference to this, since it involves legal rulings by the judge that should be off-limits for the jury.

“Comments by counsel or witnesses along the lines, ‘If it was up to us, we would play all the tapes,’ are improper,” the government said in its filing.

Zagel already has said in court that Blagojevich could be able to play some of the tapes he wants if they corroborate his testimony. The former governor has promised to testify at the trial slated to begin June 3.

Also Monday, prosecutors objected to a request by Blagojevich’s brother, Robert, for a separate trial. The brother ran Rod Blagojevich’s campaign fund for part of 2008 and allegedly participated in only a small percentage of the charged misconduct, according to his lawyer, Michael Ettinger.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-blagojevich-bar-testimony-20100419,0,2596293.story

Obama, Grand jury presentment, Update, July 7, 2009, Federal Judge Denies Citizen Grand Jury Presentment Filing

From Phil at the Right Side of Life:

“In a recent article, I reported that a number of concerned citizens had visited the USDC for DC and submitted a citizen grand jury presentment to Chief Justice Royce Lamberth in hopes that he would issue a response to the paperwork. His order was made July 2, 2009 (h/t TheJAGHunter):”

“Quotes relevant to the citizen grand jury movement, going forward, include the following:

…And although presentments are constitutionally permitted, there is no authority under the Rules of Criminal Procedure or in the statutes of the United States for this Court to accept one. …

Furthermore, grand juries are convened by the court for the district in which they sit. … Grand jurors are also to be selected at random from a fair cross section of the district in which they are convened. … The individuals who have made this presentment were not convened by this Court to sit as a grand jury nor have they been selected at random from a fair cross section of this district. Any self-styled indictment or presentment issued by such a group has no force under the Constitution or laws of the United States. …

Further, though the papers presented to the Clerk of Court shall not be filed, they shall be assigned a miscellaneous number along with this Order for the court’s record.”

Read more:

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6588

 

NC Grand Jury indictment of Obama, Walter Fitzpatrick complaint, American Grand Jury, Obama not eligible, Obama British citizen, Obama has committed treason

 I received the following email this morning:

“On May 9, 2009, the American Grand Jury met and, after reviewing the evidence presented, indicted Barak Obama, aka Barry Soetoro for fraud and treason.  Wednesday, May 13, 2009, the indictment was filed with the Clerk of Court, Catawba County, NC (file #09R81) and a copy of the indictment was sent by Certified Mail to District Attorney James C. Gaither (NC District 25B), for further action according to his Oath of Office.” 

Here is the indictment:

Presentments:  American Grand Jury
  •  
    •  
              MAY 9th, 2009

On April 29, 2009 the American Grand Jury convened and conducted a hearing with regard to CRIMINAL activity, complaints and allegations presented before said Grand Jury;

Such charges and presentments of criminal activity were handed down against the person(s) known as Barack Obama, aka: Barack Obama, Jr., aka: Barack Hussein Obama, aka: Barry Soetoro; aka: Barry Obama; aka: Barack Obama, presumed President of the United States (hereinafter known as Obama);

Said Grand Jury was duly organized and empowered under the laws of the Constitution of United States of America as follows:

Scope and Authority of the Grand Jury

The Constitution of the United States, Amendment 1 and Amendment 5, known as portions of the Bill of Rights states:

Amendment 1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment 5: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,

Said Grand Jury was convened under the power and authority vested with the people as guaranteed under the Constitution, Amendment 5, Bill of Rights.

The convened Grand Jury was “national” in nature, represented by people of the United States, said people being citizens as were sworn under Oath as to Eligibility for and Service in behalf of the Grand Jury:

Each Jury member was eligible as follows:

      1) A citizen of the United States;

      2) A citizen of eighteen (18) years or older;

      3) A resident of a State chartered within the United States of America

    4) Were in possession of his/her natural faculties, of ordinary intelligence, of sound judgment and of fair character;

      5) Possessed a sufficient knowledge of the English language;

      6) Were not serving as a trial juror in any court;

    7) Had not been convicted of a malfeasance in office, a felony, or other high crime; 
    8.  Were not serving as an elected public officer.  
     
     
     
     

Each Jury member did SWEAR or AFFIRM as follows:

“That I (jury member) shall diligently inquire, and true presentment make, of all such matters as may be given me before the jury, or shall come to my knowledge, touching such service. I shall present no person through prejudice or ill will, nor leave any un-presented through fear or favor, but in all my presentments shall endeavor to present the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth (affirmed) or so help me God (sworn).”

Said affirmation or sworn oath was duly subscribed by appearance of each jury member before a notary public whereby each jury member affirmed or swore the Oath of Office for service to the Grand Jury; furthermore each jury member verbally repeated the “oath” and acknowledged their eligibility in front of said notary by signing their name in execution. Said notary acknowledged that said jury member executed the “Eligibility and Oath of Office” document for the purposes therein contained by placing their notary hand and seal upon the document.

Each original jury member’s “Oath of Office and Eligibility” document was sealed and recorded in a central location for purposes of empowering the Grand Jury.

A jury foreman (moderator) and alternate jury foreman were appointed to conduct the Grand Jury hearing.

Said Grand Jury hearing was conducted in secrecy. All evidence was sealed and protected. All witnesses were sworn under oath. All presentments (charges) were voted upon. Said Grand Jury was comprised of 34 regular Grand Jury members, 1 Jury Foreman and 1 Alternate Jury Foreman  

Criminal complaints were placed before the Grand Jury 

    COUNT ONE:
    That Obama is NOT eligible under the laws of the Constitution of the United States as provided for in Article II, Section 1.

    Page –2- 
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

    Said Article II, Section 1 states:
    “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
    Wherefore, Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” for the following reasons:
    1) Obama was NOT born of mother and father who were BOTH US Citizens.

    “These facts are not in dispute: Under the British Nationality Act 1948, Obama’s father was a British citizen/subject when he was born in the English colony of Kenya. Obama’s father continued to be such and not a U.S. citizen when Obama was born in 1961. Under the same BNA 1948, at birth, regardless of where he was born, Obama also became a British citizen/subject by descent from his British father.

    As applicable only to a Presidential Article II ‘natural born Citizen’:

    …the individual must be born in the United States to a mother and father who are themselves United States citizens (by birth or naturalization). This is to assure that a would-be, all powerful President and Commander in Chief of the Military has sole allegiance and loyalty to the United States from the time of birth.

    It is public knowledge that Obama has admitted in his writings and otherwise that when he was born, his father was a British citizen/subject and not a United States citizen and that at that time he himself also became such. In fact, his father was not even a permanent resident of the United States, but rather only a student who would probably have been here only on a temporary student visa. Hence, not only was Obama’s father not a United States citizen but Obama himself was born a British subject/citizen. Hence, clearly, Obama is not and cannot be an Article II ‘natural born Citizen.’ The operative facts are not in dispute.”

    Page –3-

     
     
     
     
     
     

    Mario Apuzzo, Esq. 
    Licensed Attorney 
    Jamesburg NJ 08831

    2) Obama was a British citizen ‘at birth.’

    “Since Barack Obama’s father was a citizen of Kenya and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of Obama’s birth, then Obama was a British citizen ‘at birth.’ ”

    “The Framers of the Constitution, at the time of their birth,” Donofrio writes, “were also British citizens, and that’s why the Framers declared that, while they were citizens of the United States, they themselves were not ‘natural born citizens.”

    “Therefore,” Donofrio summarizes, “even if he were to produce an original birth certificate proving he were born on U.S. soil, he still wouldn’t be eligible to be president.”

    Leo Donofrio, Esq. 
    Licensed Attorney 
    State of New Jersey

    COUNT TWO:
    The charge of “Treason” against Obama is before the people of the United States of America. That such complaint is CRIMINAL, of high crimes, and extremely damaging against the people.
    Said complaint was formally brought by a Military Officer (retired) of the United States of America. All United States Military Officers are sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States and such complaint is valid, explicit and proper; when an Officer is aware of such malfeasance of Treason by an offender it is that Officer’s SWORN duty to come forward and present such accusation and complaint;
    The Military Officer who filed the complaint is Lt. Commander Walter Fitzpatrick, III, retired, United States Navy and a graduate of the United States Naval Academy;

    Page –4- 
     
     
     

    Lt. Commander Fitzpatrick on March 17, 2009 did hereby make such criminal accusation and complaint against Obama and presented said complaint before the U.S Attorney Russell Dedrick, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Edward Schmutzer, Eastern District, Tennessee;
    An original photocopy of said complaint was submitted to the Grand Jury as evidence for immediate investigation;
    Said original photocopy of the complete criminal complaint is attached as Exhibit “A” hereto and made a part hereof;
    Lt. Commander Fitzpatrick was sworn under oath before the Grand Jury to testify as to the true nature and details regarding said criminal complaint filed against Obama;
    Said criminal complaint by Lt. Commander Fitzpatrick and his “accusation of Treason” is quoted in the excerpt below:

“Now you [Obama] have broken in and entered the White House by force of contrivance, concealment, conceit, dissembling, and deceit. Posing as an impostor president and commander in chief you have stripped civilian command and control over the military establishment. Known military criminal actors-command racketeers-are now free in the exercise of military government intent upon destruction of America’s constitutional government.

We come now to this reckoning. I accuse you and your military-political criminal assistants of TREASON. I name you and your military criminal associates as traitors. Your criminal ascension manifests a clear and present danger. You fundamentally changed our form of government. The Constitution no longer works.

Confident holding your silent agreement and admission, I identify you as a foreign born domestic enemy.

My sworn duty Mr. Obama is to stand against what you stand for. You are not my president. You are not my commander in chief.”

Scope of Investigations and Deliberations of the Grand Jury hearing

Page –5- 
 
 
 
 
 

Wherefore on April 29, 2009 at approximately 7:00 pm Central Standard Time,

the American Grand Jury met in closed session comprising an attendance of 34 jury members, including a Jury Foreman (as moderator) and an Alternate Jury Foreman.  The Jury Foreman and Alternate Foreman did not vote.  The final vote included 32 jury members.

Said hearing lasted for approximately 3 hours. Such meeting was conducted online in a private website for the express purpose of conducting said Grand Jury assembly and hearing. Such hearing was secure and unencumbered by outside intervention or public intrusion.

Each Jury member had full access to the evidence, written and visible (in the form of scanned and photographed documents embedded in said private website). Each Jury member was given a full week (in advance) in private session (using the facilities of the private website) to study the evidence, present questions and form an opinion as to the validity and truthfulness of said evidence.

The final Grand Jury hearing of April 29, 2009 was scheduled in secrecy and privacy following said week of evidence review.

All counts (as listed above) were voted upon by the 32 jury members.

All communications (email, chat messages, jury foreman messages, surveys, reports, testimony) were conducted in written English. All said communications were securely saved in a database server on the private website. All recorded communications have been placed in a secure evidence file and saved for any proper authority to review.

The final vote was unanimous.  All 32 members voted “Yea” to hand down the presentments against Obama.

The Grand Jury concluded the hearing after handing down the final vote and affirming said counts and presentments.  
 
 
 
 
 

Page –6- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The Presentments and such Remedies as prayed for by the Grand Jury

Now therefore:

The Grand Jury hereby prays the Court take said presentments and formally charge AND prosecute Obama under Count One:  fraud against the people of the United States of America by reason of:

    That Obama is NOT eligible under the laws of the Constitution of the United States as provided for in Article II, Section 1.  

Furthermore, the Grand Jury hereby prays the Court will formally charge AND prosecute Obama with “treason” as attested to in Count Two:

    That the charge of “Treason” against Obama is before the people of the United States of America. That such complaint is CRIMINAL, of high crimes, and extremely damaging against the people.

Given on this day and year of April 29, 2009 by unanimous vote of the Jury Members of said American Grand Jury; 

Said presentments are hereby attested to and verified by my hand on this day and year as first above mentioned: 
 

  •  
    •  
              Your browser may not support display of this image.      _______________________________________
  •  
    •  
        Robert John Campbell, Jury Foreman

Page –7-

 
 
 
Your browser may not support display of this image.

_________________

Identification of Jury Foreman

  •  

            Name:  Robert John Campbell

  •  

            Status:  United States Citizen

  •  
    •  

        Address: P.O. Box 1513, Nogales, AZ 85628 

  •  
            Signature:Your browser may not support display of this image. 

      Passport number is concealed for privacy.  This information is available to the proper authorities, if required.  Thanks, Robert Campbell 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Stephanie Mohr, prison sentence, Prince George’s County Police Department Maryland, Ricardo Mendez, Herrera Cruz, convicted of 4th degree burglary, deported, Five years later Mohr was indicted by the U.S Department of Justice

 From GOPUSA:

https://co.clickandpledge.com/default.aspx?wid=17963
 

With 25 letters of commendation, two awards, and nine years of service to the Prince George’s County Police Department in Maryland, Stephanie Mohr does not sound like an officer who should be spending years in jail away from her young son, Adam. Unfortunately, this is already Mohr’s sixth year of a prison sentence that she does not deserve. With your help though, we can get this innocent officer out of jail and reunited with her son.

It’s time to bring Stephanie home for Mother’s Day!

In September of 1995, Mohr was on patrol with her police dog Valk. She was patrolling Takoma Park, an area that had been known to have many recent burglaries. When Mohr and her partner, Sergeant Anthony Delozier, got a call for backup from an officer who had spotted two men on the roof of a nearby store, they knew they may have found the criminals.

Ricardo Mendez and Herrera Cruz were the two suspects who were ordered to get down and face the wall. Mendez then made a move that looked as if he were about to flee the scene.

As Mohr had been trained to do in this type of situation, she released her canine. Valk, the police dog, was trained to perform the police department’s standard “bite and hold” and that is exactly what he did. The dog bit Mendez on the leg and held him there until the officers could apprehend him.

Mendez and Herrera were convicted of 4th degree burglary and were then deported. The two illegally re-entered the U.S. again and were arrested for selling crack cocaine. They were then deported a second time.

Stephanie was relieved that she had gotten these two criminals off of our streets and back to their country.
She soon gave birth to her son Adam and was a proud mother.

Unfortunately, her joy did not last very long. Five years after this incident and one day before the statue of limitations was set to expire, Mohr was indicted by the U.S Department of Justice.

She and her son have now spent over 2,000 days apart!

Looking for cases of “police brutality” the U.S Department of Justice indicted Stephanie and two fellow officers charging them with violating Ricardo Mendez’s civil rights and conspiracy.

At the trial, Officer Mohr was found not guilty of conspiracy. A hung jury, voting 11 to 1 in favor of Mohr failed to reach a unanimous verdict on the civil right charges.

The prosecutor sought a retrial 2001 even though the jurors from the first trial said that the case lacked merit. At this trial the prosecution convinced the jury that Mohr had released her canine on innocent minority citizens for racial reasons.

In this second trial, the judge allowed prejudicial testimony into evidence that Mohr had used racial epithets in making a prior arrest using her canine. The charges did not start out as racial but the prosecutors needed to do something desperate to save their case. This questionable evidence should not have been allowed into the courtroom.

The jury was stacked with minorities who would be sympathetic with illegal immigrants. The government even flew Mendez back into the U.S. at taxpayer expense to have Mendez testify against Mohr despite the fact that he was a convicted felon.

Due to the racial tactics the prosecution used, Stephanie was convicted of a federal criminal rights violation and given a maximum 10-year prison sentence.

Stephanie is now serving her sixth year of the ten year prison sentence.

This is the sixth year that she has had to spend away from her son Adam. She has missed so many important days in her son’s life like birthdays and holidays. Stephanie’s eight year old son has now spent the last 6 years of his life without his mother by his side.

Stephanie has not lost hope though. She has faith in the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund <www.leldf.org/procedures> . We are doing everything we can to help Mohr.

We have appealed the trial Courts decision denying Stephanie a new trial to the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond, Virginia.

Six years of her life have been wasted in prison because she followed police procedure when she ordered her police dog Valk to stop a suspect from fleeing the scene. Six years that can NEVER EVER be given back.

The suspect – an illegal alien from San Salvador – was convicted of selling drugs and deported. —- But outrageously the prosecutor brought him back, at public expense, to testify against Stephanie.

And Stephanie was convicted of “violating” his civil rights.

Just as unfair as the charges, the Judge, blindly followed the recommendation of the Civil Rights Division, imposed a draconian ten-year sentence that both Stephanie and her son Adam are both serving. What can be more outrageous!!!

It’s time to reunite Stephanie and Adam for Mothers Day!

If you agree that its time to send this innocent mother home to her son, won’t you please send your most generous tax deductible contribution to The Law Enforcement Defense Fund by clicking here today.

We strongly believe that Mohr has been wrongly accused and innocent of this crime. Stephanie followed all the police procedures as she was trained to do.

In order to protect the public, which was her main concern, she released her dog Valk to ensure that Mendez could not escape and pose a further threat to the community.

We here at LELDF (see who we are) hope that you agree with us that this sentence is unjust. Mendez is an illegal alien who is receiving more benefits than Mohr, a police officer who protected the public for over nine years.

LELDF is assisting Stephanie with all the legal costs for the appeal and for a new trial.

Stephanie’s appeal asks the federal judge to review her conviction based on evidence in court documents that a witness against her lied, saying she used a racial slur and that this lie influenced the jury to convict her.

LELDF is supporting Stephanie Mohr. But, we cannot do it alone. We need your support to help Stephanie obtain her rightfully deserved freedom.

Stephanie deserves to be home holding Adam in her arms. Adam needs mother to open up the over 5 years of Christmas gifts, over 5 years of Mothers Day gifts.

Your contribution of any amount will greatly impact our efforts in supporting Stephanie.

We are asking you to show your support by giving a gift of $25, $50, or any amount that you can afford. This gift of any amount is tax-deductible.

By the time Stephanie gets out of prison, her son Adam will almost be a teenager. Mohr has lost some of the most crucial moments in Adams life. This is every mother’s worst nightmare. We need to help her get out of prison as soon as possible so she can be reunited with her son. 2,020 days apart are enough!

Any donation that you can contribute will help our cause in giving Stephanie her freedom. She deserves to know that we appreciate all her hard work and sacrifices.

We thank you for your continued support.

Sincerely,


David H. Martin
Chairman

P.S. Stephanie Mohr was only performing her job the way she was trained how. Mendez is an illegal alien who should not even be in the U.S. Please do not let this mother be torn apart from her son any longer. Won’t you please help LELDF to reunite Stephanie and Adam? Thank you

 
     
     
     

http://www.gopusa.com/subscribe/

http://www.gopusa.com/backend/forward.php?file=friends/2009_05_07_leldf.html

GOPUSA Friends E-mail List

The content of this e-mailer does not constitute an endorsement by GOPUSA. This message was sent to GOPUSA subscribers on behalf of a paid advertiser. Through their support, GOPUSA can continue to bring you the best array of conservative news, information, commentary, and discussions. For questions regarding the content of this e-mailer, please contact the advertiser directly.

Please note that this list is different than our daily news and commentary list. For more information about the GOPUSA Friends List, please click here.

++ Follow this link if you no longer wish to receive GOPUSA Friends e-mailers.

++ Need to change your e-mail address? Click here.

Copyright © 2000-2009, GOPUSA.com
A division of Endeavor Media Group, LLC
P.O. Box 891354
Houston, TX 77289
++ Contact Us