Sunday, January 1, 2012
Friday, November 25, 2011
JudicialReform_Windsor_LawlessAmerica
Black Fri. 25Nov201
Affidavit of Sharon Anderson to enforce Judicial Reform Minnesota_USA
CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE OF LAWYERS TO ENFORCE
JUDICIAL REFORM.
Is the State Bar's in the USA complicity in the "BadBehavior"
of Corrupt Judges.
Latest News
To Citizenery of the State of Minnesota
Undetermined Death and or Murder of Sharon's 2nd Husband Cpl Jm Anderson 21Sept2000_________et al. Please forward,circulate, Bloggers unite.
Lawmaker calls system ‘fox guarding the henhouse.’
From: williamwindsor@bellsouth.net
To: williamwindsor@bellsouth.net
Sent: 11/24/2011 10:56:59 P.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Lawless America has MOVED -- Please Read and ActHappy Thanksgiving to you and yours!
Lawless America has moved from Shovio.com to Livestream.com....at least for now. I have been evaluating several online broadcasting options, and I hope Livestream proves to be a good choice -- still a lot to learn.
Livestream does not work the same way as Shovio.
Please go to http://www.livestream.com and click on "Sign Up." Enter your information (or your alias fake information). Then reply to this email or email me at Bill@LawlessAmerica.com with your username and the email address that you used. These will allow me to enter you as a member of the Lawless America Team. This will give you special rights, including the ability to broadcast on your own on Livestream's Lawless America Channel, should you choose to do so. Every guest who appears on camera or by audio only will need to be set up as a team member, so please do this.
For more information on viewing the show Sundays from 5-7 pm ET, here's the basic FAQ -- http://www.livestream.com/support/faq
Please do me a favor. Login to your Facebook account, and then go to http://www.livestream.com/lawlessamerica and click on the "LIKE" button. We need to build up the number of supporters to build our importance on Livestream.
Note on the "About this Channel" section of the http://www.livestream.com/lawlessamerica page that I have a short list of website links. These are websites that have www.LawlessAmerica.com listed as a link on their HOME page. If you have a website that you would like to have linked here and on the home page of www.LawlessAmerica.com and www.GetAGripAmerica.us, simple add those links to your home page and email me with your website url, and I will add it immediately. This will get ALL OF US more website traffic.
The LawlessAmerica Channel on Livestream will be broadcasting 24-hours-a-day. If you have videos that you want to have added, just send me the urls. I will add everything relevant to our cause, and they will appear multiple times each day. I have about three hours of videos on now, so each one runs 8 times a day. I will also be adding a section where viewers can see any video on demand by selecting from a list.
I'll be trying Livestream this Sunday, so please SIGN UP and tune in to help us get the bugs out.
All the best,
Bill
Bill@LawlessAmerica.com
770-578-1094
LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299 telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Candidate AG2010 www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com Blogger: www.facebook.com/sharon4anderson www.twitter.com/sharon4anderson Homestead Act of 1862 neopopulism.org - Pro Se Dec Action Litigation Pack Sharon4Anderson Scribd Document's are based on SEC filings, Blogger: Dashboard Home www.slideshare.com/sharonanderson www.taxthemax.blogspot.com www.sharon4anderson.org
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are makinknowledge gained as financial journalists , securities they recommend to readers, affiliated entities, employees, and agents an initial trade recommendation published on the Internet, after a direct mail publication is sent, before acting on that recommendations, and may contain errors. Investment decisions should not be based solely on these or other Public Office documents expressly forbids its writers from having financial interests in g such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of whistleblower protection issues, MY FindLaw SharonsWritProA06_1150_30Jun06_26
The CAN-SPAM Act: Requirements for Commercial Emailers
Sharons-Psychic-Whispers: Sharons Gypsy Curse-Court-Cop Corruption 3Apr0http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPlawsuit/courtfilings/Docket.htm Sharon4Council: DLJ Managment v. City St. Paul A06-2118,Money LaunderinNo direct un-apportioned tax confirmed by the US Supreme Court rulings in CHAS. C. STEWARD MACH. CO. v. DAVIS, 301 U.S. 548, 581-582(1937) g andFCC Complaints - http://sharons-copywrite.blogspot.com
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Sunday, January 2, 2011
MNCourtVideo's 2010
Return to Minnesota Supreme Court
Return to Minnesota Judicial Branch Home
Sign up to receive updates
Minnesota Supreme Court Oral Arguments - Videos
The Webcasts are not live. Videos are generally posted by 5 p.m. the same day of the arguments.
Technical issues occasionally may cause a delay in posting.
The following oral arguments are provided in Windows Media format.
You will need the Windows Media Player plugin to view them.
Search for an Oral Argument Video:
Use Case Name, Date (M/D/YYYY format - no leading zeros for month and day) or Case Number to find an archived argument.
Video archiving began September 2005.
Select from the following results:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DECEMBER 2010 | NOVEMBER 2010 | OCTOBER 2010 | SEPTEMBER 2010 (4 most recent months posted for browsing)
December 2010
Case Name &
Oral Argument Video Date Case Number Opinion Links
State v. Kuhlmann
12/7/2010 A090915
State v. Gaiovnik, a/k/a Gaiounik
12/7/2010 A090190
Fredrick Farms, Inc. v. County of Olmsted
12/6/2010 A101089
Western National Insurance Company v. Thompson, et al.
12/6/2010 A091506
State v. Ortega
12/2/2010 A100507
Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud
12/2/2010 A091335
In re the Estate of: Patrick W. Butler, Deceased
12/1/2010 A091208
State v. Ferguson
12/1/2010 A100499
November 2010
Case Name &
Oral Argument Video Date Case Number Opinion Links
In re Petition regarding 2010 Gubernatorial Election 11/22/2010 A102022
Taylor v. LSI Corporation 11/10/2010 A091410
SCI Minnesota Funeral Services, Inc. v. Washburn-McReavy Funeral Corporation, et al.
11/9/2010 A090935
State v. Koppi
11/9/2010 A090136
State v. Johnson *
Welfare of: M.L.M *
*Consolidated for argument
11/8/2010 A090247
A090875
In re Discipline of LeTourneau
11/4/2010 A100247
State v. Cox
11/4/2010 A091861
State v. Gatson
11/3/2010 A100247
United Prairie Bank - Mountain Lake v. Haugen Nutrition & Equipment, LLC
11/3/2010 A090607
State v. Nissalke
11/2/2010 A091829
DeCook v. Rochester International Airport Joint Zoning Board
11/2/2010 A090969
Crossroads Church of Prior Lake v. County of Dakota
11/1/2010 A100859
State v. Borg
11/1/2010 A090243
October 2010
Case Name &
Oral Argument Video Date Case Number Opinion Links
State v. Bauer
10/13/2010 A081698
City of Cohasset v. Minnesota Power
10/13/2010 A090572
State v. Martinez-Mendosa
10/12/2010 A092151
Latterell v. Progressive Northern Insurance Company, and AIG Insurance Company
10/11/2010 A091138
Vickla v. State
10/11/2010 A090830
In re Discipline of Garcia
10/6/2010 A090877
Tucker v. State
10/5/2010 A090666
Marriage: Angell v. Angell
10/5/2010 A090349
Martin v. Morrison Trucking, Inc., and Travelers Insurance Company
10/4/2010 A100446
State v. Hill
10/4/2010 A091947
September 2010
Case Name &
Oral Argument Video Date Case Number Opinion Links
Harlan Clark v. Tomas Reddick, et al.
9/13/2010 A101527
In re Discipline of Fett
9/2/2010 A091862
Graff v. Robert M. Swendra Agency, Inc.
9/1/2010 A090173
Miller v. Lankow, et al.
9/1/2010 A090244
Video Oral Argument pages and videos produced in partnership with Twin Cities Public Television.
If you have questions, comments or suggestions regarding this web site, please contact the webmaster.
Return to Minnesota Judicial Branch Home
Sign up to receive updates
Minnesota Supreme Court Oral Arguments - Videos
The Webcasts are not live. Videos are generally posted by 5 p.m. the same day of the arguments.
Technical issues occasionally may cause a delay in posting.
The following oral arguments are provided in Windows Media format.
You will need the Windows Media Player plugin to view them.
Search for an Oral Argument Video:
Use Case Name, Date (M/D/YYYY format - no leading zeros for month and day) or Case Number to find an archived argument.
Video archiving began September 2005.
Select from the following results:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DECEMBER 2010 | NOVEMBER 2010 | OCTOBER 2010 | SEPTEMBER 2010 (4 most recent months posted for browsing)
December 2010
Case Name &
Oral Argument Video Date Case Number Opinion Links
State v. Kuhlmann
12/7/2010 A090915
State v. Gaiovnik, a/k/a Gaiounik
12/7/2010 A090190
Fredrick Farms, Inc. v. County of Olmsted
12/6/2010 A101089
Western National Insurance Company v. Thompson, et al.
12/6/2010 A091506
State v. Ortega
12/2/2010 A100507
Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud
12/2/2010 A091335
In re the Estate of: Patrick W. Butler, Deceased
12/1/2010 A091208
State v. Ferguson
12/1/2010 A100499
November 2010
Case Name &
Oral Argument Video Date Case Number Opinion Links
In re Petition regarding 2010 Gubernatorial Election 11/22/2010 A102022
Taylor v. LSI Corporation 11/10/2010 A091410
SCI Minnesota Funeral Services, Inc. v. Washburn-McReavy Funeral Corporation, et al.
11/9/2010 A090935
State v. Koppi
11/9/2010 A090136
State v. Johnson *
Welfare of: M.L.M *
*Consolidated for argument
11/8/2010 A090247
A090875
In re Discipline of LeTourneau
11/4/2010 A100247
State v. Cox
11/4/2010 A091861
State v. Gatson
11/3/2010 A100247
United Prairie Bank - Mountain Lake v. Haugen Nutrition & Equipment, LLC
11/3/2010 A090607
State v. Nissalke
11/2/2010 A091829
DeCook v. Rochester International Airport Joint Zoning Board
11/2/2010 A090969
Crossroads Church of Prior Lake v. County of Dakota
11/1/2010 A100859
State v. Borg
11/1/2010 A090243
October 2010
Case Name &
Oral Argument Video Date Case Number Opinion Links
State v. Bauer
10/13/2010 A081698
City of Cohasset v. Minnesota Power
10/13/2010 A090572
State v. Martinez-Mendosa
10/12/2010 A092151
Latterell v. Progressive Northern Insurance Company, and AIG Insurance Company
10/11/2010 A091138
Vickla v. State
10/11/2010 A090830
In re Discipline of Garcia
10/6/2010 A090877
Tucker v. State
10/5/2010 A090666
Marriage: Angell v. Angell
10/5/2010 A090349
Martin v. Morrison Trucking, Inc., and Travelers Insurance Company
10/4/2010 A100446
State v. Hill
10/4/2010 A091947
September 2010
Case Name &
Oral Argument Video Date Case Number Opinion Links
Harlan Clark v. Tomas Reddick, et al.
9/13/2010 A101527
In re Discipline of Fett
9/2/2010 A091862
Graff v. Robert M. Swendra Agency, Inc.
9/1/2010 A090173
Miller v. Lankow, et al.
9/1/2010 A090244
Video Oral Argument pages and videos produced in partnership with Twin Cities Public Television.
If you have questions, comments or suggestions regarding this web site, please contact the webmaster.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Republican Primary_TonySutton_Sharon4MNAG
http://www.hometownsource.com/blogs/index.php/2010/08/03/republicans-have-their-own-primary-says-chairman-tony-sutton/
Republicans have their own primary, says Chairman Tony Sutton
Posted by Tim Budig, August 3, 2010 Comments(0)
Republican Party of Minnesota Chairman Tony Sutton dismissed the idea that Republican voters primary election day — Tuesday, Aug. 10 — would go to the polls with the idea of getting rid of Independence Party (IP)-endorsed gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner by voting for another IP candidate.
“We’ve got our own primary,” said Sutton, noting the challenge by frequent candidate Sharon Anderson of St. Paul against Republican-endorsed attorney general candidate Chris Barden.
There’s “absolutely no buzz,” said Sutton when asked, among Republicans about surgically removing Horner by voting for IP gubernatorial candidate Rob Hahn.
Hahn is a publisher and author from St. Paul.
Indeed, Sutton argued that an IP gubernatorial candidacy will draw more votes away from the DFL gubernatorial candidate than Republican-endorsed gubernatorial candidate Rep. Tom Emmer of Delano.
The talk of Republicans crossing over to eliminate Horner, Sutton argued, could be early spin by Horner to fallback on if he loses the primary.
Beyond this, who even knows which voters will show up primary day? Sutton asked.
“It’s a crap shoot,” he said of guessing.
Horner has suggested that Republicans could be trying to prevent him from reaching the November ballot.
“Republicans from the day I started floating a trial balloon (about running for governor) have been very, very worried about my candidacy,” Horner recently said.
Horner argues that Emmer is too far to the Right, which gives him an opening as a candidate.
Horner expressed concern about Hahn.
“We’re taking him (Hahn) very seriously,” said Horner.
“Not so much because of his candidacy, but because his candidacy presents a vehicle for Republicans to cross over and create mischief,” said Horner.
“Rob Hahn is a threat because of the willingness of Republicans and the willingness of Hahn to become a vehicle,” said Horner.
Hahn, who recently announced a limited cable television commercial buy, in a recent press release said his campaign would gladly accept donations from Republicans, as well as from Democrats and Independents.
“The fact that one of my IP opponents continues to suggest that Republicans might be backing my campaign and might cross over to vote for me in the primary indicates he might already be trying to spin defeat, failing to recognize I continue to run a strong campaign based on specific issues and details,” said Hahn.
During a recent appearance on Minnesota Public Radio, Horner and Hahn had spirited exchanges, Horner suggesting Hahn lacked an understanding of the issues — he deemed Hahn’s riverboat gambling proposal ludicrous — while Hahn accused Horner of being condescending in a comment he made about casino workers.
Sutton argues that the media is “kind” in its coverage of the IP, saying the party doesn’t compare at all to either the Republican or Democratic parties in terms of following and organization.
SharonScarrella Anderson on August 4th, 2010
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Sure is Strange that you only mention the AG’s Race ie Sharon Anderson 4 Judicial Reform,Separation of Powers,FreeSpeeh_Press,Constitutional Guarantees
Sharon is calling for the Resignation of any “Lawyers” from the Executive,Legislative Branch’s ,violating the Separation of Powers ie: In re: Scarrella4Justice221NW2d http://www.sharon4judge.blogspot.com then the Trial Lawyer “Emmers” acting in concort with “Obama” simulating Legal Process via “Oaths of Office.
Judicial Reforms Needed by JOn Roland NonLawyer for Texas AG http://www.constitution.org
In response to requests to summarize the most important judicial reforms needed, here is a list of some of the most important, with links to further discussion.
Select judges into a pool of judges by sortition, or at random, not by election or appointment, but with some filtering for knowledge and skills.
Assign judges to courts for short terms by sortition. Even members of the Supreme Court would be drawn at random from the general pool of judges.
Have multiple judges assigned to each court, and assign them to cases by sortition.
Expand supreme and other appellate courts to 28 members, and hear cases initially by randomly selected panels of three, appealable to randomly selected panels of nine, and appealable from there to randomly selected panels of 27 (with one spare).
Require that decisions of multi-judge panels be unanimous to sustain a claimed power of government against a claim by a citizen that the government lacks such power.
Mandate reversal of any judgment that does not presume nonauthority for any official act and require strict proof of such authority.
Mandate reversal of any judgment for the prosecution in a trial with mixed issues of law and fact, including all criminal trials, in which parties have been impeded from arguing all issues of law before the jury, except those issues that may not be argued without disclosing evidence properly excluded.
Forbid motions in limine to the prosecution in criminal trials.
Mandate reversal of the conviction in any criminal trial in which the jury has not been instructed to determine whether the charge is authorized by applicable statutes and constitutions, or they have not been provided with copies of such statutes and constitutions, and of legal pleadings on the arguments in the case.
Mandate the suspension, without pay, on the first offense, for one month, of any judge who, having jurisdiction, fails to schedule a hearing on a prerogative writ of quo warranto, habeas corpus, procedendo, mandamus, prohibito, scire facias, or certiorari, within 3 days of it being filed and served on respondant, or to hold a hearing thereon within 20 days, in which the burden of proof shall be on the respondant, failing which judgment shall be rendered in favor of the demandant. The suspension shall be doubled for each subsequent failure.
Mandate the convening of a grand jury of 23 by random selection from each jurisdiction having a population of no more than 3000 persons (village).
Mandate that no more than half the time of the grand jury be spent hearing bills of indictment, and that they shall have at least 4 hours to consider each bill, unless they shall choose otherwise.
Authorize grand juries to issue subpoenas directly rather than only through their courts.
Authorize and direct grand juries to decide the jurisdiction, or lack thereof, or the immunity of any official, for any complaint brought before them.
Authorize grand juries to order the removal of any impediments to access to them by members of the public
Authorize grand juries to issue to any complainant or his designee, not just to public prosecutors, an indictment authorizing criminal prosecution.
Authorize grand juries to investigate any public or private enterprise whose activities may adversely impact the public, and to report their findings.
Mandate that trial and grand juries be convened under the supervision of prior grand juries to insure there is no stacking.
Mandate the reversal of any court decision which treats a recent precedent as binding, and for constitutional issues does not return to the original text and historical evidence of its meaning.
Mandate reversal of any denial of standing of a party to privately prosecute a public right for injunctive or declaratory relief, or on a writ of quo warranto.
Mandate reversal of any disablement or deprivation of life, limb, liberty for more than 24 hours, property, or parental rights without a trial by a jury of 12, including for contempt of court.
Mandate reversal of any restriction on the practice of law without a jury trial.
Mandate reversal of any court decision in which the public was not allowed to record the proceedings, other than to conceal the identities of the jury.
Mandate reversal of any court decision in which the judges do not justify and publish their decision, clearly separating it from summary, findings, and dicta.
This list is subject to revision, so check back from time to time for the latest.
Many of these reforms would now require a constitutional amendment to overcome long chains of precedent. Such amendments are to be found here.
–
Unless you work in law enforcement
Radley Balko | August 2, 2010
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. That’s the standard line motorists hear when they say they weren’t aware of the speed limit, or gun owners hear when they say didn’t know about the gun laws in the jurisdiction they happened to get arrested in. Yet that ignorance is pretty understandable in an America where just about everything is being criminalized. At the federal level alone there are now more than 4,500 separate crimes, and that’s not counting the massive regulatory code, violations of which also can sometimes be punished with criminal charges.
Posting your comment.
Leave a reply
name (required)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
