Very important Press release: Obama’s camp publishes a response to a petition by Attorney Taitz to Judge Moore. Their response confirms that she is on a right track

Posted on | March 24, 2014 | 5 Comments

Press release: Obama’s camp publishes a response to a petition by Attorney Taitz to Judge Moore. Their response confirms that she is on a right track.

Attorney Orly Taitz researched Federal Statute 18USC3332. She made an interesting discovery: this statute does not limit reporting of crimes by the court to the federal Grand Jury to Federal Judges only. She discovered that absent such limitation a citizen can forward this request to a state court judge and petition him to forward evidence of crimes to the Federal grand jury.

Taitz published a draft of her letter to the Chief Judge of the Supreme court of Alabama Roy Moore. While majority of the AL Supreme Court ruled against McInnish stating that the Secretary of State of AL does not have a duty to request certified birth certificates from candidates, there is nothing preventing Moore from forwarding to the grand jury evidence of crimes which was provided to him in a case and additional evidence that Taitz provided to him, particularly in light of the fact that part of the evidence was discovered by Alabama investigator Al Hendershot and Alabama Federal and county grand juries have jurisdiction to subpoena Hendershot to testify before them. Roy Moore and Thomas Parker do not need the other 7 judges to forward this evidence to the Grand Jury, they can do it on their own.This is a real test. A conservative judge can be brave in issuing a dissenting opinion against the regime when he knows that this opinion does not count and will not affect ones in power. The real test is for the judge to do something of consequence, for example for Judge Wingate to rule for the plaintiffs, where his decision is of consequence or for Judges Moore and Parker to forward th evidence t the grand Jury. We will see if these 2 judges really have courage and uphold justice when it really counts and when they cannot hide behind an opposite findings by the majority, while keeping support of the conservatives. This is similar to a test to prosecutors and sheriffs. The real test for Sheriff Arpaio is not doing press conferences of no consequence and doing fund raising, but to appear in court and testify, release all the evidence    and submit an official criminal complaint to the prosecutors and Judicial Committee of Congress.

Obama’s personal attorney Scott J. Tepper stated during phone conference to Judge Wingate in MS, in Taitz et al v Democratic Party, Obama, Pelosi, Onaka, Fussy, Astrue  that he reads Taitz website daily. Taitz  knew that if she is mistaken and there is a precedent stating that the Supreme Court judge of the state court cannot forward evidence of a crime to the federal Grand Jury, Obama’s attorneys will find this precedent and will post it on one of their blogs.

She was proven correct.  Obama’s camp indeed posted a rebuttal and it showed that indeed there is no impediment to Chief Judge Roy Moore as well as Judge Tom Parker to forward the evidence of the crimes committed by Obama and his accomplices to the federal grand Jury, as well as to the state and county prosecutors and county grand jury.

Further, the response shows that indeed Alabama case is vastly different from her MS and Ca cases and there is a great chance of her prevailing in the US District Court in MS, as well as the 9th Circuit and of course in specific cases in DC and MD.

The difference between AL and MS cases is as follows:

1. Plaintiffs in AL sought only a Writ of Mandamus from the court to the Sec of State to seek certified copies of birth certificates of all the candidates. They never asked for a declaratory judgment and the court noted that a lack of such a request was a problem.  In Taitz cases she did not make such an error and specifically asked for a declaratory relief

2. In MS she brought additional RICO (Racketeering Influenced Corrupt organization ) cause of action, which specifically addresses criminal collusion, which was not brought in any other cases, including AL

3. Taitz filed MS case before the primary, so there cannot be a claim of laches, she did not file too late

4. Eastern District of CA already upheld the right of the Sec of State to vet candidates

6. 9th Circuit ruled in Keyes that as long as the case was filed before the candidate took office the court can rule on legitimacy of a candidate.

Based on what Taitz saw in responses from Obama camp there is  good probability that Judge Moore will forward Taitz petition to the Federal and County Grand Jury and the public is requested to write to Judge Moore and Judge Parker asking them to grant the petition by Taitz to forward evidence of criminal activity, which was forwarded to them by Taitz to the Federal and County Grand jury as well as state and county prosecutors. Also, very limited response by the Obama camp tells Taitz that she has a high probability of getting positive rulings by Judge Wingate in MS, by Chief Judge of the 9th Circuit Alex Kozinsky in Grinols, as well as by Judge Hollander in MD in the case dealing with Obama’s use of a stolen SSN of Harry Bounel, as well as by Judge Lamberth on Obama’s use of a fabricated Selective Service certificate with a fabricated postal stamp affixed to it.

Letter to Judge Moore with exhibits

DR. ORLY TAITZ ESQ

PRESIDENT

DEFEND OUR FREEDOMS FOUNDATION

CANDIDATE ON THE BALLOT FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA

29839 SANTA MARGARITA, STE 100

RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA, CA 92688

PH. 949-683-5411 FAX 949-766-7687 ORLY.TAITZ@HUSHMAIL.COM

ATTN: HON.  ROY MOORE, CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

03.22.2014

OPEN LETTER/PETITION/REQUEST TO :

1.UNDER 18USC3332  FORWARD TO THE FEDERAL GRAND JURY FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EVIDENCE OF FRAUD, IDENTITY THEFT, FORGERY, USE OF FABRICATED IDS BY BARACK OBAMA, AS A CANDIDATE IN 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN AL, WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY THIS COURT

2.  UNDER ALABAMA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE RULE 12 FORWARD TO THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY  AND GRAND JURY EVIDENCE OF FRAUD IDENTITY THEFT, FORGERY, USE OF FABRICATED IDS BY BARACK OBAMA. AS A CANDIDATE IN 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN AL, WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY THIS COURT

Honorable Roy Moore,

I read your brilliant analysis in McInnish v Chapman, a case relating to Barack Obama’s run for the U.S. President while using a fabricated birth certificate.

On that note I would like to provide you with additional evidence, part of which was gathered in the State of Alabama by an investigator Albert Hendershot.

Attached evidence shows that Mr. Obama is not only using a fabricated birth certificate, but also using a stolen Connecticut Social Security number, which was assigned to Harry (Harrison) Bounel born in 1890, as well as a fabricated Selective Service registration ,  Indonesian citizenship and a last name not legally his.

I am forwarding this information with the request to forward it to the Federal Grand Jury for the Middle District of Alabama. under 18 USC 3332.

18 U.S. Code § 3332 – Powers and duties

“(a) It shall be the duty of each such grand jury impaneled within any judicial district to inquire into offenses against the criminal laws of the United States alleged to have been committed within that district. Such alleged offenses may be brought to the attention of the grand jury BY THE COURT or by any attorney appearing on behalf of the United States for the presentation of evidence. Any such attorney receiving information concerning such an alleged offense from any other person shall, if requested by such other person, inform the grand jury of such alleged offense, the identity of such other person, and such attorney’s action or recommendation. (b) Whenever the district court determines that the volume of business of the special grand jury exceeds the capacity of the grand jury to discharge its obligations, the district court may order an additional special grand jury for that district to be impaneled.”

While some claim that 18 USC §3332 allows only Federal judges to forward such evidence to the Grand Jury, and that it might be considered an infringement   by the Judge of the State Supreme Court into the Federal turf, in reality 18 USC §3332 does not limit such reporting power to the federal courts and federal judges. Any court is allowed to forward to the Federal Grand Jury evidence of offenses against the criminal laws of the United States as the intent of legislature was wide ranging reporting for abatement of criminal activity.

Additionally, as Your Honor might remember, based on Glassroth v. Moore, CV-01-T-1268-N, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (M.D. Ala. 2002), and its companion case Maddox and Howard v. Moore, CV-01-T-1269-N, the Federal court had no qualms about infringing on the turf of the State Supreme court and demanding removal from the State Supreme Court rotunda the monument with 10 commandments, even though the Supreme Court of the United States itself proudly displays the Statue of Moses, the gentleman who brought us the 10 Commandments in the first place. (maybe placing the exact replica of the SCOTUS sculpture of Moses in the state rotunda would be more palatable for the Federal court).

At any rate, there does not appear to be any decision by the Supreme Court of the U.S. stating that the State Supreme Court Judge cannot forward to the Federal Grand Jury for inquiry evidence of such offenses,  particularly since the investigator who procured the evidence resides in Alabama and can be  subpoenaed to testify.

Additionally, since typically U.S. Attorney would be the official to provide evidence to the Federal Grand Jury, there is a conflict of interest in this instance, as the U.S. Attorneys are appointed by the sitting president, they are under directions of the Attorney General, who is in turn under directions of the President and the evidence dealt with the legitimacy of the U.S. President. As such, referral by the court might be essential and an only way to relate the evidence to the Grand Jury.

2.    The court has inherent power to forward to the state and county prosecutors as well as the state and county Grand Jury evidence of crimes which was provided to the court. Code of Alabama allows the Grand Jury to indict for all triable offenses including violation of election law. Mr. Obama has violated the election law, as he submitted his Declaration of a Candidate for the U.S. President based on fraud and while using fabricated IDs and a stolen Social Security number, using the last name not legally his, as well as hiding his Indonesian citizenship.

Based on all of the above this court can forward to the county or state prosecutors or grand jury the evidence provided in McInnish, as well as evidence submitted herein.

Code of Alabama

Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 12. . Selection of Venire; the GrandJury and Petit Jury Panels.

ARCrP Rule 12.3

Rule 12.3. Oath, instructions, duties, and powers of the grand jury.

Currentness

(a) Oath. The foreman of the grand jury shall take the following oath:

“You, as foreman of the grand jury of ________ County, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that you will diligently inquire, and true presentment make, of all indictable offenses given you in charge, as well as those brought to your knowledge, committed or triable within the county; the state’s counsel, your fellows’ and your own you shall keep secret; you shall present no person from envy, hatred, or malice, not leave any one unpresented from fear, affection, reward, or the hope thereof; but you shall present all things truly as they come to your knowledge, to the best of your understanding, so help you God?”

After the above oath (or affirmation) has been administered to the foreman, the following oath (or affirmation) shall be administered to the other grand jurors:

“The same oath (or affirmation) which your foreman has taken, on his part, you and each of you, on your respective parts, shall well and truly observe and keep, so help you God.”

(b) Instructions. The judge shall instruct the grand jury concerning its powers and duties and the grounds for disqualification of a grand juror as set out in Rule 12.4, and shall otherwise instruct the grand jury as the judge shall deem proper.

(c) Duties of the grand jury. It shall be the duty of the grand jury to:

(1) Inquire into all indictable offenses committed or triable within the county. If any grand juror knows, or has reason to believe, that a public offense has been committed for which a defendant may be indicted and tried within that county, it shall be the duty of that grand juror to disclose the same to the other grand jurors, who may thereupon investigate it;

(2) Inquire into any alleged misconduct or incompetency of any public officer in the county. If upon such investigation and diligent inquiry, the grand jury finds that the officer investigated should be removed from office, it shall return a Bill of Impeachment as provided by law; provided, however, if the officer who the grand jury finds should be removed from office is a judge, the grand jury shall forward a confidential report, signed by the foreman, concerning the matter to the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission.

(3) Inquire into the condition of the county jail and juvenile detention facilities, if any, in regard to their sufficiency for the safekeeping of prisoners or juveniles, respectively, and their sufficiency for the accommodations and health of prisoners or juveniles, respectively; and

(4) Perform such other duties as may be required of it, which include the duties of each member of the grand jury to:

(i) Disqualify himself or herself in a particular matter for any of the reasons enumerated in Rule 12.4;

(ii) Attend each session of the grand jury unless excused by the foreman or the court; and

(iii) Keep confidential those matters revealed to the grand jury in secret, as required by law.

(d) Powers of the grand jury.

(1) The grand jury shall have inquisitorial powers over all indictable offenses found to have been committed or to be triable within the county, and shall have authority to return indictments for all such offenses.

(2) The grand jury shall be entitled to free access, at all proper hours, to all state, county, and municipal offices and buildings located within the county and shall be entitled to examine, without charge, all records and other papers of any state, county, or municipal offices within the county in any way connected with the grand jury’s duties, unless those records and papers are otherwise privileged from disclosure by law.

COMMITTEE COMMENTS

Rule 12.3(a) states the oaths presently required in Alabama. Ala. Code 1975, §§ 12-16-171, 12-16-172.

Rule 12.3(b) substantially changes past practice. Ala. Code 1975, § 12-16-202, requires the court specifically to charge such things as the laws regulating the operation of automobiles, carrying concealed weapons, dealing in county claims by county officers, failure of tax assessor to administer oath to taxpayer, forming pools to regulate quantity or price of products, combination to control corporation with such intent, violation of election laws, laws relating to convicts and prisoners, adulterating and selling candies, gaming, selling liquors in violation of law, betting on any election, violating the game and fish law, and violating the law prohibiting corporations from contributing to campaign funds. The rule merely directs the judges of the courts in which grand juries relative to the criminal laws against certain offenses; to charge the grand jury as to all other matters which may be required by law; and to instruct the grand jury that it is their duty to indict for offenses if, in their opinion, the evidence justifies the indictment.

Rule 12.3(c) is intended to limit some of the duties of the grand jury imposed by statute unless for some good reason those duties are required of them. See generally Ala. Code 1975, § 12-16-191, on the duty of grand juries to examine county jails; § 12-16-195 on grand juries’ examining books of county superintendents of education; § 36-11-3 on duty of grand juries to investigate public officers; Hess & Kulakowski, Preliminary Proceedings and Trial Preparations, 35 Alabama Lawyer 497, 506 (1974).

See Ala. Code 1975, § 12-16-192.

Rule 12.3(c)(2) is not an exclusive remedy and the grand jury can still indict.

Rule 12.3(d) restates in part present Alabama law and is not exclusive. The function of the grand jury is to make investigations into possible crimes committed within the grand jury’s jurisdiction. “The grand jury is an integral part of our legal system, whose function it is to make investigations of all crimes committed within its jurisdiction.” King v. Second National Bank & Trust Co., 234 Ala. 106, 108, 173 So. 498, 499 (1937). As the Alabama Supreme Court said in Fields, Alias v. State, 121 Ala. 16, 25 So. 726, 727 (1899):

“[The grand jury] is that branch of the court, when organized under the statute, in which all criminal prosecutions by indictment must originate. It puts in motion the organized machinery for the trial of persons charged with crime by presenting in open court in the name of the State a complaint, which must be endorsed a true bill. By this means the court acquires jurisdiction of the particular case. The functions and powers of the grand jury as to the indictment so returned are ended when the presentment is made and the indictment or true bill is received by the court.”

Once the grand jury is empaneled and sworn as provided by statute, “it becomes the supreme inquisitorial body of the county, and no preliminary act of any court or judge can limit its powers.” State v. Knighton, 21 Ala.App. 330, 331, 108 So. 85 (1926).

Partial authority for subsection (2) is found in Alabama Code 1975, § 12-16-196, which provides:

“The district attorney and the grand jury shall be entitled to free access, at all proper hours, to the county jail, to the office of the county treasurer and to examination, without charge, of all records and other papers in any of the county offices, connected in any way with their duties.”

Respectfully,

Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

President

Defend Our Freedoms Foundation

Comments

• Search for:
• Tweet

• EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — YouTube Indiana Trial of Obama !

• EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — Indiana Trial of Obama, 2nd Copy

• Evidence on Barack Obama

  Obama File with Exhibits
  Affidavit of Paul Irey
  Obama file Exhibits 1 - 7
  Obama file Exhibit 8 - Part 1
  Obama file Exhibit 8 - Part 2
  Obama file Exhibits 9-13
  Obama file Exhibits 14-21
  Request for Docs under FOIA and Emergency Motion for Reconsideration
  Exhibits sent to Inspector Generals and Congress

• RSS Feed: Subscribe for Free RSS Feed

  

• ---

  PETITION TO CONGRESS:
  Ban importation of 200,000 Syrian migrants into the US

  

  ---

• Petition the White House to institute Edward Snowden, National Whistleblower – Patriots against Government Corruption Day

  

• URGENT! PLEASE SIGN PETITION TO CONGRESS

• OrlyTaitzEsq.com

  • Untitled

• TAITZ REPORT

  Subscribe today to stay in touch with our progress. Send this channel out to your email lists. Thank you for your support. CHANNEL (Google Plus) SUBSCRIBE TO YOUTUBE
• 

• Official Facebook

  
  

• Recent Posts

  • (no title)

• IMPORTANT NOTICES – PLEASE READ!

  Historic DVD Now Available! DVD of the historic trial in GA and DVD of a historic testimony in NH, where evidence was provided showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number. The DVDs are in a beautiful commemorative case with personal autographs from attorney Dr. Orly Taitz $22.50 each +$2.50 for shipping and handling. --------- To order these DVDs, donate $25.00 by credit card on the website RunOrlyRun.com and email orly.taitz@gmail.com with you name and address. Or send a $25.00 check with your name and address to: Orly Taitz for US Senate 2012, 29839 Santa Margarita ste 100, RSM, CA 92688.

• Advertisement / Sponsors

  
  29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy,
  Ste 100
  Rancho Sta Margarita, CA 92688
  orly.taitz @gmail. com
  (949) 766-7687
  
  
  --------------------------------------
  
  Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld
  --------------------------------------
  
  

  Bumper Sticker
  $9.99 thru PayPal

  --------------------------------------
  
  
  --------------------------------------

  Orly Taitz Photo Collections

  
  

• April 2024

  M	T	W	T	F	S	S
  1	2	3	4	5	6	7
  8	9	10	11	12	13	14
  15	16	17	18	19	20	21
  22	23	24	25	26	27	28
  29	30

• Pages

  • #409755 (no title)
  • …Defendant Obama defaulted in Grinols et al v Obama et al
  • …Grinols Subpoenas
  • ..Grinols Order, Summons, TRO, Complaint
  • .Affidavit of Mike Zullo
  • 1. Judd v Obama
  • 2. Farrar v Obama
  • 3. Taitz v Sebelius
  • 4. Taitz v Indiana, IN Judge Orders Trial
  • 5. Taitz v Astrue
  • 6. Mississippi Filed Complaint Update
  • 7. Taitz Walters v Sec of State Kansas
  • Videos
  • Video: Orly before NH Election Committee