FYI only.
BUMP!
The more the courts deny this the more suspicious I get.
Good question.
Oops moreover...
INTERNET
POWERHOUSE ANDY MARTIN PLANS TO APPEAL DISMISSAL OF BARACK OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE LAWSUIT, SAYS HE HAS NOT YET RECEIVED A COPY
MARTIN SAYS JUDICIAL SYSTEM REFLECTS “CALLOUS DISREGARD” FOR THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE
(NEW YORK)(November 21, 2008) For those of you who are not familiar with the peculiar highways and byways of the judicial process, welcome to the strange ways of the court system in Hawai’i. Apparently my lawsuit in a Honolulu state court has been dismissed.
Unfortunately, I have not seen a copy of the decision. Despite the significance of the court order, I was not given a courtesy notice when it was entered in Honolulu, apparently late Wednesday, although I was in Honolulu all day on Wednesday.
Thursday all day I was traveling back to New York and was unavailable. I did not get back to New York until 8:00 A.M. Friday.
I was alerted by a reader’s e-mail that something had happened, and went to the Honolulu Advertiser’s web site where I found a complete story, www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081121/NEWS20/811210355/100 ...
Obviously I was unable to respond to phone calls while in the air, and when I checked my e-mails today the Advertiser reporter had not left a phone number to call him back.
The Court did not fax my office a copy and so I have no immediate way of seeing a copy of the decision. I assume the Advertiser’s news report is a fair summary of the decision.
Depending on what the response is to a fund appeal, I will certainly appeal this decision to the Hawai’i Intermediate Court of Appeals. The trial court’s interpretation of the relevant statute appears to be a wooden reading of the law. The claim that there is a lack of historical significance to the birth certificate of a president of the United States is a classic example of how utter nonsense can exist in the judicial system.
I will solicit input from my audience as to whether they feel that pursuit of the appeal is a worthwhile venture and will proceed accordingly.
I understand how 150 million Americans are frustrated by the callous disregard which the court system has shown for access to vital, basic information about Barack Obama, the “mystery man” who has been elected president by the “Mainstream Media of the United States.”
However other than this mild criticism, I believe it is more appropriate to proceed through the judicial process, and that is the course I intend to follow on the issue of access to Barack Obama’s original, typewritten 1961 original birth certificate.
-end snip-
The last entry on the docket sheet is for 11/19. There is no termination date entered on the case header. Who said it was dismissed? No dismissal listed on the docket sheet.
Somebody just trying to raise money ahead of time?
Bump
Ah, yes, legendary internet powerhouse Andy Martin strikes again.
Gameplaying Re Obama Birth Certificate and the CourtsI agree with the appeal to equity....
Moreover, the US court system is broken. The courts do not just interpret statutory law, which in this case is obscure and uncertain. Nor do they just interpret prior judicial decisions and dicta in what is called common law. Courts are also concerned with what is called equity. This is how wikipedia defines equity:
"Equity is the name given to the set of legal principles, in jurisdictions following the English common law tradition, which supplement strict rules of law where their application would operate harshly, so as to achieve what is sometimes referred to as 'natural justice.' It is often confusingly contrasted with "law", which in this context refers to 'statutory law' (the laws enacted by a legislature, such as the United States Congress), and 'common law' (the principles established by judges when they decide cases)... in general, a litigant cannot obtain equitable relief unless there is 'no adequate remedy at law'—that is, a court will not grant an injunction unless monetary damages are an insufficient remedy for the injury in question. Law courts also enter orders, called "writs" (such as a writ of habeas corpus) but they are less flexible and less easily obtained than an injunction...the plaintiff requests an injunction, declaratory judgment, specific performance or modification of contract, or other non-monetary relief, the claim would usually be one in equity...A final important distinction between law and equity is the source of the rules governing the decisions. In law, decisions are made by reference to legal doctrines or statutes. In contrast, equity, with its emphasis on fairness and flexibility, has only general guides known as the maxims of equity. As noted below, a historic criticism of equity as it developed was that it had no fixed rules of its own, with the Lord Chancellor from time to time judging in the main according to his own conscience. As time went on the rules of equity did lose much of their flexibility and from the 17th century onwards equity was rapidly consolidated into a system of precedents much like its cousin common law.Now, why are courts reluctant to mandate release of the Obama vault copy birth certificate under equity? What principle at equity overcomes the public's right to know about the background identification of a presidential candidate?
I disagree with what "common law" means. In recent times it is become to have a meaning which is a confusion of casebook/hornbook law, regulations of process, and common law. Common law means that law as understood by responsible adults in common as a culture. Call a jury from the public's upstanding citizens -- the basics of law as understood by the jury are the common law. It does include precedent, but precedent as rulings that can be understood as common wisdom.
I agree with the appeal to equity. Hawaii's own law says the authorities may release the documentation when these is a tangible direct interest. For the qualifications of teh President, the singular one specific criterion applied to the President and none other -- the whole of the public as a tangible and direct interest. It is a public duty to release the records.
What earthly reason is there for concealing a valid birth certificate. Is it perhaps not “valid”?