U.S. v. Kalash - Drug Law Constitutionality and Other Unconventional Defenses

[BeenThere]

No gun related or violent charges.

Nothing.

First offense, no priors, nothing.
If I have a drug problem I'm eligible?
I'll have to create one.

-Kalash

Yes, if you take the plea bargain that would be a good idea if you want the extra time off.

After you plea, they will conduct a pre-sentence investigation (PSI). A probation officer will interview you as part of this. Don't over do it, but that would be a good time to explain your drug problem. You should easily be able to explain usage of ecstasy as it will relate directly to your case.

After you are sentenced, you will probably be able to self-surrender since you are out on bond. Once you turn yourself in to the BOP facility they will have a DAP counselor interview you again. It will be easier to explain your ecstasy usage if it is in your PSI which they will read through. It shouldn't be hard to get into the program. The only part that is questionable is how soon you can get in. Hopefully they have room to fit you in to where you get the most out of the 12 months off that is available.

With your history, and the amount of time you are looking at, you will probably get sent to an FPC Federal Prison Camp (minimum security).

I know this is down the road a little bit and you won't have to worry about it for a while but I will mention a few things to help you prepare for some BOP prison time.

Once you are designated to a bop prison facility, call them and find out exactly what they allow you to bring with you, it won't be much, but trust me, everything matters. See if you can bring your own tennis shoes. The BOP issues Black boots that are far from comfortable. Save up some money for commissary. Once a week you get to go to the store and have the chance to buy whatever they have available. They have a ton of stuff. If they don't let you bring your own sneakers, make sure and set aside about 60 bucks for some. They are absolutely essential as you will see. Most facilities also sell FM headphones, set aside another 80 bucks for the radio and headphones. These can come in handy at night when you are trying to sleep and the loudmouths are well, loud.

You will also probably have to buy all your toilet articles like toothbrush, toothpaste, razors, shaving cream, deodorant, lotion, fingernail clippers, soap, hair stuff, you name it, they have it to purchase. your little welcome packet will be severely lacking in the above. The BOP issued towels are also small and thin so plan on getting at least a couple good towels from commissary. You can also get sweatpants, shirts, shorts and boxers so like I said bring enough money.

They also sell quite a bit of food. I learned about 100 different things to do with ramen noodles! Many people who can afford it will usually skip a BOP served meal in preference of something they bought. The prices are a little more than what they sell for in the store, but still affordable.

Try not to have to borrow shit from anybody. Take as much money as you can reasonably afford to put on your account.

Books and magazines! Reading helps make the time go by faster so try to have someone that can send you paperback books and magazines. You may consider a couple magazine subscriptions. You can get hardcover books but the must come direct like from amazon. It will be a great time to catch up on whatever you may be interested in. PM me and I will give you my phone number and I will get you a magazine subscription and send you a few books you want when you are in. I try to take care of my friends that are locked up since I know what it was like. You can also write me, and I WILL write back. If you have any special requests once you are in, let me know, I am the google master

Quite a few of the facilities have GED programs and even associate degree programs sponsored by local collages - you may want to look into that. The college classes get you out of working a shitty job where you will earn between 12 to 40 cents per hour (unless they have a unicore program). New guys usually get Kitchen detail,grounds crew, or an orderly position unless you have a specific talent that they are in need of - this varies by facility. You will still have to work if you have college classes, but usually you will have less hours.

Money for phone calls! Don't forget to take a list of all your phone numbers and even make another list that you can have somebody mail you, should you not be able to take your list inside.

If you have any dental problems, get them addressed before you turn yourself in. Bad teeth usually get pulled in the BOP.

I'm sure I forgot some things but that is a start. If I think of more, I will post again.

Good luck with court!

BeenThere <--- that is why I chose that user name.

 

[Kalash]

BeenThere - thanks.

Def. gonna get you a number and stuff so we can talk.
:D

I'm not quite at the point I'm willing to give up yet though.

So I'm putting off preparations till that time.
Focus on the fight, then tend to the wounds.
If I stop to lick myself now (I seem to pull these analogies from nowhere. Sorry. >_<) I'll just get killed in the next wave of attacks.

I already have an AA - think that'll preclude the college courses?

As for the books...
Heh.
You don't know what you're getting yourself into with that offer
I read more than I should =P

I'm working on setting up a renewing fund for cash...


I did have a question though - you can call toll free numbers from inside, right?
Like... calling card numbers?

If you can, I'm set on those.
If not - then I'm going to have phone issues.
Not that I expect to be using them that often... (though... this could change...)

Again - facility specific probably - will there be computer access?
If no, what about a typewriter?

I've always dreamed about growing up and becoming a writer.
Real life gets in the way out here.

I'm kinda looking forward to the time off (though... not entirely...) to focus and write.
But my handwriting sucks, and I can type a lot faster than I can write.
Just wondering if there's anything like this that would be available.


While we're on this subject - Mods, do you want to split this?
I know you merged the other threads - that's fine - but this is turning into a general, "While you're in you should..." thread.
While I don't mind - a lot of people won't go through the 3 pages of drama to get here

I think that's it for general stuff I've been wondering.
I'll keep thinking about things and see if I can come up with some better questions.
Thanks for the advice!

 

[BeenThere]

BeenThere - thanks.

Def. gonna get you a number and stuff so we can talk.
:D

I'm not quite at the point I'm willing to give up yet though.

Thats cool man, I wish you the best in fighting it

I already have an AA - think that'll preclude the college courses?

Yes, I think so, most of what I have seen ends at the Associates Level. You might consider getting a second degree for more marketability once you get out.

As for the books...
Heh.
You don't know what you're getting yourself into with that offer
I read more than I should =P

I'm not sure many people read more than they should I can probably get ya about 1 a week at least. The BOP prison were you are sent -*if* you get sentenced, will have a library. They stock some decent books but are rather limited when it comes to non-fiction. They do have book transfer programs so you can get books from any of the participating institutions - consider that and you have a huge selection. You just have to order ahead of time and wait for it to get transferred. This can work out if you stay on top of things.

I'm working on setting up a renewing fund for cash...

You will still have to be able to have the money sent to your BOP account as you won't have much access directly to it when you are on the inside.

I did have a question though - you can call toll free numbers from inside, right?
Like... calling card numbers?

If you can, I'm set on those.
If not - then I'm going to have phone issues.
Not that I expect to be using them that often... (though... this could change...)

You can call any number you wish but, you much first get it on your approved list first. Whoever picks up the phone will be played a message stating that the call is from a correctional facility and then be prompted to accept the call. Make sure friends and family have phone numbers that don't change often. It can take anywhere from a day to a week to get a phone number added to your approved list. You can only call numbers on your approved list - there isn't much involved in getting a phone number approved. You submit it to your counselor who then adds it to the list.

Again - facility specific probably - will there be computer access?
If no, what about a typewriter?

I've always dreamed about growing up and becoming a writer.
Real life gets in the way out here.

I'm kinda looking forward to the time off (though... not entirely...) to focus and write.
But my handwriting sucks, and I can type a lot faster than I can write.
Just wondering if there's anything like this that would be available.

No computer access although some facilities have non-internet connected computers for you to use for some jobs. Yes, most facilities have typewriters, You have to purchase your own ribbons and correction sheets from commissary.

If you are good at typing, other inmates may request to pay you to type something - this is paid with commissary items and stamps. You will that many people do certain chores for other inmates to make money on the side. This ranges from doing there laundry, cleaning/waxing rooms, and operating a store (on the downlow). How this works is they usually do a 2 for 3 trade off and give you a list of things to get and trade back to them. You don't usually want to get things from them due to the expense.

While we're on this subject - Mods, do you want to split this?
I know you merged the other threads - that's fine - but this is turning into a general, "While you're in you should..." thread.
While I don't mind - a lot of people won't go through the 3 pages of drama to get here

Yes, this is probably a good idea as i and other are sure to think of more involved with being locked up. Locked up is a funny term to use if you are sent to a Federal Prison Camp (FPC) most don't have much in the way of confinement. The prison I went to didn't even have a security fence around it. You actually crossed public street when going to the GYM or chow hall. Most of the people at those facilities are looking at considerably less time than the higher security prisons. They aren't willing to risk getting 5 years added to their sentence for escape.

I think that's it for general stuff I've been wondering.
I'll keep thinking about things and see if I can come up with some better questions.
Thanks for the advice!

One other thing is, if you are sent to a minimum security facility you will probably be in dormitory type quarters. People are allowed to use study rooms and the other TV and entertainment rooms at all hours. They do a few counts of inmates overnight, so you have to return to your room to be counted when this happens. It is much better than being locked up in a cell though.

Most of the correctional officers treat inmates with little respect. This comes from either the person being an outright asshole to a guard who has numerous inmates take advantage of them when they were helpful. I spoke with the guards as little as possible since they were usually rude and condescending.

The terminology inmates have for guards is usually either "the police" or "HACK" (Horses Ass Carrying Keys). Don't call a guard a HACK - at least not when they can hear it.

You are welcome for the advice!

 

[glowbug]

Glow - if I'm representing myself, can't I bring up more things in court than I could if I had an attorney?

I mean... if I start to raise these questions and am stopped, can't I just say, "Your honor, I'm sorry... I thought the purpose of this court was to be impartial and allow me to present my defense. Do I not have this right?"

"So I can present my defense but you refuse to let me challenge my accuser?"

"Your honor - you are telling me that this court does not recognize my constitutionally protected rights?"


Play dumb... ask questions.
And if they start contradicting themselves, call them on it, ensure it's on the record, put the court on notice, and state your intention to appeal.

Isn't that how to go about this?

I'm having trouble just giving in when the law/constitution/supreme court rulings back my case.

Well, I doubt the judge will be particularly inclined to give your arguments any shrift when they're losers in the first place, and even moreso given that you've dismissed your attorney.

They don't view that very charitably when you're being a smartass. Remember, the judge went to law school and probably has years of experience behind the bench trying cases such as yours. He's not going to have much patience with a layman who's trying to "upstage" his knowledge of the law.

The judge may be inclined to listen to your constitutional arguments for a minute or two if you're representing yourself, but then he'll dismiss them. And if you try to bring them up again he'll cut you off, end of story.

The law is the law whether you're represented or not, do you understand? Federal courts value efficiency. They're for the disposition of cases, not a soapbox for you to pontificate on a layman's understanding of the nuances of constitutional law.

And if you continue with obstructionist tactics, you'll wear the judge's patience further and do yourself an even greater disservice. You won't be the first person they've dealt with who has tried that.

You've got to get through your head that the courtroom ain't YOUR grandstand. Yes, you have certain rights, but at the end of the day you're still in the judge's house and subject to his rulings.

And those arguments ARE losers. I can't impress that enough on you.

 

[glowbug]

I mean... if I start to raise these questions and am stopped, can't I just say, "Your honor, I'm sorry... I thought the purpose of this court was to be impartial and allow me to present my defense. Do I not have this right?"

"So I can present my defense but you refuse to let me challenge my accuser?"

"Your honor - you are telling me that this court does not recognize my constitutionally protected rights?"

I can guarantee you you're fucking yourself royally if you make these statements.

If you're gonna call it a kangaroo court, be smart enough to wait until after the outcome has been handed down.

 

[Kalash]

It may be the judge's house - and he may have his own rules for his house...

But there are rules for that house that he has to obied by.
He has the privilege of living in that house - a house of the people, owned by the public, and is duty bound to obey the Constitution.

If he dismisses my Constitutionally protected rights as "invalid frivolous arguments" he is violating his oath of office, turning on the American people, and committing treason.

I don't have to know law better than him - I just have to assert my protected rights.
The law will sort itself out.

Losing arguments or not, I have to defend my constitutionally protected rights.

I know I'm just posting this again, but it's still relevant...

"The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just." - Abraham Lincoln

It's something they teach you in the military - you never surrender.
You fight to your last bullet, then rush forward and pummel your attacker with your fists.

Surrender is never an option - despite the chances of success.
If your cause is just you can never back from your principals.

Sure - the chance of success is small, but the chance exists.
Public opinion is swaying.

Now is the time to strike.
It's hard to concede defeat in this war before going into battle.

 

[glowbug]

It may be the judge's house - and he may have his own rules for his house...

But there are rules for that house that he has to obied by.
He has the privilege of living in that house - a house of the people, owned by the public, and is duty bound to obey the Constitution.

If he dismisses my Constitutionally protected rights as "invalid frivolous arguments" he is violating his oath of office, turning on the American people, and committing treason.

Sez you, a convicted felon by that time. And guess how much weight that typically carries. None in all but a handful of cases, usually where there's been an unlawful search. Prisons are full of folks whose rights were violated, if you ask them.

I don't have to know law better than him - I just have to assert my protected rights.

Again, prisons are full of folks who asserted their protected rights. And they're still where they are. Asserting your rights isn't some touchstone that's magically going to get you out of the charges.

The law will sort itself out.

The law is already sorted out on those issues.

Losing arguments or not, I have to defend my constitutionally protected rights.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard that bravado before the curtains went up, and then when it was showtime the folks turned into stammering blobs of jello. Or even worse, hung themselves out to dry with their big mouths.

You'll know what I'm talking about when it's zero hour, and all of a sudden your nuts jump up in your throat when it's finally game time and the immediacy of the moment hits you and you realize just how in over your head you are.

What are you going to do after the judge shoots down all those arguments (which he will, trust me)? Do you know how to voir dire a jury to exclude any biased jurors? Have you prepared the evidence you intend to offer in your defense, if any? Do you know all of the elements of each offense which the prosecutor must prove, and what evidence is competent to prove them? Do you know the federal rules of evidence, so that you may object when inadmissible testimony is offered? Have you prepared your cross-examination of the government's witnesses? Do you even know the methods of impeachment?

If you actually get to that point, I hope a plea offer is still on the table, because the judge isn't going to be pleased with the circus he has to preside over while you muddle through your trial.

I'm not saying this to dog you. I'm simply telling you that what you're thinking about doing is the height of foolishness, and I'm trying to persuade you not to do it. It's sheer idiocy to go in without counsel.

But you'll see what I'm talking about when the poop finally hits the fan.

In any case, good luck. You're surely going to need it.

 

[Banquo]

Something to keep in mind is that issues regarding subject matter jurisdiction, including many of the points you've brought up in this thread, can be raised at ANY point during the appeals process. They need not be "preserved" in the trial court. Otherwise, you must be sure to have your attorney/yourself bring up these points during the trial and pre-trial motions, if you wish to appeal them later.

I will also point out, again, that I generally agree with Glowbug. Many of your grand arguments about constitutional interpretation are beyond long shots -- they stand almost no chance of succeeding.

Finally, when evaluating a plea deal, be as objective as possible. I know you're pissed about how your attorney has handled things, but if the feds offer you an otherwise acceptable deal, and it involves waiving your right to aruge ineffective assistance of counsel, then you should not discount it. Ineffective assistance of counsel motions, while standing a far better chance than your jurisdictional arguments, still (in some estimations) have a 95%+ fail rate.

Good luck

 

[Kalash]

It's good to know I'm crazy.

I'll find out this week what's going to happen - the prosecutor isn't pulling the plea deal.

He's pushing back the trial date so I can get new council - and he's expecting me to plea at that time.

I still haven't ruled this out.
>_<

And you guys keep making it seem like a better and better option.

Does reality seem like it sort of... suspended itself - to anyone else?
Like... it's sort of...
Only half real now?

It's probably just the come down from the adrenaline rush I had all week.
I feel totally... off... though.

 

[SPUNK]

seriously, you should try and get a Public Defender

 

[Kalash]

seriously, you should try and get a Public Defender

I have a panel attorney...

I can't get a public defender.
I have 4 co-defendants.

One of them has a public defender.
I can't get one because it creates a conflict of interest.


So the court appointed me a private attorney (that according to... well... everyone in the courthouse that I've talked to >_< is a fairly good one.).

This is a panel attorney.

And he has refused to file motions on my behalf questioning the law, its origin, etc.

However the law is being submitted as evidence.
If it didn't exist I couldn't have broken it...

So I have the right to introduce counter-evidence and/or challenge the evidence against me.

This, more or less...
Is my counter evidence.



The charges against me are for owning private property with the intent to distribute it.
Distribution is part of property rights - however there is an additional clause preventing any state from making any law, statute, etc... that prohibits the obligation of contract. (Article 1, section 10 line 2 I think... somewhere around there - in the constitution)
This does not apply federally - only to the states.

So the STATES cannot create a law or statute that prohibits the obligation of contract.
If someone contracts to sell their private property to another party, the states cannot interfere with this nor pass a law preventing this transaction.

Good enough for me.
The states cannot pass drug laws.


"Drugs are bad" is an arbitrary opinion.
It is not a binding resolution. It is not a fact.

Even if 99% of the population believe this opinion it cannot make drug use/ownership ILLEGAL.
If we had a democracy they could do that with 51% of the population.

Since we DO NOT, we have a republic, no number of people can vote to deprive any other number of people of their UNALIENABLE RIGHTS.



Either we have a constitutional republic - and the drug laws are unconstitutional...

Or we have a democracy - we have a supreme state and we are all subjects of the state. None of us are free.

In scenario 1 - I committed no crime.
In scenario 2 - NONE OF THE JURY MEMBERS are free either - we are all slaves of the state. Will the court admit to this?
If the court DOES admit to this - we are NOT born free, and the constitution which gives the government all its authority is no longer valid - the court invalidates the document granting it its authority...
So from where does the authority of the court derive?

If the court is not a constitutional court it has no authority over me and I am not obligated to obey any decision of the court.

If we are all born as slaves, our entire government is illegitimate - no laws are enforcible.
The whole thing gets scrapped and we start over - as the declaration of independence states that we need to do.


It would be different if I were desperate.
It would be different if my life were on the line.

But the foudning fathers DID put their lives on the line.
They committed TREASON against the British Crown. Their lives were forfeit if they failed in their revolution.

Their lives were forfeit if they fought and fell.

Give me liberty or give me death.

Well... we don't HAVE liberty.
And death isn't an option in this matter.

Better to die than live as a slave.

If I'm imprisoned NOW and believe I'm free - I'm insane.
If I'm imprisoned NOW, placing me in a cage and placing further restraints upon my privileges is the RIGHT of my master.
If I have a master - and it appears that I do - then I have no reason to live.

If I cannot free myself of my master's whip (i.e. cop's gunfire, threat of violence, abuse of authority) and am bound to him no matter what actions I decide to take, what difference does it make if I am released from the cage (prison) in 3 years or 9?
I will be no more free after the 3 years even out of the cage....

I will be no more imprisoned in... prison than I am outside.

If I face slavery either way, and my options are to attempt to free myself and my countrymen from the unlawful rule of our Unconstitutional evil master(s), or to accept that I am a slave and volunteer to suffer for disobeying the will of my master (laws of congress - will of congress - opinions of congress; in the drug cases, ARBITRARY (not based on reason or fact) opinions of congress)...

Why would I not choose the only path there is to FREEDOM?

Why choose the illusion of freedom (plea, get out of "prison" sooner) and waive all of what I believed to be my unalienable rights...
Over the option to attempt to gain freedom - and possibly be punished slightly harder for violating the ALMIGHTY WILL of my master?

In reality, what am I going to lose by doing this?
A few years of FALSE freedom?

Isn't the risk of a few years of FALSE freedom worth taking a shot at liberty?

 

[bingalpaws]

The charges against me are for owning private property with the intent to distribute it.
Distribution is part of property rights - however there is an additional clause preventing any state from making any law, statute, etc... that prohibits the obligation of contract. (Article 1, section 10 line 2 I think... somewhere around there - in the constitution)
This does not apply federally - only to the states.

So the STATES cannot create a law or statute that prohibits the obligation of contract.
If someone contracts to sell their private property to another party, the states cannot interfere with this nor pass a law preventing this transaction.

Good enough for me.
The states cannot pass drug laws.


"Drugs are bad" is an arbitrary opinion.
It is not a binding resolution. It is not a fact.

Even if 99% of the population believe this opinion it cannot make drug use/ownership ILLEGAL.
If we had a democracy they could do that with 51% of the population.

You know I like the ideas you're presenting, and of course wish you the best with this, but:
- the contracts you mention are technically not contracts as 1 basic requirement of a contract is that it cannot violate any laws. This is pretty standard fare on all contracts (if I rent an apartment to you, and you're not paying me, so I move to evict. If our original rental agreement has anything illegal, even the smallest technicality, you could have it deemed void because a contract cannot contain anything illegal - which drugs, despite what we think they should be, are.)
- you winning this way would have to set precedence for any mdma only case to be a win (isn't how that kind of thing works?). So if you won, you'd be essentially changing drug law. Again, if you make it, huge kudos from the whole board here lol!

I think getting these things recognized woudl be next to impossible for anyone, let alone someone currently facing said charges, but good luck and KEEP US POSTED !!!

 

[Kalash]

You know I like the ideas you're presenting, and of course wish you the best with this, but:
- the contracts you mention are technically not contracts as 1 basic requirement of a contract is that it cannot violate any laws. This is pretty standard fare on all contracts (if I rent an apartment to you, and you're not paying me, so I move to evict. If our original rental agreement has anything illegal, even the smallest technicality, you could have it deemed void because a contract cannot contain anything illegal - which drugs, despite what we think they should be, are.)
- you winning this way would have to set precedence for any mdma only case to be a win (isn't how that kind of thing works?). So if you won, you'd be essentially changing drug law. Again, if you make it, huge kudos from the whole board here lol!

I think getting these things recognized woudl be next to impossible for anyone, let alone someone currently facing said charges, but good luck and KEEP US POSTED !!!

The laws violate the laws =P

The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land.

If the laws violate the constitution, they are invalid anyway.
Sure, it would be precedent, but things have to start somewhere, don't they?

The only real question I have to answer is, "Are my rights superior to the privileges of government?"

If that answer is, "YES" then I have no choice but to proceed despite the great chance that I will fail in my quest.


"The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just." - Abraham Lincoln


If that answer is, "No." - then we are all slaves of the government/state.
And in a "FREE" society, that is irrational and unacceptable.

And again, it seems to me that I must fight - however in this case to raise awareness and "alter or abolish" the government that has become destructive of our rights, rather than protectant of them.


Realistically, I should plea.
I shouldn't fight the "great oppressor."

However if none of the slaves ever stands up to the master, they will never be free.

So...
What to do...?

Listen to Lincoln?
Isn't he considered one of our great presidents?


"One man with courage is a majority." - Thomas Jefferson.


Do I listen to these "great" men and stand up for liberty and my rights?
Or do I concede that I am no more than a slave, give up my liberty for security of knowing what my future will hold, and progress through life beaten and enslaved?

 

[bingalpaws]

Kalash, seriously, more power to you man!!! It is genuinely cool and shows a lot about your character fighting a battle that you know is almost unwinnable. And fuck, if you did win this you'd be putting us on the path towards what's really right, so I'm definitely rooting for you!!

 

[Kalash]

Faxing this to my attorney right now.

I'll wait on a response before faxing it to the prosecutor.



(Prosecuting Attorney),

Once again I find myself forced to refuse to sign the plea agreement you have placed before me.
On page 2 line 27 of this agreement you have me pleaing to count 8 – with which I am not charged, and I am not guilty of.
This entire agreement seems to be a subversive attempt to obtain a plea of guilt to the only perceived “violent crime” in this case.

However this is not my only complaint with this agreement.

Should all the counts be correct, should I not wish to challenge the events as laid out in your case against me, I would still be incapable of signing this agreement.

I assure you that I do not question your recitation of the events, and I would love to settle any debt you feel I owe to the plaintiff civilly with the smallest investment of time within the court.
If you can give me an itemized list of their loss and injury I will be more than happy to settle with you and your plaintiff outside of court.
Without this itemized list of harm or injury, I can only conclude that there was no injury or harm experienced by your client, and your client is lacking in standing to bring this case before against me.

While I don't profess to be learned in the law, it seems to me that the ruling of the Supreme Court in Allen v. Wright would preclude your plaintiff's claims from being heard in a court of law or equity.
U.S. Supreme Court
468 U.S. 737 – Allen v. Wright
The requirement of standing, however, has a core component derived directly from the Constitution. A plaintiff must allege personal injury fairly traceable to the defendant's allegedly unlawful conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief. 454 U.S. at 472.
Like the prudential component, the constitutional component of standing doctrine incorporates concepts concededly not susceptible of precise definition. The injury alleged must be, for example, "‘distinct and palpable,'" Gladstone, Realtors v. Village of Bellwood, 441 U.S. 91, 100 (1979) (quoting Warth v. Seldin, supra, at 501), and not "abstract" or "conjectural" or "hypothetical," Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 101-102 (1983); O'Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488, 494 (1974). The injury must be "fairly" traceable to the challenged action, and relief from the injury must be "likely" to follow from a favorable decision. See Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Org., 426 U.S. at 38, 41.

I fail to see how my actions resulted in any loss or injury by your plaintiff.
Your plaintiff made arrangements to transfer funds to myself in exchange for what, at the time, was my private property.
This contract was made consensually, without force or coercion – unlike the plea agreement you have offered me – between consenting adults behind closed doors. I feel you may find Lawrence v. Texas pertinent in my perspective of your accusations.

If you are contending that the goods transferred were not my private property then I would like to know the source of this accusation so that I may seek redress against those that misrepresented said property.
If, on the other hand, you are claiming that I do not have the right to own private property that I acquired through a consensual transaction, a barter for the goods I possessed, then I ask you to cite the source of this claim.

If there is a question of the goods received – if their content was not as promised, I would like to reclaim the goods and issue a refund for their purchase. According to the charges you have brought against me, however, the goods were delivered as promised, and your client is absent any claims of fraud or product defect.
If there was not a problem with the product, I do not see how I am responsible for any loss or injury attributed to your client's use or disposal of the product.

It also seems foolish to me that the plaintiff seeks redress in the form of offering me housing and sustenance at the plaintiff's cost. While I appreciate the offer of free lodging – at an estimated cost of $85,000 per year – greater than my current income, I fail to see how this could, in any way, be relief for the plaintiff.

Knowing that I wish to settle with you, and am eager to do so that I may get on with my life, I hope this letter is received with expediency and your reply will urgently be awaited.

At this time I have failed to be convinced of your client's injury or loss and cannot sign this plea relieving you of this burden of proof.

One final note, I am incapable of purgering myself, committing a federal crime, for your benefit and signing this plea agreement would be an act of purgery unless the statement beginning on page 18 in line 1 is struck from this agreement.

If the comments of your cohort in the (Location Removed) federal court house on Monday Sept. 24th were not an overt threat against me, should I fail to comply with your demands for a signature on this agreement, then I must be mistaken in what the definition of both “threat” and “force.”

In case you are unaware of what was said, I was informed that should I fail to sign this agreement by Friday Sept. 28th, you yourself would aggressively seek that I be subjected to restraint, and violence should I oppose this restraint for an additional 3-6 years.


As I do not condone violence, I am incapable of condoning your advances upon my person and property, and am unwilling to work under these circumstances.


Unless you remove the threat of violence, I cannot agree that I am not being coerced into this agreement.


It is my hope that we can come to an understanding soon, as I'm sure you also have other matters in your life that you find as pressing as those I find in mine.


Respectfully,
(Name removed )

 

[Banquo]

^^^

Please make sure you have your attorney look over anything before you send it!!! There are some serious admissions in your statement.

Also, I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish. You are making arguments that will almost surely lose. Besides these arguments, is the plea deal otherwise acceptable, or do you really want to go to trial? Because if the plea deal IS acceptable, nothwithstanding the items above, you may be making a mistake in not taking it or asking for a better one.

Kalash -- years of jail time could hang in the balance here. Please be very careful, and always consult with your attorney when making these kinds of decisions.

 

[Infinite Jest]

IANAL: it appears that Kalash is arguing principles from tort law. But he's not being sued in tort, he's being charged with a criminal offence. In other words, all those arguments are completely irrelevant.

Banquo's advice appears sensible. Kalash: you don't like the laws. Neither do I. But arguing that the laws don't exist seems like a losing strategy to me.

 

[Kalash]

My attorney is supposed to be getting back to me.

That was sent to his secretary.
It's not yet been forwarded to the prosecutor.

You are correct.
Years could hang in the balance.



Tort law v. criminal...

If you're referring to Standing...
It's irrelevant.

http://www.adventuresinlegalland.com/index.php?/content/view/52/27/

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=198325969631851603



The plea - that I committed a crime with no victim - contrary to Supreme court rulings stating that ALL CRIME requires a victim...
Where the government has no standing - as there is no victim...


I'm not even sure what I'm trying to accomplish - other than refusing to plea while retaining the option for later.

There will never be a retraction of page 18 line 1 "No one has threatened or forced me in any way to enter into this agreement."

Even if they DO continue to offer the 5k1 I am being threatened with MORE time should I go to trial.

Even if I sign it I cannot swear in and then claim that I was not threatened into signing it.

That would be purgery.


However - you are correct.

I will wait to hear from my attorney before electing to send it to the prosecutor.

However, tomorrow is the deadline, and if I have heard nothing...
I don't know what I'll do.
Most likely it will get sent.

 

[IcarusRisen]

Kalash, seriously, more power to you man!!!

I wish you guys wouldn't encourage him :-/. No wonder he wanders into the dark side forum unable to listen to reason that he's not going to win. However, I do wish him the best of luck if he takes that route.

 

[Banquo]

Even if they DO continue to offer the 5k1 I am being threatened with MORE time should I go to trial.

That is the crucial point.

No one here can advise you what to do since we aren't familiar with the evidence and the facts of the case, nor are we your attorney. But, I'm sure you are aware that plenty of people throw away good plea deals only to get a longer prison sentence after a jury trial. (Admittedly, the opposite is also true -- plenty of people are acquitted at trial after turning down a plea deal.)

I think many people who have read about your situation admire your resolve and determination. However, remember that what a jury decides will likely be based on more ordinary issues than the ones you've presented, like physical evidence relating to the alleged crime. These are issues of FACT.

As for the issues you have researched, there is little wiggle room as far as issues of LAW are concerned. Unfortunately, most/all of it will be up to the judge, who will likely rule on such things in a matter of seconds.