Additional commentary by
Timothy Horrigan
(member of the House Petitions & Redress
Committee)
Joseph S. Haas has filed some unusual lawsuits over the years, making it to the State Supreme Court once or twice. This petition is probably connected to one or more of these suits— but I am not sure how.
Mr. Haas filed another petition for the 2012 session.The second petition is about something else altogether:
PETITION 14
PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE
TO: The Honorable House of Representatives
FROM: Petitioner Representative Paul Ingbretson, Graf. 5
DATE: September 25, 2009
SUBJECT: Grievance of Joseph S. Haas
Whereas, the New Hampshire Bill of Rights at Article 8, Part First of the New Hampshire Constitution provides that "All power residing originally in, and derived from, the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them. Government, therefore, should be open, accessible, accountable and responsive," and
Whereas, the New Hampshire Bill of Rights at Article 35, Part First of the New Hampshire Constitution provides that "It is essential to the preservation of the rights of every individual, his life, liberty, property, and character, that there be an impartial interpretation of the laws, and administration of justice. It is the right of every citizen to be tried by judges as impartial as the lot of humanity will admit. It is therefore not only the best policy, but for the security of the rights of the people, that the judges of the supreme judicial court should hold their offices so long as they behave well;" and
Whereas, the New Hampshire Bill of Rights at Article 37, Part First of the New Hampshire Constitution provides that "In the government of this state, the three essential powers thereof, to wit, the legislative, executive, and judicial, ought to be kept as separate from, and independent of, each other, as the nature of a free government will admit, or as is consistent with that claim of connection that binds the whole fabric of the constitution in one indissoluble bond of union and amity;" and
Whereas, the judicial branch has used its authority under Article 35 to interpret the separation of powers under Article 37 to insulate itself from accountability to the sovereign people in derogation of Article 8; and
Whereas, this general abuse of authority by the judicial branch has resulted in particular oppression and violation of the constitutional and statutory rights of your Petitioner, by the Grafton County Superior Court Equity Division for which, by reason of collusion, conflict of interest, insularity and indifference, there is no practical means of correction within the judicial branch; and
Whereas, the New Hampshire Bill of Rights at Article 32, Part First of the New Hampshire Constitution provides that "The people have a right, in an orderly and peaceable manner, to assemble and consult upon the common good, give instructions to their representatives, and to request of the legislative body, by way of petition or remonstrance, redress of the wrongs done them, and of the grievances they suffer;" and
Whereas, the New Hampshire Bill of Rights at Article 31, Part First of the New Hampshire Constitution provides that "The legislature shall assemble for the redress of public grievances and for making such laws as the public good may require;"
Now, Therefore, your Petitioner. Representative Ingbretson on behalf of Joseph S. Haas, hereinafter presents the particulars of his grievance against the judicial branch, Grafton County Superior Court, Equity Division: Sentencing Judge James D. O'Neill, 111, invokes the constitutional authority and duty of the Honorable House of Representatives pursuant to said Articles 31 and 32 to bring about their redress:
The Who, What, When, Where, Why and How being:
That of the Petitioner's "Free Commercial Speech" and equal rights to that of "Bounty Hunter" William Devine of Boston, have been stolen by this judge by the unlawful incarceration order by him to that of even beyond the maximum amount as prescribed by the law, and of which the Petitioner spent 100 days in jail!
The court case for this term of "Free Commercial Speech" in Vol. 400 Mass. Reports page of the Beineke case, footnote #7 for William Devine, as profiled In The "Boston Herald" of September 24th, 1989 @ page 16 (or the 16th @ page 24). Mr. Devine having won the right, after an expenditure of $1/4 million in legal fees he told the Petitioner on the phone back then to find "Missing Heirs" to ocean-front land on Nantucket Island.
The law reading in Articles 22 + 23, Part Second of the N.H. Constitution of contempt being limited to ten (10) days [ 24 hours BTW for contempt in Illinois ] and applicable to the judiciary as a supposed co-equal branch of government by Art. 72-a in 1966 when they branched away from within the General Court.
The Petitioner having found an heir and contracted with her to file an Appearance and to contest this Petition to Quiet Title to some land on which two land developers had built three houses without due process of law notice to the true owner, of which someone, possibly a relative, DID post the property FOR SALE during the 20 years for which somebody did testify during the 1988 case hearing in 199_ Grafton County Superior Court, case of Bent & Johnsen v. the Stevens Heirs. The lawyer William Koppenheffer of Hanover for the two land developers having placed a Legal Notice in the newspaper once a week for three consecutive weeks advertising of: to come in now, or forever lose your rights.
Although the Petitioner did claim an Article 20 right to a trial by jury, it was Robert E. K. Morrill who DENIED such and held a bench trial, using the then interpretation of the RSA Ch. 498:5-d over-ride of the Constitution to that of the judges SHALL determine title to real estate, that in 1996 has since been amended by the Rep. Roland E. Hemon House Bill in 1995 from Dover of that the judges "may" do so, but ONLY after the party waives this right that was supposed to be a guarantee, as secured by the law!
The Petitioner lost the case and his share of the land, plus the heir lost her inheritance.
Right after the loss, there be insult to injury, by the prosecution of the Petitioner by Assistant County Attorney, George B. Waldron (now of the Merrimack County Attorney's Office in Concord) for his boss, the then County Attorney Ken Anderson of Plymouth, for the charge of Champerty/ Rule 95-B Indirect Criminal Contempt of Court, initiated by Judge Peter W. Smith of Littleton.
This charge was filed in the Fall of 1992, and that was AFTER when the N.H. Supreme Court did away with this Champerty offense in the case of: Adkin Plumbing & Heating Supply Co., Inc. v. Tyler P. Harwell, Vol. 135 N.H. Reports 465-470 (April 24, 1992).
Yet another non-jury trial was held in violation of the law! This time by James D. O'Neill, III from Laconia, acting against his RSA Ch, 92:2 oath to Article 84-N.H. and Article III, Section 2, Clause 3 U.S. Constitution for ALL criminal cases (except for impeachment) to have the one charged be entitled to a trial by jury. This Judge O'Neill somehow thinking himself within the federal court system, using their policy of that for a "petty" offense there of a sentence of less than 6 months the defendant is NOT allowed to have a jury trial, thus sentenced the Petitioner herein to 5 months, 29 days in jail.
By RSA Ch. 651:18 and for good-time credits the Petitioner had l/3rd of his sentence reduced for good behavior, and so only spent 100 days in the Grafton County Jail and processed thereto within a matter of days to the Grafton County House of Correction in North Haverhill, N.H.
The reason(s) for the above violations of law being an arrogant judiciary thinking themselves "Above the Law"! This has got to stop! Damages maybe ought to be deducted from their pay and/or retirement amounts as by a lien through the writ of elegit process of up to half of what they owe for this debt to be determined by the General Court short of impeachment whereupon action by the Plaintiff to this same State within the County Court system, unless corrected, would be futile.
Grafton County spending over $100,000 per year for a $5 million insurance policy against which fraud has no statute of limitations. The fraud here being a swindle or cheat by a public servant not of honor, but of dishonor and dishonesty: lacking honesty or the truth of the law itself, the theft being 100 days of the Petitioner's time, at least, which when compared to the Vernoca Silva case of the mid 1980s in the RSA Ch. 541-B:l-23 State Board of Claims she got $1,250 day at the then maximum amount of to $25,000, (actually $1000/day net since her Attorney Andru Volinsky, then of Concord and now in Manchester got $5000) since increased to $50,000 for claims within the Board, or to $250,000 in the Superior Court, then to $2,500/day today as an equivalent, then x 100 = a perfect $250,000 amount.
Wherefore, your Petitioner prays that the House of Representatives:
Accept the within Petition for Redress of Grievance for enrollment and by vote of the General Court appoint a committee to hold public hearings and examine into the circumstances hereof; and following such hearings and examination, recommend to the full General Court that it:
Insert a line item in the judicial branch appropriation for the next biennium (since the appropriations are already done for 2009-10, and so for 2011) a figure sufficient to reimburse your Petitioner for his time and expenses incurred in and his financial losses resulting from all of this as explained above and to explain further.
Initiate address proceedings against: This sentencing judge James D. O'Neill, III to start.
Respectfully submitted by Petitioner Representative Ingbretson on Behalf of Joseph S. Haas.
September 25, 2009
See Also:
2010 New Hampshire House Petition pages:
Grievance of the voters of the of town of Hudson school district (actually filed without their permission by Rep. Lars Christiansen)
|
|