VALIDITY OF OREGON'S JUDGE'S OATHS CHALLENGED IN WRIT TO U.S. SUPREME COURT

By Jack Worthington
Research Investigative Analyst
February 17, 2003  1:05 PST
NewsWithViews.com

PORTLAND, OR. (NWV) -- Recently, I met with Milt Mitchek, another researcher, and had a conversation regarding disclosure of the following, very interesting, information. After some study and investigation, I felt that the issues Mr. Mitchek presented were so important that they deserved to be publicized.

In 1988 Milt said, "I discovered a problem in the  judicial branch of  government when a district attorney said that the state (Oregon)  was proceeding under Authority of Amended Article VII (Oregon Constitution) on a case with which I had some familiarity." It appears from Milt's research that he discovered there was no abstract of votes in the Oregon State Archives for the "amended" Article VII (Ballot Measure 362-363 in the year 1910), and furthermore, neither could the State Archivist!

Milt's ongoing research revealed some startling facts as follows:

1. - the "initiative process" was abused in 1910

2. - the governor (Frank W. Benson) was holding two offices simultaneously up to June 16, 1910

3. - that the Secretary of State (Benson) canvassed the votes and witnessed his own signature (it appears to be something like self-notarization)

4. - that amended Article VII was an unconstitutional use of the Article IV "initiative process"

5. - that the 'purported' adoption of Measure 362-363 changed conviction verdicts from unanimous to � vote of juries in civil cases

6. - that the 'Measure' authorized Grand Juries to be summoned separately from trial juries

7. - that the 'Measure' permitted a change in the judicial system

8. - that Measure 362-363 of the November 8, 1910 General Election made monumental revisions of the Oregon Constitutional provisions and statutes (Oregon Blue Book, Article VII, original and Amended)

9. - that Measure 362-363 purports that (the original) amendment of Article VII of the Oregon State Constitution first abolishes and then disbands the entire Judicial Department of Oregon

10. - that the unconstitutional Measure 362-363 effectively abolished "We The People's" Constitutional Court and circumvented "We The People's" remedy of Article I, section 10 of the Oregon Constitution

11. - that Measure 362-363 abolished habeas corpus proceedings in violation of the United States Constitution

12. - that Measure 362-363 circumvented the first 10 Amendments of the United States Constitution

13. - that Measure 362-363 circumvented Article 1, section 10 of the United States Constitution prohibiting the impairment of obligations of contracts

14. - that Measure 362-363 impairs the will of the people of Oregon's original 1859 Constitution

15. - that Measure 362-363 tampers with the Oregon State Petit and Grand Jury system

16. - that Measure 362-363 supplanted Article VII of the Oregon State Constitution and vitiated the entire Judicial Department of the Oregon State government wherein plaintiffs are being routinely deprived of their vested rights, liberty and property without due process and equal protection of law

17. - that the Oregon Constitution limits amendment through the (people's) "initiative process" to a single subject and matters properly connected therewith per "initiative" measure.

This discovery was truly startling to Milt. I asked Milt about recent developments and he mentioned "the judges have some oath problems, which raise doubts about their being qualified for office." What prompted you to question the validity of their oaths?" Milt responded, "Well, in 1998 a friend, Jerry Buck, was having problems in Baker County (Oregon), as a section of his property (100 feet) was being taken by the government for a 'right-of-way'. I wondered by what authority the county could do this." With more questioning Milt explained that he decided to check the qualifications (oath of office) of then circuit court "judge," Milo Pope, now retired, and discovered that there was a discrepancy in the judge's oath. Then Milt said, "I discovered that the phrase, "and impartially" was MISSING from "judge" Pope's oath, as filed with the Secretary of State." Then Milt laid the 'slammer' on me. He said that his research uncovered a 1941 Oregon case, State ex. rel. Smith v. Tazwell in which the Oregon Supreme Court made it clear that it was necessary for a circuit court judge to 'qualify' for his office by taking, subscribing and transmitting the original Article VII, section 21, oath of the Oregon Constitution BEFORE assuming his seat. Well, that original Article VII oath has the phrase "and impartially" and thus it seems that there is a "failure to qualify" issue.

Milt went on to point out that Chief Justice Wallace Carson sent a memorandum to 174 [?] Oregon Judges advising them that they might need to check their oaths. Apparently some 'judges' then retook their oaths, compounding the problem. I asked, "Can a 'judge' simply retake an oath anytime after having assumed his seat?" Milt reminded me that Smith v. Tazwell specifically used the qualifier, "BEFORE". The application for public office is signed under penalty of perjury and specifically requires one to qualify prior to 'robing' and not at some later time. Do you recall the commonly used legal saying, "You can't unring a bell?" It seems to apply here.

Regarding the district attorney in the 1988 case, Mr. Gregg Baxter, he is now the 'judge' replacing Mr. Pope. And yes, 'judge' Baxter had an oath on file with the Secretary of State wherein the phrase, "and impartially" was missing. Given the current debacle of the Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), are, "Can a 'judge', who is also a member of PERS, render his decisions "impartially"? And, does any portion of a fine or fee, approved by such a 'judge', find its way into the PERS?" Thus the mischief in 1910 affects today's Oregon citizens in a direct and grievous way.

With Milt's assistance, Darrell Smith, et. al., now has a Petition for Writ of Certiorari before the United States Supreme Court, Docket #02-986, because the above information very strongly suggests that one cannot receive due process in the Oregon courts, i.e. there is no remedy.

1 www.osl.state.or.us/lib/governors/fwb.htm
2 www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/02-986.htm

For more information regarding this article, read: "Validity of Oregon Courts Faces Possible Questioning by U.S. Supreme Court."

� 2003 - NewsWithViews.com - All Rights Reserved