Home > Uncategorized > My Emails to the “FEDs” about my “Citizen’s Arrest Warrant”

My Emails to the “FEDs” about my “Citizen’s Arrest Warrant”

Monday, August 27, 2007 Leave a comment Go to comments

District of Columbia Code (Washington, DC)

Division IV. Criminal Law and Procedure and Prisoners.
Title 23. Criminal Procedure.
Chapter 5. Warrants and Arrests.
Subchapter V. Arrest Without Warrant.

DC Code § 23-582. Arrests without warrant by other persons.

(a) A special policeman shall have the same powers as a law enforcement officer to arrest without warrant for offenses committed within premises to which his jurisdiction extends, and may arrest outside the premises on fresh pursuit for offenses committed on the premises.

(b) A private person may arrest another —

       (1) who he has probable cause to believe is committing in his presence —

              (A) a felony; or

              (B) an offense enumerated in section 23-581(a)(2); or

       (2) in aid of a law enforcement officer or special policeman, or other person authorized by law to make an arrest.

(c) Any person making an arrest pursuant to this section shall deliver the person arrested to a law enforcement officer without unreasonable delay.

Copy of Emails

Note: Note all email messages went to every email address.
All email addresses are listed as a group are listed only once for brevity of this post.

==============================

Date: Aug 13, 2007 8:52 PM

FROM: Don Hamrick <4donhamrick@gmail.com>

TO: US Dept of Justice, Washington, DC, I.G. Glenn Find,<inspector.general@usdoj.gov>
US Dept of Justice, Washington, DC, AskDOJ@usdoj.gov,
US Dept of Justice, Washington, DC, Daisy.D.Correa@usdoj.gov,
US Dept of Justice, Washington, DC, Scott.A.Myers@usdoj.gov,
US Dept of Justice, Washington, DC, dc.outreach@usdoj.gov,
US Marshals Service, Washington, DC, Director John Clark, <us.marshals@usdoj.gov>
US Marshals Service, Washington, DC, robert.robeson@usdoj.gov,
US Marshals Service, Little Rock, Dave Loyer, Little Rock <dave.loyer@usdoj.gov>
US Attorney’s Office, Little Rock, Duke, Jane <jane.duke@usdoj.gov>
US Attorney’s Office, Little Rock, Kim Squires <Kim.Squires@usdoj.gov>
US Attorney’s Office, Little Rock, Richard Pence <richard.pence@usdoj.gov>
FBI Field Office, Washington, DC, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov
FBI Field Office, Little Rock, little.rock@ic.fbi.gov,
FBI Field Office, St. Louis, stlouis@ic.fbi.gov,

 

Scheduling Citizen’s Arrest OOA Tuesday Aug. 21, 2007

NOTE: This did note happen because my arrival was unavoidably delayed a day.
On Wednesday I elected to visit the staff of U.S. Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas
at the U.S. Senate in Washington, DC.

CORRECTED COPY

Please notify the FBI, US Marshals Service, and the Capitol Police that I will require their assistance with my Citizen’s Arrest Warrant at the US Supreme Court and the US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DC CIRCUIT in Washington, DC on or about Tuesday, August 21, 2007.

Tuesday, August, 21, 2007 provides enough time for my Citizen’s Arrest bulletins to circulate through the FBI, the US Marshals Sevice, and the Justice Department so that no one will be taken by surprise. No one will be able to claim ignorance or to obstruct justice through ignorance at show time.

I will announce the purpose of my presence at the US Supreme Court when I arrive with the expectation that an FBI agent will already be there waiting to assist me or to advise me otherwise (i.e., on laws affecting the procedure and execution of Citizen’s Arrest that I may have overlooked).I will also notify the media of this event to insure fair and legal conduct by all involved.

=============

Date: Aug 14, 2007 12:06 AM

UPDATE: CITIZEN’S ARREST OOA AUG 21 @ NOON

FOR ALL MEDIA

Tuesday at “High-Noon” on August 21, 2007 is enough time for my Citizen’s Arrest bulletins to have circulated around the FBI, the US Marshals Service, the various US Attorney’s Offices, the US Department of Justice, and the media to get everyone ready for the event.

The media can look for me to approach the US Supreme Court at the historic front steps.

If the media (whether print, network, radio, or Internet) is there I will brief the media on the 5 year history of my Second Amendment case enduring corrupt judges and Assistant U.S. Attornies, pulling every dirty trick in the book to keep my case from going to trial, up to and including the Inspector General of the US Marshals Service at the US District Court/DC Circuit implicating himself in an act of obstructing justice at the 8th Circuit in St. Louis, Missuori.

However, in the likelihood that the media is a no show (proving the media’s cultural taboo about stories on a corrupt federal judicial system) I will proceed to the side entrance closest to the Court Clerk’s office. I will expect to see the FBI and/or the US Marshals Service waiting at that entrance to assist me and NOT to arrest me.

============

Date: Aug 15, 2007 1:34 AM

ALTERNATIVE TO CITIZEN’S ARREST OF US SUPREME COURT’S

COURT CLERK & CASE HANDLER MR. HIGGINS

RULE 40.2 of the “Rules of the US Supreme Court” state that “A seaman suing under 28 U.S.C. § 1916 may proceed without payment of fees or costs or furnishing security therefor, but is not entitled to proceed under Rule 33.2, except as authorized by the Court on separate motion under Rule 39.”The FBI Washington DC can inspect the Docket Report for No. 03-145 and my other case numbers, and review my Petitions for Writ of Certiorari and they will find that the subject matter of my appeals qualify underthe “safety” provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1916 in addition to the fact that I am a U.S. merchant sezman.There was no lawful reason for Mr. Higgins and the Court Clerk to deny my statutory right of filing fee exemmption, thereby extorting the Court’s filing fee under color of law. 18 U.S.C. § 872, 241, 242, and 245.The FBI can find the above very quickly and very easily as their “finding of facts” in support of my planned Citizen’s Arrest” of Mr. Higgins and the Court Clerk.The US Supreme Court can offer restitution in lieu of citizen’s arrest of Mr. Higgins and the Court Clerk by returning the accumulated filing fees of $600 (plus interest if I have such a right without further litigation).Chief Justice John Roberts can do an administrative review my rights under 28 U.S.C. § 1916 and finding that I do have rights as a seaman under 28 U.S.C. § 1916 can issue Court Orders to (1) the Court Clerk to return the $600 in filing fees; (2) to the DC Circuit to return the filing fees extorted from me in that court; (3) to the US District Court in Little Rock for the same thing in that court; (4) to the 8th Circuit to vacate its Order dismissing my appeal for lack of prosecution and remand my case for trial for cause of judicial wrongs, i.e., obstruction of justice; and (5) to PACER to return the balance of the money I paid because PACER billing charges are incidental expences related to the filing fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1916.

The FBI can, if they wanted to, have all this done and have the “refund check” ready in hand before I arrive at the steps of the US Supreme Court. If that were to occur the problem will have been resolved negsting the necessity for citizen’s arrest and I can then
prepare for trial.

WHAT SAY YOU ALL?

YEA! OR NAY!

============================

Date: Aug 19, 2007 12:58 AM

FINAL NOTICE: REQUEST FBI HELP WITH CITIZEN’S ARREST

REQUEST THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TO NOTIFY FBI DIRECTOR MEULLER TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO EFFECT CITIZEN’S ARREST.THIS IS A TEST OF EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW – THAT NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.THIS IS A FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTION BY AN UNREPRESENTED CIVIL PLAINTIFF ACTING IN THE CAPACITY OF A PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAKING A CITIZEN’S ARREST OF FEDERAL COURT CLERKS AND FEDERAL JUDGES (FOR EXTORTION) WITH THE REQUESTED ASSISTANCE OF THE FBI OR THE US MARSHALS SERVICE OR THE CAPITOL POLICE.

EVIDENCE OF EXTORTION: Hamrick, pro se v. Pres Bush, et al, 8th Circuit, No. 07-2400; And previous cases at the US Supreme Court, the DC Circuit, and the US District Court in Little Rock, Arkansas.

CONFIRMING

I hereby give confirming notice that in order to insure that citizen’s arrest will be done properly and legally I will expect assistance from either the FBI, the US Marshal Service, or the Capitol Police with my effort to place both Mr. Higgins (Case Handler) and the Court Clerk of the US Supreme Court and the Court Clerk of the DC Circuit under Citizen’s Arrest for extortion, 18 USC § 872 of filing fees from a US seaman plaintiff/appellsnt, 28 USC § 1916 as a predicate act of racketeering activity under the civil RICO Act. An examination of the Docket Reports will provide the necessary evidence of unlawful receipt by the fecersl courts of filing fees as coerced payments under color of law from me as a US seaman, paid in violation of 28 USC § 1916.

Because I am the unrepresented civil plaintiff/appellant with a civil RICO Act against the US GOVT I am acting in the capacacity of a PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL in both my own interests and in the public interests in defense of statutory, civil, and constitutional rights, including the Bill of Rights and especially the Second Amendment.

I will approach the US Supreme Court front the traditional front steps and proceed to the side entrance nearest the Court Clerks office where I will announce the purpose of my visit to the Capitol Police before I step through the metal detectors.(Signed under penalty of perjury!)

DON HAMRICK

====================

Date: Aug 22, 2007 9:39 PM

Citizen’s Arrest Meets US Supreme Court Police,

Capitol Police, USMS

Today, Wednesdsy, August 22, 2007, I went to Washington, DC for a showdown with the name federal law enforcement agencies over the evidence of felony extortion of filing fees. 28 USC § 1916.I went straight to the office of Arkansas Senator with my complaint/request for help with my “Citizens Arresr Warrant.” And just as I planned the office personnel called in the Feds (US Supreme Court Police, US Marshals Service, and the Capitol Police).Though the intent of the Senator’s staff may have been intended to arrest me their actions were to my benefit because as one of the Capitol Police noted it worked out to a situation of “one stop shopping.” I gave my speech once to all present persuading all that kidnapping, assault & battery, and all othersorts of imagined violent crimes were not part of my planned “Citizen’s Arrest.” I made it clear the proper procedures were that I would announce the Citizen’s Arrest with an FBI Agent in attendance to do the actual taking into physical custody. With that understanding being made clear the US Supreme Court Police, Krista Jaffe AGREED to investigate my claims of extortion of $600 in filing fees at the US Supreme Court and PROMISSED to notify me by email of their findings.FOR US SUPREME COURT POLICE: Please Cc: Direct Mueller, FBI, their Field Offices in DC, Little Rock, and St. Louis, the US Attorney’s Office for each location, and the US Marshals Service for each location, your findings of facts and determination of the Supreme Court’s duty to return the $600 to me and to my legal right to make citizen’s arrest of those involved in the extortion of filing fees 18 USC § 872 from me as a seaman.FOR FBI & US MARSHALS SERVICE: Please investigate the judicial handling of my cases from 2002 to the present because I have reason to believe (with direct and circumstantial evidence) of conspiracies to obstruct justice, judicial misconduct of the criminal type with every dirty trick by the feceral bench and bar to unjustly keep my case from going to trial. Giving the overall picture of events in my cases there arises the implication the a person or persons unknown to me other than Deputy US Marshal Anthony Campos and Senior Inspector Robert Robeson may have conspired with Court Clerks and/or judges themselves with intent to obstruct justice (preventing my case from going to trial) simply becauase I email the US Marshals Service my inquiry about citizen’s arrest on the basis of extorted filing fees and no FLE agency would investigate my complaint.

I reiterate that this is a test of equal justice under the law – that no one is above the law. However, events during the last 5 years have proven the opposite to be true. I want to see where Krista Jaffe, US SUPREME COURT POLICE, THREAT ASSESSMENT UNIT stands on this point of law. Where is the threat here? The “FEDS” may view me as a threat because I am standing up to defend not only my own statutory, civil, and constitutional rights, duties, and responsibilities under the Bill of Rights and under the “Common Defence” clause of the Preamble to the US Constitution but the same for all US citizens.

THE QUESTION REMAINS:

If the US Supreme Court Police do admit in their findings of fact that acts of felony extortion of filings was committed, in fact and law, will they turn the matter over to the FBI for further investigation and prosecution as would be done if the perp was a civilian criminal suspect?

It is truly a sad state of affair to have to attempt citizen’s arrest of the Court Clerk of the US Supreme Court and the case handler just to get the FEDS attention so they can start taking my complaints seriously.

SIGNED: DON HAMRICK

==========================

Date: Aug 23, 2007 11:13 AM

Threat Assessment versus Citizen’s Arrest

FROM EXTORTION VICTIM DON HAMRICK

TO KRISTA JAFFE, US SUPREME COURT POLICE, THREAT ASSESSMENT UNIT

CC: EVERYONE ELSE!

FEDERAL QUESTIONS: When you determine that felony extortion of US Supreme Court filing fees were, in fact and law, committed in violation of Rule 40.2 of the Rules of the US Supreme Court and 18 USC § 872 and 28 USC § 1916 will you:(1) Insistently recommend to Chief Justice John Roberts to issue federal guidelines and rules of courts (Civil Procedure, Appellate Procedure, and US Supreme Court) for civil plaintiffs (whether represented or unrepresented) on citizen’s arrest whether or not the civil plaintiff is acting in the capacity of a Private Attorney General?

(2) Now make a Threat Assessment that the US Government unlawfully made (i.e., threats of arresr and prosecution) to me just because I pursued citizen’s arrest as a means of last resort?

(3) Insistently recommend to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and to his successor to issue federal guidelines on (A) the right of citizen’s arrest as applied to felonies committed by judicial and administrative personnel of federal courts specificly and by the US Government generally; and (B) the right of an unrepresented civil plaintiff with a civil RICO Act case against the US Government to act in the capacity of a Private Attorney General?

(4) Do a “Threat Assessment” on the non-judicial opposition I incurred from the US Marshals Service, the US Coast Guard and the US Department of Transportion or will you recommend this be done by the FBI?

(5) Recommend to Director Mueller, FBI, to investigate the extortion in all my cases and to prosecute those found responsible as required by the mandate of equal justice under the law – that no one is above the law or will you issue a finding of facts that would verify and authenticate the legal authority to act on and perform the citizen’s arrest with the assistance of the FBI performing the physical taking into custody?

(6) Find that there exists the act of obstruction of justice element to the extortion of said filing fees and as such requires the FBI to investigate?

(7) Transmit your findings of facts and other derivative memorandi to Chief Justice John Roberts and to the chief judges of the contested courts?

(8) Issue an All Points Bulletin (APB) declaring my proven innocence to any and all alleged claims that my activities in regard to citizen’s arrest; that my activities to date have been within the law and, under my declaration of intent, will continue to be within the law; and that it is you recommendation to all federsl law enforcement agencies, I.e., the FBI, to assist me as need.

The above is sufficient to guide you in your investigation.

Signed: Don Hamrick

=======================

Date: Aug 23, 2007 1:37 PM

Citizen’s Arrest – RICO AcT & 2nd Amendment

FROM EXTORTION VICTIM DON HAMRICK

TO KRISTA JAFFE, US SUPREME COURT POLICE, THREAT ASSESSMENT UNIT

CC: EVERYONE ELSE!

SUBJECT:

THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL VICTIM/CIVIL PLAINTIFF UNDER THE CIVIL RICO ACT AS SPPLIED AGAINST THE US GOVERNMENT

RICO ACT ALLEGATION:

US GOVERNMENT & U.N. ENGAGED IN RACKETEERING ACTIVITIES CONSISTING, IN PART, AN UNLAWFUL AND AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION SCHEME OVER THE SECOND AMENDMENT.

SITUATION:A certain percentage of civilian merchant seamen reporting aboard US GOVT vessels must have small training (Military Sealift Command requirement) I’m the 9mm Baretta, 12ga shottgun, and the M-14 rifle.

THE PROBLEMS:

(1) There is no corresponding “right to carry” concealed or openly derived from that federal training in regard to intrastate an interstate travel in comparison to State level requirements for State permits & licences.

(2) The US Department of Homeland Security has general superintendence over the merchant marine it its personnel, (46 USC § 2103)

CAUSE OF ACTION

1. Coast Guard denied my application for Merchant Mariner’s Document endorsement, “Nnational Open Carry Handgun”

2. Coast Guard wrongfully took me of a US GOVT Pre-Position vessel anchored off the coast of Lithuiania where I was stranded for 12 days while the ship conducted a 10-day exercise with the US Navy just because I emailed a Second Amendment advocacy article to the Coast Guard.

3. I construe the activities of the US Government these past 5 years in preventing my case from going to trial as Racketeering Activities.

DEMAND:

I believe I have the right to demand an FBI OPERATION GREYLORD type of investigation into judicial and executive handling of my caes these past 5 years.Signed:

Don Hamrick

=========================

Date: Aug 23, 2007 11:00 PM

The Philosophy of and Legal Standing for Citizen’s Arrest as

Part of Checks & Balance under 10th Amendment

FROM EXTORTION VICTIM DON HAMRICK

TO KRISTA JAFFE, US SUPREME COURT POLICE, THREAT ASSESSMENT UNIT

CC: EVERYONE ELSE!

PHILOSOPHICAL & LEGAL QUESTIONS ON CITIZEN’S ARREST AS APPLIED TO THE THREE BRANCHES OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR FELONY CRIMES AND ITS USE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW AS A LAWFUL FUNCTION OF THE CHECKS AND BALANCE SYSTEM OF JUSTICE:

1. An unrepresented civil plaintiff is not treated fairly or equally as is a civil plaintiff represented by an attorney as evidenced by the US Supreme Court treatment of Silveira, No. 03-51, and my case, Hamrick, No. 03-145, both are Second Amendment cases. The US Supreme Court denied both cases.2. Recommending to an unrepresented civil plaintiff to get an attorney for representation is confirmation of judicial bias against unrepresented civil plaintiifs.

3. I have reasons to believe that the US Marshals Service conspired with court clerks to prevent my cases these past 5 years from proceeding to trial because I made inquiries about citizen’s arrest of federal judges and their court clerks for extortion of filing fees from a seaman; and the court clerks conveying this unlawful bias to the presiding judges. This allegation is verifiable as circumstantial evidence through an examination of the Docket Reports and actual reading of my pleadings, motions, judicial notices against the Orders of those judges denying nearly everything I file which is, in and of itself evidence of judicial bias.

4. The actions of the US Marshals Service in continuosly treating me as a criminal suspect even though I have repeatedly presented evidence that I am acting and will always act within the law and legal procedures through every available remedy through the three branches of the US Government, including the performance of citizen’s arrest of federal judges, court clerks, and case handlers, are construed as criminal acts of obstruction of justice, especially when I am acting in the capacity of a Private Attorney General because I employed the civil part of the RICO Act against the US Government.

5. “Threat Assessment” is a two-way street. “We, The People” have the Ninth Amendment right and the Tenth Amendment power reserved to the People to make “Threat Assessments” of US Government actions toward our statutory, civil, and constitutional rights, freedoms, liberties, duties, and responsibilities, be they private, social, public, or political. Taking legal actions against the US Government for wrongful agency action compounded by criminal conduct designed to subvert the proper administration of justice by treating an unrepresented civil plaintiff as a criminal suspect destroys not only the concept of equal justice under the law but our constitutional guarantee of a Republican form of government imposing a form of government that terrorizes the People. This begs the question of who presents the greater and more consist threat to the People: the terrorists or the US Government?

6. Justice, in my case, demands an FBI investigation into the conduct of federal judges, court clerks, case handlers, the US Marshals Service, throughout the 5-years of federal litigation because it is common knowledge that corruption NOT the Rule of Law controls the federal courts, especially when political nobodies such as I dare bring a Second Amendment case as an unrepresented civil plaintiff.

7. THREAT ASSESSMENT:

Krista Jaffe, US Supreme Court, Threat Assessment Unit, is that she has the power to verify and validate my Citizen’s Arrest Warrant of federal judges, court clerks, and case handlers for extortion and racketeering activities over the Second Amendment. The threat from Krista Jaffe rests in what her determination will be of my Citizen’s Arrest Warrant: (A) Will she verify and validate my Citizen’s Arrest Warrant? Will she stipulate to my right, power, and duty to make the Citizen’s Arrest with the mutually agreed to condition that an FBI agent will be present to do the physical taking into custody of the arrestees? Will she impose the condition that I agree to drop the Citizen’s Arrest Warrant in order for Chief Justice John Roberts to agree to return the $600 in filing fees as I initially proposed (but now decline for purposes of setting a precedent for seamen’s rights under 28 USC § 1916). Will she deliver the Citizen’s Arrest Warrant to Director Mueller, FBI with her verification and validation so they can investigate the allegations and make the arrests without my involvement with the Citizen’s Arrest Warrant? Or, will she deny verification and validation of the clear cut evidence of extortion and present me with another act of obstruction of justice for me to overcome? The point here is that I want to set a legal precedent for seamen’s rights under 28 USC § 1916 so that the federal courts will not again obstruct justice for the next seaman with a case against the US Government that follows me.

These are very serious questions that an attorney would present. But because I am presenting them as an unrepresented civil plaintiff and as a political nobody my Threat Assessment of Krista Jaffe is that she may very likely deny verification an validation of my Citizen’s Arrest Warrant because it would mean elevating my case to the same level as other high profile cases. Her career with the US Supreme Court Police would be ruined because she did not aid and abet in felony extortion but turned the tables of justice in defense of the People (me, as a seaman, a class of people in terms of civil rights law).

In hopes that trusting the government may someday not be a fallacy.

Signed: Don Hamrick

============================

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: