USCA and Out of Order

Monday 7/20/98 8:07 AM John Young Saw Payne/Morales v. NSA: Response to USCA Orders July 19, 1998 http://www.jya.com/whp071598.htm Thank you and your helpers for all of the scanning work. Morales and I talked on the phone last night about the next step. We are going to move on the criminal privacy act violation. http://www.jya.com/snlhit.htm Ninth Circuit judge Proctor Hug has not responded. However, Ninth circuit Senior Case Expiditer Gwen Baptiste returned my complaint. This, of course, has earned Baptiste a criminal complaint affidavit to be filed with Hug again. Morales was very insistant last night about the seriousness about the judiciary not doing their jobs. Reason is that improper handling of valid complaints can lead to frustrated citizens - some of who might resort to socially unacceptable expressions of displeasure towards the judiciary. Like ARTICLES RELATED TO OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING seen at http://www.aci.net/kalliste/ Morales and I believe in using the law to fix the problem - now with some help from congress. A Washington DC DOI whistleblower pointed me to the book, Out of Order : Arrogance, Corruption and Incompetence on the Bench - Max Boot; Hardcover http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0465054323/o/ref=qid_900944492/002-27... I read the Forward by Bjork on Friday afternoon. I sure wish we could avoid unpleasantness I see coming by getting this matter SETTLED. Later bill Friday 5/1/98 9:48 AM Certified Return receipt requested Cathy A Catterson, Clerk Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 121 Spear Street POB 193939 San Francisco, CA 94119-9800 415 744 9800 Dear Clerk Catterson: Purpose of this letter is to discover the REASON the criminal complaint addressed to Ninth circuit judge Proctor Hug Jr dated Wednesday 4/1/98 11:02 AM was returned to me WITHOUT COVER LETTER. I attach a copy of the envelope the above material was enclosed. Return address is CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS P.O. BOX 547 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94101-0547 OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, 300 Postmark is SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF APR 24 98 U.S. POSTAGE $2.62 METER 504753. The envelope is hand-addressed and stamped CONFIDENTIAL. Since no cover letter was enclosed to explain the return of what I believe is both a valid and lawful criminal complaint affidavit supported by WRITTEN EVIDENCE, some even in FILED court documents, I feel we must investigate to discover the REASON. All of the accused are federal employees or contractor employees. Possibility exists that return of the enclosed criminal complaint affidavit without cover letter stating the REASON may indicate violation of Title 18 § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant [(b)] Whoever knowingly ... corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to - ... (2) cause or induce any person to - (A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding; ... (3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (c) Whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hinders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from - ... (2) reporting to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. Clerk Catterson, you may be aware that under § 1512 (d) In a prosecution for an offense under this section, it is an affirmative defense, as to which the defendant has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence, that the conduct consisted solely of lawful conduct ... Therefore, I ask that you investigate to discover WHO returned the enclosed criminal complaint affidavit to me. And report the REASON the criminal complaint affidavit was returned to me. I ask that you respond within 30 days. Sincerely, William H. Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 87111 Wednesday 4/1/98 11:02 AM Certified Return receipt requested Proctor Hug Jr Chief Judge, Ninth Circuit 50 West Liberty Street Reno, NV 89501-1948 (702) 784-5631 784-5166 fax Dear judge Hug: Purposes of this letter-affidavit are to file criminal complaint affidavits against 1 judge Marilyn Hall Patel for not properly processing a criminal violation of the Privacy Act, 2 former Ninth Circuit chief judge J Clifford Wallace for not properly processing criminal complaint affidavits for a felony perjury violation by Sandia National Laboratories lawyer Gregory Cone, b judge Fern Smith for not properly processing a felony perjury violation by Sandia National Laboratories lawyer Gregory Cone. c Albuquerque FBI special agent in charge Thomas Kneir for sending FBI agents Kohl and Schum to my home in an attempt to intimidate me from exercising my civil rights. d Margret D. Thomas, Judicial Assistant to the Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel, for not forwarding a valid criminal complaint affidavit regarding a criminal violation of the Privacy Act to Patel. Brief history would be valuable for your understanding of this matter. Sandia has long been involved with the security of America's nuclear arsenal. As they announce on their website: "We are funded primarily by the U.S. Department of Energy to design all the non-nuclear opponents of the nation's nuclear weapons" http://www.sandia.gov/">http://www.sandia.gov/</a>). This includes the cryptographic locks used to secure the nukes. NSA supplies the algorithms and implementation guidelines to Sandia. http://www.aci.net/kalliste/nukearse.htm In about 1982 I became project leader of the Missile Secure Cryptographic Unit [MSCU]. The MSCU was funded by the National Security Agency [NSA]. As a result of my about 4 year work with NSA, I was given access to its cryptographic algorithms by one document and many electronic schematics. I wrote a book ISBN: 0125475705 Title: Embedded Controller Forth For The 8051 Family Author: Payne Cover: Hardback/Cloth Imprint: Academic Press Published: September 1990 http://www.apcatalog.com/cgi-bin/AP?ISBN=0125475705&LOCATION=US&FORM=FORM2 about the software technology we used for the MSCU. In 1986 I transferred to build the data authenticator for the Department of Energy's Deployable Seismic Verification System [DSVS]for the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [CTBT]. NSA liaison for the DSVS/CTBT project offered information to me that NSA regarded former president Reagan as one of the US's foremost traitors for the reason First, U.S. President Ronald Reagan informed the world on national television that the United States was reading Libyan communications. This admission was part of a speech justifying the retaliatory bombing of Libya for its alleged involvement in the La Belle discotheque bombing in Berlin's Schoeneberg district, where two U.S. soldiers and a Turkish woman were killed, and 200 others injured. Reagan wasn't talking about American monitoring of Libyan news broadcasts. Rather, his "direct, precise, and undeniable proof" referred to secret (encrypted) diplomatic communication between Tripoli and the Libyan embassy in East Berlin. http://www.aci.net/kalliste/speccoll.htm which is further explained at http://caq.com/CAQ/caq63/caq63madsen.html It may be the greatest intelligence scam of the century: For decades, the US has routinely intercepted and deciphered top secret encrypted messages of 120 countries. In early 1992 a Sandia labs director decided that he and his subordinates were going to enter the data authentication business. The director transferred me to break electronic locks for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. This work was funded by the FBI/Engineering Research Facility [FBI/ERF], Quantico, VA. I ordered about $200,000 of the FBI/ERF's money buying two copies of electronic locks. One lock I ordered was the Hirsch Scramblepad electronic lock. In about 1991 I was following progress of lawsuits in the district of Northern California, The first two cases to directly address the issue of intermediate copying both originated in California's Northern District Court. They are Atari v. Nintendo and Sega v. Accolade. In both cases, the district court found that intermediate copying was NOT fair use. [The New Use of Fair Use: Accessing Copyrighted Programs Through Reverse Engineering, Stephen B. Maebius, Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, June 1993, 75, n6, p433] Judge Fern Smith presided in both cases. Reason I was following Atari v Nintendo was that I my Forth book I have two chapters on reverse engineering software. One chapter contains a computer program which copied a ROM BIOS to diskette. Smith's decisions made my intermediate copying program illegal. In a strong opinion she [Fern Smith] wrote in March 1991, when granting Nintendo's request for a preliminary injunction against Atari, she lambasted Atari's lawyers for thievery. I was given the job assignment to copy the ROMs of Hirsch's 8051-based Scramblepad electronic lock to reverse engineer them to hopefully allow me to modify the locks for allow surreptitious entry. I refused to engage in illegal activity for the FBI. The termination letter seen at http://jya.com/whpfiles.htm states This is to advise you that effective July 27, 1992, you will be terminated from Sandia National Laboratories. This action is the results of your flagrant attack on a valued Sandia customer and repeated insensitivity to security/classification requirement. These acts violate Sandia National Laboratories Code of Conduct, specifically the Personal Conduct section,, and the Safeguarding Information and Records Section. ... for my whistleblowing SAND report on the National Security Agency's deficient work and refusing to mark classified on a report I and Danny Drummond wrote on how to fake Wiegand Wire access entry credentials for the FBI. Both I and my EEOC complaint officer Ray Armenta were never able to determine exactly why I was fired. However March 22, 1997 I received copies of the enclosed 1 April 15, 1994 letter to EEOC director Charles Burtner from Sandia Diversity Leadership director Michael G. Robles. 2 July 27, 1997 Termination of Employment memorandum containing my signature. 3 DISCIPLINARY REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES, July 16, 1992. 4 DISCIPLINARY REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES, July 6, 1989. 5 September 6, 1995 letter from EEOC Investigator Larry J. Trujillo to Richard Gallegos. from Sandian Richard Gallegos. Sandia lawyer Harold Folley previously stated that no documents existed. The Privacy Act states (d) Access to Records.--Each agency that maintains a system of records shall-- (1) upon request by any individual to gain access to his record or to any information pertaining to him which is contained in the system, permit him and upon his request, a person of his own choosing to accompany him, to review the record and have a copy made of all or any portion thereof in a form comprehensible to him, except that the agency may require the individual to furnish a written statement authorizing discussion of that individual's record in the accompanying person's presence; The Sandia Disciplinary Review Committee NEVER interviewed me to check the veracity of their statements. The Privacy Act states (2) permit the individual to request amendment of a record pertaining to him and-- The statements in the SDRC are incorrect. I followed all Sandia procedures known to me. I did nothing wrong. I had no opportunity to defend myself. My rights guaranteed under the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Article XIV. Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. have been violated. C My permission was never asked to release these records to Gallegos. As you may realize about the Privacy Act (b) Conditions of Disclosure.--No agency shall disclose any record which is contained in a system of records by any means of communication to any person, or to another agency, except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior written consent of, the individual to whom the record pertains ... The Privacy Act allows imposition of criminal penalties for those like members of the SDRC, Robles, Burtner, and Trujillo who (i)(1) Criminal Penalties.--Any officer or employee of an agency, who by virtue of his employment or official position, has possession of, or access to, agency records which contain individually identifiable information the disclosure of which is prohibited by this section or by rules or regulations established thereunder, and who knowing that disclosure of the specific material is so prohibited, willfully discloses the material in any manner to any person or agency not entitled to receive it, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000. (2) Any officer or employee of any agency who willfully maintains a system of records without meeting the notice requirements of subsection (e)(4) of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000. I forward criminal complaint affidavits on the above individuals to selected magistrate judge Marilyn Hall Patel. Patel ignored my complaints. I return to the subject of breaking electronic locks for the FBI/ERF. Smith's two decisions were overturned on appeal. However, both cases have been overruled on appeal. In the ground-breaking Atari decision, the Federal Circuit held that intermediate copying was a fair use. The Sega decision, which was appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, similarly overruled the district court and held that intermediate copying may be fair use. Sandia patents and trademark lawyer Gregory A. Cone in the enclosed affidavit for a ADEA lawsuit I filed in the District of New Mexico stated AFFIDAVIT OF GREGORY A. CONE Gregory A. Cone, being duly sworn, deposes and states: 1. I am employed by Sandia Corporation. I am an attorney admitted to practice law in the State of California and before the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office and concentrate on legal issues related to patent and copyright law. In that capacity, I am familiar with activities at the Sandia National Laboratories ("Sandia") as they related to what is sometimes referred to as "reverse engineering ." ... [I]t is the general view at Sandia that disassembly of "object code" under such circumstances constitutes a "fair use" of copyrighted software under 17 U.S.C. article 107 and is thus permissible. Sandia bases its view on Sega Enterprises v. Accolade, Inc. 977 F.2d 1510, 24 U.S.P. Q. 2d 1561 (9th Cir. 1992), amended, 1993 U. S. App. LEXIS 78, and Atari Games Corp v. Nintendo of America, Inc, 975 F.2d 832 (Fed. Cir. 1992). ... FURTHER, Affidavit sayeth naught. (signed) GREGORY A. CONE SUBSCRIBED, SWORN TO and ACKNOWLEDGED before me on this 12th day of August, 1993, by Gregory A. Cone." (signed) Mary A. Resnick Notary Public My Commission Expires: 2-7-94 Cone has the two citations reversed. The U. S. Patent Quarterly references the Atari v Nintendo lawsuit 1510 should be corrected to 1015. Cone issued the above affidavit to District of New Mexico federal court in attempt to show that I had no legal reason to refuse to reverse engineer the Hirsch Scramblepad electronic lock. I was covered under 10 C.F.R. 708 - DOE CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEE PROTECTION PROGRAM for my refusal to reverse engineer the Hirsch Scramblepad code. 708.1 Purpose, This part establishes procedures for timely and effective processing of complaints by employees of contractors performing work at sites owned or leased by the Department of Energy (DOE), concerning alleged discriminatory actions taken by their employers in retaliation for the disclosure of information relative to health and safety, mismanagement, and other matters as provided in 708.5(a), for participation in proceeding before Congress, or for the refusal to engage in illegal or dangerous activities." ... Cone's affidavit attempts to create the appearance that reverse engineering was legal before July 27, 1992, the date of my firing. Title 18, Chapter 79, Article 1623 felony perjury. Article 1623 - False declarations before grand jury or court (a) Whoever under oath (or in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code) in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States knowingly make any false material declaration or makes or uses any other information, including any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material, knowing the same to contain any false material declaration, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. Decision of the Atari Games Corp. v. Nintendo of America appeal cited at page 1016 from 24 USPQ 2d was Decided SEPTEMBER 10, 1992. I was fired JULY 27, 1992 so my work assignment was illegal at the time I refused. Therefore, Cone committed felony perjury IN WRITING filed with New Mexico District Federal Court. Chronological review of criminal complaint affidavits would be valuable before I present the current criminal complaint affidavits. 1 Monday March 11, 1996 10:05 I wrote judge Fern Smith a certified return receipt requested letter to ask her to either arrange or personally indict Sandia lawyer Cone for felony perjury. Smith did not respond. 2 Friday May 31, 1996 08:58 I write the criminal complaint affidavit for the arrest of Sandia lawyer Cone and appoint judge Fern Smith as magistrate. 3 Thursday June 13 on orders of Smith and Albuquerque FBI special agent in charge Thomas Kneir FBI agents Kohl and Schum visited my home at 17:08 to investigate me for sending letters referenced in 1 and 2 to Smith. 4 In response to 3 on Tuesday July 9, 1996 06:52 I filed criminal complaint affidavit against Cone, again, for felony perjury with J. Clifford Wallace, chief judge, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Smith for § 4. Misprision of felony Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. for Smith's failure to properly process Cone's felony perjury and § 241. Conspiracy against rights If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; ... for sending, with Knier, FBI agents Kohl and Schum to my home in an attempt to intimidate me. Knier for Conspiracy against rights for his complicity with Smith. 5 Monday July 15, 1996 06:23 I write Wallace again inquiring why he has not responded. 6 August 15, 1996 Thursday Ms. Corina Orozco, Deputy Clerk, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals writes me to tell me In the future, all correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Court. Do not address any correspondence to any one specific judge of this court. 7 September 12, 1996 06:20 I inform Orozco by letter that she is obstructing justice. I ask Orozco to desist. 8 July 25, 1996 Senior Case Expeditor [sic], Gwen Baptiste from the Office of the Clerk, United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit, writes Re: Complaint of Judicial Misconduct We have received your complaint of judicial misconduct. Pursuant to the Rules of the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit Governing Complaints of Judicial Misconduct or Disability, you complaint is being returned to you for compliance with the above rules. A copy of these rules is enclosed. To understand the purpose of the procedure and who may be complaint about please refer to Rules 1 and 2. 9 Wednesday September 18, 1996 11:05 by certified, return receipt requested mail I write Wallace again told tell him Lawyer Wallace, I did not intend to file or did I file a complaint of judicial misconduct. Lawyer Wallace, I filed a criminal complaint affidavit as I have a right to as a citizen of the United States of America when the criminal acts are committed by government personnel, their contractors, Department of Justice and judicial personnel. 10 Wednesday November 27, 1996 09:18 I wrote certified, return receipt requested letter to inform Wallace Purpose of this letter is to inform you of consequences of your failure to perform your duties as required by law as magistrate judge. You are committing felony violations of law. and If I have not complied with all applicable rules, then I ask that you inform me of any non-compliance so that I can correct my criminal complaints and re-submit them. I satisfied the requirement of the Constitution and Rules 3 and 4, and issued written and sworn complaints that set forth the essential facts constituting the offenses charged against Smith, Kneir, and Cone. I also showed facts showing that the offenses were committed by Smith, Kneir and Cone and these individuals committed them. So I ask that you do your job and proceed with supervision of the arrest and prosecution of Smith, Kneir, and Cone for title 18 felony violations of law. 11 Monday March 24, 1997 17:57 I write a certified - return receipt requested letter to Marilyn Hall Patel, District Judge; California, Northern to inform her she has been selected as magistrate to process the criminal complaint affidavit against Sandia Diversity Director Michael G. Robles for sending the enclosed SDRC report to Burtner of EEOC. Robles did this without my written permission and without checking the accuracy of the information. The information contained in the SDRC report is false and defaming. 12 Monday April 21, 1997 13:44 I write Patel a certified - return receipt requested letter containing a criminal complaint affidavit against Charles L Burtner, Director, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC] Larry J. Trujillo, Investigator, Phoenix District Office for sending the false and libelous enclosed documents to Richard Gallegos in Albuquerque without my written consent. 13 Thursday May 8, 1997 06:30 I write a certified - return receipt requested to Patel containing Purpose of this letter is to file a criminal complaint affidavit against Sandia National Laboratories [Sandia] Disciplinary Review Committee members and attendees G. H. Libman, R.A. Polocasz, D. B. Davis, M. E. Courtney, W. R. Geer, C. A. Searls, J. D. Giachino, R. L. Ewing, A. M. Torneby, R. B. Craner, C. W. Childers, E. Dunckel, D. S. Miyoshi, J. J McAuliffe, J. D. Martin, and R. C. Bonner for violation of the criminal penalties section of the Privacy Act, 5 USC 552a(i)(2) and Title 18 felony violations of Civil Rights, Section 241, Conspiracy against right to citizens. for their roles in maintaining an illegal system of records. Sandia refused to acknowledge existence of the enclosed SDRC report and for denying my rights guaranteed under the Constitution. I was never interviewed by the SDRC committee or had any chance to defend my self against the false and defaming claims of the SDRC. 14 Friday June 13, 1997 12:41 I write a certified, return receipt requested to Wallace containing a criminal complaint affidavit against Margret D. Thomas, Judicial Assistant to the Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel for violating § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant ... (C) prevent the communication by any person to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... (3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. for writing on May 9, 1997 Dear Mr. Payne: We are in receipt of your recent letters. Please be advised that we do not issue warrants on criminal proceeding absent an indictment, information or complaint initiated by the United States Attorney. For this reason, and by copy of this letter, we are referring this matter to that office. Any future correspondence concerning these events should be sent to the United States Attorney and not to judge Patel. Thank you. Very truly yours, MARGARET D. THOMAS Judicial Assistant to the Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel cc: Joel Levin Criminal Section Assistant United States Attorney Judge Hug, Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, entitled the Complaint provides: The complaint is a written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged. It shall be made upon oath before a magistrate. As you may be aware, An individual may "make a written complaint on oath before an examining and committing magistrate, and obtain a warrant of arrest." This is in conformity with the Federal Constitution, and "consonant with the principles of natural justice and personal liberty found in the common law." [United States v Kilpatrick (1883, DC NC) 16G 765, 769] You may also be aware, A complaint though quite general in terms is valid if it sufficiently apprises the defendant of the nature of the offense with which he is charged. [United States v Wood (1927, DC Tex) 26F2d 908, 910, affd (CA5 Tex) 26 F2d 912.] And for your edification, The commission of a crime must be shown by facts positively stated. The oath or affirmation required is of facts and not opinions or conclusion. [United States ex rel. King v Gokey (1929, DC NY) 32 F2d 93, 794] The complaint must be accompanied by an oath. [Re Rules of Court (1877, CC Ga) 3 Woods 502, F Cas No 2126] A complaint must be sworn to before a commissioner or other officer empowered to commit persons charged with offenses against the United States. [United States v Bierley ( 1971, WD Pa) 331 F Supp 1182] Such office is now called a magistrate. A complaint is ordinarily made by an investigating officer or agent, and where private citizens seek warrants of arrest, the practice recommended by the Judicial Conference of the United States is to refer the complaint to the United States Attorney. However, further reference to him is rendered futile where a mandamus proceeding is brought to compel him to prosecute and he opposes the proceeding. [Pugach v Klein (1961, SD NY) 193 F Supp 630, citing Manual for United States Commissioners 5 (1948)] Any attempt to bring criminal complaints to government authorities would, of course, be futile. I am a citizen of the United States and, judge Hug, you are the assigned magistrate. In order to satisfy the requirement of the Constitution and Rules 3 and 4, a written and sworn complaint should set forth the essential facts constituting the offense charged and also facts showing that the offense was committed and that the defendant committed it. And, As to the requirement that the complaint be made on personal knowledge of the complainant, it is enough for the issuance of a warrant that a complainant shows it to be on the knowledge of the complainant. [Giordenello v United States (1958) 357 US 480, 2 L Ed. 2d 1503, 78 S Ct 1245, rev. (Ca5 Tx) 241 F2d 575, 579 in accord Rice v Ames (1901) 180 US 371, 45 L Ed 577, 21 S ct 406, and United States v Walker, (1952, CA2 NY) 197 F 2d 287, 289, cert den 344 US 877, 97 L Ed 679, 73 S Ct 172] So as to keep contiguous the requirements of the law ad the criminal complaint affidavit, I will include these complaints in this letter to you. CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AFFIDAVIT: J Clifford Wallace Essential material facts are: 1 Tuesday July 9, 1996 06:52 Payne files criminal complaint affidavit on Sandia lawyer Cone for felony perjury with J Clifford Wallace, chief judge, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and judge Fern Smith for Misprision of felony for failure to prosecute Cone and Conspiracy against rights for sending, with FBI Albuquerque agent-in-charge Knier, FBI agents Kohl and Schum to Payne's home in an attempt to intimidate Payne. 2 Repeated attempts by certified return receipt requested mail to urge Wallace to do his job enumerated to 5-10 and 14 above in this letter go unanswered. Count 1 Wallace made no attempt to bring lawyer Cone to justice despite possessing WRITTEN evidence of criminal activity. Therefore, Wallace is charged with Title 18 § 4. Misprision of felony for Wallace's failure to properly process criminal complaint affidavit. Count 2 Wallace made no attempt to bring judge Fern Smith to justice despite possessing WRITTEN evidence of misprision of felony for not properly processing the criminal complaint affidavit against lawyer Cone and § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant for sending FBI agents Kohl and Schum to Payne's home in an attempt to intimidate Payne. Therefore , Wallace is charged with Title 18 § 4. Misprision of felony for Wallace's failure to properly process a criminal complaint affidavit. Count 3 Wallace made no attempt to bring FBI agent-in-charge to justice for violation of § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant for sending FBI agents Kohl and Schum to Payne's home in an attempt to intimidate Payne. Wallace is charged with Title 18 § 4. Misprision of felony for Wallace's failure to properly process a criminal complaint affidavit. Count 4 Wallace made no attempt to bring MARGARET D. THOMAS to justice for violation of § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant ... for writing Thomas' May 9, 1997 to Payne. Wallace is charged with Title 18 § 4. Misprision of felony for Wallace's failure to properly process a criminal complaint affidavit. VERIFICATION Under penalty of perjury as provided by law, the undersigned certifies pursuant to 28 USC section 1746 that material factual statements set forth in this criminal complaint are true and correct, except as to any matters therein stated to be information and belief of such matters the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that the undersigned verily believes the same to be true. Date William H. Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 87111 505-292-7037 CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AFFIDAVIT: Marilyn Hall Patel Essential material facts are: 1 Patel failed to respond to certified return receipt requested criminal complaint affidavits specified in 11 - 13 in this letter. Count 1 Patel made did not properly process criminal complaint affidavits despite being in possession of documents showing criminal violations of the Privacy Act and violation of civil rights. Therefore, Patel is charged with Title 18 § 4. Misprision of felony for Patel's failure to properly process criminal complaint affidavits. VERIFICATION Under penalty of perjury as provided by law, the undersigned certifies pursuant to 28 USC section 1746 that material factual statements set forth in this criminal complaint are true and correct, except as to any matters therein stated to be information and belief of such matters the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that the undersigned verily believes the same to be true. Date William H. Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 87111 505-292-7037 Judge Hug, I have been extremely patient with judges and clerks of the district of Northern California and Ninth Circuit. Criminal compliant affidavits were filed between March 11, 1996 and June 13, 1997. Nothing has happened as of April 1, 1998. I ask that you 1 issue warrants of arrest or 2 inform me why you cannot proceed to do what I request within 60 calendar days. Smith's case is particularly egregious. Smith and Albuquerque FBI agent in charge James K. Weber, who replaced Kneir, sent US Marshals Lester and Lopez to my home on January 24, 1997 in a second attempt to intimidate me. Anotin Scalia was appointed magistrate to process criminal complaint affidavits against Smith and others for the second intimidation attempt. Sincerely, William H. Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 87111 VERIFICATION Under penalty of perjury as provided by law, the undersigned certifies pursuant to 28 USC section 1746 that material factual statements set forth in this criminal complaint are true and correct, except as to any matters therein stated to be information and belief of such matters the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that the undersigned verily believes the same to be true. Date William H. Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 87111 505-292-7037 Enclosures Privacy Act criminal violation documents, 11 pages AFFIDAVIT OF GREGORY A. CONE, 4 pages May 9, 1997 letter from MARGARET D. THOMAS, 1 page 13