Judge prefers making headlines to hearing our case

Stopped in 2008 at a Police State roadblock and thrown in jail, your editor appealed to the circuit court which jailed him again, neither of the two judges wishing to hear his challenges of their jurisdictions.

Okay, where were we last month? Yes, now I do remember all: Following seven days away from the toils of editing and publishing this paper on a taxpayer funded jailhouse vacation, I was again at large and aiming for blood according to the imaginative sister-in-law of bucko Silverhill Police Chief Kimberly Wasdin: one Carla Wasdin, no less macho herself. As the Baldwin County Correction Center’s shrink in its medical department, she had reported my offhand comment that “I’m still gunning” for K. Wasdin – the Brigand-in-Chief behind that Police State roadblock whom I will bring to justice – as threatening to kill her. And the jailhouse investigator, Nathan Lusk, had gone along with this line, the whole joke falling apart as Judge Harry Wilters was reading me my release terms, both of us laughing when he said, “I understand you’ve threatened to kill the Silverhill police chief.”

No, I do not wish to bodily harm a soul, though it’s clear to me that hunger, turmoil, race riots and a bloody revolution are now just months away if we wait much longer before breaking the chains put on our State in 1865. The time is now; we must recover the valid, original Alabama Constitution.

On February 26, 2009, I filed an appeal against the monstrous judgments seeking to intimidate our suit from going forward, and on March 16, 2009, added this motion:

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
STATE OF ALABAMA
Olaf Olsen Childress
Plaintiff
vs.
CIRCUIT COURT
COUNTY OF BALDWIN
STATE OF ALABAMA, et al.
Defendants

Emergency Memorandum Notice

Case number CC 2008 2146
Case number CC 2008 2148
Case number CC 2008 2149
Case number CC 2008 2150
Case number CC 2008 2151

I, Olaf Olsen Childress, plaintiff having firsthand knowledge of the facts contained herein and competent to testify regarding these matters, hereby asseverate that what follows is true and correct under penalty of perjury:

Having already suffered two separate trials and convictions on the same criminal charges, by the Silverhill Municipal Court and Baldwin County Circuit Court, both of Alabama, neither of which consented to hear my defense arguments regarding their lack of due process in unconstitutionally arresting and incarcerating me twice on the identical claims, I remain presently under attack by said courts; which are obviously working in tandem to avoid answering my charges against themselves. For they have proven either unwilling or incompetent to hear these arguments.

The purpose of this memorandum is to make clear these miscarriages of justice and today’s entrenched disregard for due process. As Judge Edith Jones of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit told the Federalist Society of Harvard Law School on February 28, 2003, the question of what is morally right becomes routinely sacrificed to what is politically expedient, a change having come about because legal philosophy has descended to nihilism.

The 131-page transcript of “Case 2148” before Honorable Harry Wilters, prepared as of that February 3, 2009, trial by Court Reporter Rheannon Miller, demonstrates in and of itself the possibly quite deliberate confusion endemic in this, a court system whose jurisdiction lacks accountability; it begins with page 1 erroneously listing only one of the above cases, four of which were actually tried simultaneously on that date. A putative fifth docket entitled “cc 2008 002149,” stating no charge or conviction, was invented out of whole cloth more than a month afterwards. Regarding the latter, I received a “cost bill” filed by “Operator KAM” of the Baldwin County Judicial Data Center dated 03/09/2009 that falsely showed $552.50 already paid by myself against a total due of $832, with a yellow-highlighted balance of $279.50, possibly suggesting I should call “KAM’ to find out what this is all about and whether I can avoid such additional losses by throwing myself on the court’s mercy and promising I will fight injustice no more forever.

Perhaps the above “cost bill” referred in some way to the $1,250 appeal filing fee paid by myself to the Town of Silverhill in addition to the $1,900 fines and court costs paid thereto, which the town clerk should have forwarded to the circuit court? Thus, if the appeal filing “cost bill” amounted to $832, somebody owed me that difference, not the other way around. The confusion created by these lower courts’ accounting practices clearly demonstrates subterfuge, incompetence or both.

Along with KAM’s cost bill also on the same date, March 13, 2009, I received by mail four separate “REMOVE THESE EDGES FIRST” communications each containing a “Notice of Payment Terms” as follows:

Rather than beg clemency by ending my search for due process, the essence of this case against “the first contemporary threat to the rule of law,” as stated by Judge Edith Jones in noting that it “comes from within the legal system itself,” I pay herewith all of the above demanded monies plus $100 “docketing fee” on top of the latest appeal filing fee already paid entailing more than $3,300 devoured by the process so far at Silverhill, because I entertain no plans for exiting this mortal existence carrying one red cent.

As stated above, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals can easily verify from the transcript alone that my complaint has merit. I charge malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance against Judge Ken Raines and the Town of Silverhill, Judge Harry Wilters and the City of Bay Minette, Police Chief Kimberly Wasdin of Silverhill along with her roadblock-implementing officers, and Bay Minette Investigator Nathan Lusk in addition to Corrections Center employee Carla Wasdin, inasmuch as the above named defendants all conspired to deprive me of my God-given rights to life, liberty and property in coordinated efforts to maintain and further empower local police and court systems tending toward tyranny.

I do not by this present appeal seek relief in the form of any monetary compensation charged against the taxpayers or refund of monies paid by myself, nor will I demand apologies. The aim of this memorandum and accompanying appeal is to obtain the truest interest of us all. For we, the people, must redeem our Constitution of the State of Alabama as legally ratified by ourselves in 1819, viz. Article I, § 9: “The people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and possessions, from unreasonable searches or seizures; and no warrant to search any place, or to seize any person or thing, shall issue without describing them as nearly as may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation.”

And yet we seek greater relief than mere cessation of unconstitutional roadblocks.

Due process is the revisional remedy sought by this appeal. We ask the courts to prove their jurisdiction by DISPROVING our contention that the 14th Amendment was never ratified and that the sovereign State of Alabama went into limbo under a foreign, occupational government in 1865. Relieving us of such continuing distresses as these roadblocks by declaring the court system itself and all so-called amendments to the Alabama Constitution since 1865 as de facto rather than de jure authority would prevent the bloodshed which is sure to soon follow; and I hasten to add that this is merely a prediction, no threat of any kind. What we seek is a true and just remedy that reinvests unto ourselves and this State the sovereignty recited in our de jure Alabama Constitution’s Article I, § 2: “All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit: and, therefore, they have at all times an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may think expedient.”

The elderly Judge Harry Wilters should retire from practice, as those many prompts by Prosecutor Michael Dasinger prove he was not following much of the testimony; and half a dozen Silverhill police officers need to pass an examination determining their grasp of the constitutions they have sworn to uphold, likewise the Corrections Officers Nathan Lusk and Carla Wasdin, along with Silverhill Prosecutor Dasinger and Judge Ken Raines. As for the Court Recorder Rheannon Miller, let it suffice that we note many errors in her transcript, obviously not all her fault alone, because the defendants have vested interests in keeping my challenge of the status quo from reaching a higher and more lawfully- instructed court. Such mere suggestions are not the remedy herein sought, nor can monetary compensation satisfy this appeal.

The transcript omits the court’s ordering me to “Turn off that recorder!” and fails to note additional instances where the judge yelled at me to “Sit down!” It behooves the State of Alabama to recognize technology long available that would more accurately record what is said in a courtroom, even the tone of each participant’s voice, so that a further action might proceed much better informed.

The said transcript on page 1 indicates but a single one of my cases, in introducing Honorable Harry Wilters, the Prosecutor Michael Dasinger and myself. On page 3 it then erroneously names Honorable Robert Wilters Jr. as the Judge. On page 25 it has “Judge Reid” where I had referred to Judge Wilters. Incidentally the intervening pages note, among prospective jurists, a building inspector, a federal government retiree, an EIA office manager, a paralegal, a Board of Education member, a defense contractor and a Baldwin County Corrections Center employee: hardly an impartial pool of my peers. On page 44 the transcript again has me referring to Judge Wilters as “Judge Reid.” I have never stood before Baldwin County Circuit Judge Reid, whereas Court Reporter Rheannon Miller has often done so, which circumstance clearly shows who is in error here. I will not recite numerous additional distortions and omissions in her report for lack of proof, as Judge Harry Wilters, not his colleagues Judge Reid or Judge Robert Wilters, ordered me at the very first to turn off my audio recorder. But let me stick to what she has typed up. That alone vindicates what I am saying here.

On page 46 the transcript has me asking Judge HARRY Wilters: “Why would I pay $1,250 additional to the $1,900 that Judge Reed -- Judge Raines relieved me of in Silverhill if I was not convinced that due process had not been found in Silverhill? Is that not my purpose for being here?” This change of spelling from Reid to Reed, plus other errors cited above, should give some indication that we are looking at a possibly unreliable report, one written up to suggest MYSELF as the stuttering incompetent which was not the case at all.

The recorded testimony by Police Chief Kimberly Wasdin on pages 66-69 contains so many lies and distortions I will not try correcting them in this limited space, but at least the court reporter noted it faithfully. She even has that part right on pages 98-99 where I attempted to inform the jury that my arrest warrant was falsely created one day AFTER the roadblock. But querying Ms. Wasdin got court-blocked, viz:

“Q. Okay. Why was this arrest warrant signed by the town clerk, which I have shown you, not signed by the magistrate? It’s signed by the town clerk. Why was it dated May the 30th when –

“THE COURT: That doesn’t make a darn bit of difference.

“MR. CHILDRESS: It doesn’t make any difference –

“THE COURT: No, sir. Now, sit down. If you’re going to keep doing this, sit down or I’m going to put you in that jail. Do you understand that?”

On page 101 Judge Wilters has ordered me to sit in the witness box if I wish to say anything further and, as I begin from there, Prosecutor Dasinger reminds him:

“MR. DASINGER: -- are you going to swear him in?

“THE COURT: Raise your right hand, please.”

So once again the prosecutor’s prompts carried the day for this inattentive Judge.

On page 115 appears an honest mistake in Ms. Rheannon’s quote from my closing:

“The owner or damaged party may file any complaint calling for an arrest warrant to issue, without which no crime. Yes. This does fly in the face of the various police state wars on drugs, poverty, terror, and blank failures. But it’s -- it’s blank of the neglect.”

Sorry she didn’t follow me on that last sentence, which was: “This does fly in the face of the various Police State wars on drugs, poverty, terror, and bank failures. But it’s -- it’s BLANK of the Land.” Thus did I avoid the word LAW, and yet another order to “Sit down!”

On pages 127-128 Judge Wilters names a fine of $500 for failure to renew license tag. The transcript records another prompt:

“MR. DASINGER: Your Honor, I think on that one the fine, by statute, is maybe $25.

“THE COURT: $25?

“MR. DASINGER: “yes sir. Let me –

“THE COURT: Not less than $25. I’d just as soon put it $25.

“MR. DASINGER: You’re correct.”

“THE COURT: All right. Failure to obey a police officer, $1,000.

“MR. DASINGER: Your Honor, in Municipal Court we only have jurisdiction of up to $500.

“THE COURT: All right. $500 -- $500 in all of them. Did I say $1,000? All right. As to resisting arrest, $500, six months in the Baldwin County Jail. I’m going to split that sentence and order you to serve seven days. The balance will be supervised probation for a period of two years. You may have him. I know I’ll make headlines in your paper, but I like your paper anyway.”

I had already been fined and relieved of $1,900 on those four charges at Silverhill. A balance of $100 was thus called for, which indicated DOUBLE JEOPARDY, of course. But that was not the end of it, as further judicial vindictiveness awaited me following that trial in front of Judge Harry Wilters on February 3, 2009, possibly as a result of my having subsequently filed a notice at Bay Minette Circuit Court on February 26, 2009, that I would bring these denied and unheard arguments before the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.

“Allegations such as those asserted by petitioner, (a pro se litigant), however inartfully pleaded, are sufficient to call for the opportunity to offer supporting evidence. Accordingly, although we intimate no view on the merits of petitioner’s allegations, we conclude that he is entitled to an opportunity to offer proof.”  – Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 522

I, Olaf Olsen Childress, having prepared the foregoing, declare under penalty of perjury and the de jure laws of Alabama, that everything stated herein is true and correct; signed this 16th day of March. 2009.

Olaf Olsen Childress
22151 Toler Road
Silverhill, Alabama 36576

PROOF OF SERVICE:

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was delivered by hand to Bay Minette Circuit Court and to the attorney for defendants this 16th day of March, 2009. – Olaf Olsen Childress

Forms, delays, more forms
Or, justice fileted is justice denied.

March 16, 2009 – Driving 30 miles back up to the Baldwin County Courthouse this morning after those three postponements and a fourth attempt where the jury “just following orders” put me in jail, I walked through the War on Terrorism gauntlet and, after the deputies gave back my keys and cellphone, entered the circuit clerk’s office ready to pay the fuddlers.

But they wouldn’t take my money. Well, not the whole wad of cash I had brought anyway – and even complained that I’d come without a checkbook.

“You don’t owe these bills,” said KAM, in reference to the four REMOVE THESE EDGES FIRST thingies. (Her first name was reluctantly given as Karen.)

“Then why did you send them to me?”

“They’re just for your information. You have already paid them, and only owe the balance of $279.50, shown on this form.”

“No, I did not pay those amounts. What is going on here?”

“If you pay the $279.50, that’s it.”

Which I did. Karen didn’t want to stamp my Emergency Memorandum Notice, so I dealt with Sue Todd, who for a $100 cash fee, accepted after much hesitation, filed all necessary formwork as required by the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals. I feel like a fool going forward as a criminal on an errand that’s in the interest of Karen, Sue, you and me equally. I corrected the four-page memo by writing alongside the $832, $832, $832, $933.50: I learned at the courthouse these were not payable though the bills said pay or be arrested.

Sue Todd advised me that I shall make no appearances. The appeal is to proceed by briefs only. Further instructions would follow.

Waiting some twenty minutes for that latest receipt, I sighed: “Utter confusion!” A nearby circuit clerk glancing my way raised an eyebrow.

In walked Michael A. Dassinger III, the Silverhill and County’s attorney whom I would serve with a copy of the memo an hour later at Robertsdale. He greeted me. Ten minutes later, all of his forms properly stamped, on his way out I passed him a copy of TFF.

“I’m not in here, am I?” he asked.

“Don’t know,” I said. “It’s a back issue.”

Two thoughts, one goal: I know y’all get tired of hearing this, but here it is again. First, the media is where we lost it, which includes both the forum on which ideas stand or fall and the coin for exchanging goods or services. Let’s recover them from the Jews. And, second, anytime an obstacle comes before us, see it as an opportunity. We need the Jewish Problem. Let not the sacrifices of all those wars, nor the real stimulus of an insane occupation regime, go now to waste. Our goal is freedom.

See the transcript of my trial on the web: www.gulftel.com/firstfreedom/t1.pdf.