Hospitals & Asylums
To release Manuel Noriega to the custody of Panama as decreed 9-9-07
Be it enacted in the House and Senate, Assembled, Referred to the House Judiciary Committee to Ensure that there is an Error Free Extradition Treaty with Panama and Timely Service Upon the
US Supreme Court, US 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, Ohio Supreme Court, Canadian Supreme Court, Google Inc. and Panamanian Consulate
Manuel Antonio Noriega ID 38699-079 v. United States of America HA-9-9-07
Amices Brief in Pursuit of Panamanian Ambassadorial Service under Art. 36 of Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963
Art. 2 Section 4 and Art. 3 Section 3 of the US Constitution
Cheney, Richard B. & Lynne V. Kings of the Hill. Simon & Schuster. Touchstone. 1983, 1996
Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights 42USC§1983
Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States 18USC§371
Conspiracy to defraud the Government with respect to claims 18USC§286
Fraud and related activity in connection with computers under 18USC§1030
Immunity of Witnesses Generally 18USC§6002
International Bar Association ICC Monitoring and Outreach Programme HA-27-6-06
International Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment A/39/51, 1984
Jose Antonio Ocampo v. Luis Moreno-Ocampo HA-22-6-06
Leslie Anderson v. United States of America and The Minister of Justice (Ont.) (Criminal) (By Leave) No. 31932
Lloyd Prudenza and David Dalglish v. United States of America, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada (Ont.) (Criminal) (By Leave) No. 31696
Locally Tampered Evidence/With Harry Whittington v. Dick Cheney HA-20-2-06
Locally Synchronized Perjury Evident in Appendix C of the Brief State Response Sanders HA-27-7-07
Menu Foods Recall HA-26-3-07
Sanders, Tony J. Drug Administration (DA). Hospitals & Asylums. Chapter 8. 6th Draft. 8 August 2007
Sanders, Tony J. Model Rules for Community Corrections (MRCC). Hospitals & Asylums. Chapter 6. 4th Draft. 7 August 2007
State v. Sanders NO. C-070527
Syl Apps Secure Treatment Centre v. B.D., 2007 SCC 38 July 27
Termination of War Contracts 41USC(2)101
Third Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 12 August 1949
US v. Erpenbeck US.6th Cir. No. 04-3456&7
1. The release of Manuel Noriega is not the victory for justice we had all hoped that it would be but a battle with corruption we hope to win decisively in Congress. Noreiga's Attorney Frank Rubino said he would appeal. The recent decision of the District Court to send Noriega to France is based upon faulty law and bold-faced corruption. The judges mentioned in this case embarked upon on a conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States 18USC§371. Evidence indicates that a conspiracy to defraud the Government with respect to claims did occur in contravention to 18USC§286. The end of August was blighted with perjury, a judicial treason in contravention to Art. 3(3) after an unjust war in contravention to Art. 2(4), that must be prosecuted by the Court and Congress to terminate all fraudulent war contracts remaining from Operation Just Cause under 41USC(2)101(f).
2. First let me introduce myself as a witness, in need of protection, denied immunity from the disease of prosecution as the result of a loophole in the immunity of witness in general under 18USC§6002 that Congress should consider amending to punish perjury such as that recently committed by Presiding Judge Painter of the Ohio 1st Judicial District Court of Appeals, whose signature was illegible, as noted in Appendix C State Response of State v. Sanders NO. C-070527 at pg. 61. The perjury occurred in the form of a spurious entry failing to expunge a traffic misdemeanor after seven years without so much as reading the brief or dismissing the case properly, hiring a bio-terrorist as is his want infringing as he is upon the trademark and email of the Centers for Medicare, Medicaid with the Court Computer Management System CMS v. CMS a flagrant Solicitation to commit a crime of violence 18USC§ 373. Fraud and related activity in connection with computers under 18USC§1030 occurred at now repaired page 690 of the Model Rules for Community Corrections (MRCC) pertaining to the prohibition of refouler and torture and Harry Whittington v. Dick Cheney HA-20-2-06 that includes claims for both Manuel Noriega and Harry Whittington. This tampering with evidence indicates that the local Ohio Appeals Court has joined the Florida and French speaking judges to defraud the United States of their judgment. The reasonable justice would accept the secretly censured or dysfunctional “.cms” email address of the Appeals Court advertised in their local rules as admission of guilt and see that my seven year old, falsified, traffic conviction is expunged and that I and the Court are redressed as the Court could not find it in themselves to do in 2000, see Appendix A at pg. 45.
3. Now let me introduce the case of Drug Administration at §314a(B). On February 4, 1988, a grand jury in Miami, Florida, indicted General Noriega for crimes associated with drug trafficking while a CIA agent and high ranking officer in Panama. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights received a number of complaints regarding the suspension of human rights and visited Panama between February 27 and March 3, 1989. On May 7, 1989 the Panamanian elections annulled by the Electoral Tribunal. By the fall of 1989, the Noriega regime was barely clinging to power. Tensions increased when election results were voided and opposition leaders were physically beaten by Noriega's Dignity Battalions (DIGBATs). On 15 December 1989, the National Assembly of Panama declared that a state of war existed with the U.S. and adopted measures to confront foreign aggression. On 20 December 27,684 U.S. troops and over 300 aircraft confronted the 3,000 Panamanian Defense Force. The Organization of American States condemned the action. On July 19, 1990 a group of 60 companies based in Panama filed a lawsuit against the United States Government in Federal District Court in New York City alleging that the U. S. action against Panama was "done in a tortious, careless and negligent manner with disregard for the property of innocent Panamanian residents". About 2,700 families that were displaced by the Chorrillo fire were each given $6,500 by the United States to build a new house or apartment in selected areas in or near the city. In Operation Just Cause 23 US service members were killed, 18 from the Army, 4 from the Navy and one from the Marine Corp and 324 wounded in action there were an estimated 516 to 4,000 Panamanian casualties.
4. Noriega contends that under the Geneva Conventions, a POW must be returned home after hostilities have ceased -- in his case, more than 20 years ago. Noriega was convicted in absentia in Panama on charges of embezzlement, corruption and murdering political opponents and sentenced to 60 years, but he could wind up serving only a fraction of that time or even get house arrest under Panamanian law under the Treaty with Panama on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, 1991 and Extradition Treaty with Panama, 1905 and Art. XI (2,4) Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 not to mention the Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners 1990, Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment 1988 and Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners 1955-77. As a prisoner of war Noriega is entitled to be repatriated to his home country after the cessation of hostilities under Art. 118 of the Third Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 12 August 1949 that States, “Prisoners of war shall be released and repatriated without delay after the cessation of active hostilities.” Magistrate Turnoff in is in error to say that this right does not exist under the Geneva Conventions. Noriega's detention was in fact a violation of the Art. XI (2,4) Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 that confers all jurisdiction of criminal justice functions regarding Panamanians to Panama to which the USA was party at the time of arrest.
5. US Magistrate Judge William Turnoff's did commit perjury on Tuesday August 28, 2007 by saying "The rights asserted by General Noriega simply do not exist under the Geneva Conventions." by making the decision to cause Manuel Noriega to face extradition to France for a trial regarding the alleged laundering of $3 million of drug revenues including the purchase of a Paris apartment. Noriega was convicted in France on the money laundering charges while he was jailed in the U.S., but the French government agreed to a new trial if he was extradited, according to court documents. The ruling was based in part upon that of Senior Judge William Hoeveler that found Noriega to be a POW and this does not render Noriega immune from extradition to foreign counties for other crimes. Panama has filed an extradition request but has not actively pursued it, Hoeveler said in his ruling that also perjures. Federal prosecutors say POWs that have pending criminal charges must face them, or be sent to a third country that has a legitimate extradition treaty with the U.S., such as France. This decision was a flagrant deprivation of rights under Color of Law 18USC(13)§242 aggravated by reason of kidnapping to a class A felony. The United States is therefore liable to Noriega for a civil action for the deprivation of rights to redress the violation of the declaratory decree releasing Mr. Noriega on September 9 2007 under 42USC§1983. The federal penitentiary in Florida is certainly very troubled. A representative of the US DOJ Inspector General was shot to death by a prison guard he was arresting. An unregistered prisoner convicted of dubious bank fraud charges in the Southern District of Ohio, that claims full responsibility, is reported to have been illegally trafficked to a federal prison in Florida in US v. Bill Erpenbeck US 6th Cir. No. 04-3456&7.
6. France's claim upon Noriega is weak, and corrupt. France obviously seized these assets of Noriega on the conjecture that it was illicit drug money, and one might add corrupt influence of the detaining power, and under their Constitution is responsible for the return of these seized assets. But no, instead France also wants to torture Noriega on false drug charges that do not amount to war crimes and fail under the statute of limitations. Allegations of corruption, abuse of process and torture must leveled against the French thieves whose claim to neutrality fails not only under a theory of stolen goods but also under the statute of limitations for petty breeches of law not involving murder and their bad taste in law, the most corrupt criminal justice has to provide, drugs. Does this give the French a right to also slave and torture the body of Mr. Noriega? No, it gives Noriega the right to sue for the return of his property. How are lawsuits fought in the EU? In the jail cell with the torturous toxins of drug enforcement officers or in writing like civilized nations? Evidence indicates that international European jails are not safe for war criminals whereas my last two cases were murdered in 2006 for political reasons and all the European Court of Justice did is rob Google in my honor as noted in the International Bar Association ICC Monitoring and Outreach Programme HA-27-6-06, Jose Antonio Ocampo v. Luis Moreno-Ocampo HA-22-6-06, and Prosecutor v. Milosevic HA-25-12-04. The question the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals is sought to certify to France upon the information of Google’s lawyers is, should Google’s millions be returned to the US firm?
7. Two cases have been brought before the Canadian Supreme Court, Lloyd Prudenza and David Dalglish v. United States of America, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada (Ont.) (Criminal) (By Leave) No. 31696 and Leslie Anderson v. United States of America and The Minister of Justice (Ont.) (Criminal) (By Leave) No. 31932. It should be noted that Ontario has a lengthy history of offenses against the United States documented in the Menu Foods Recall HA-26-3-07. There is also evidence of politicization of these cases in the form of a television commercial where a new cow with a Canadian accent is ridiculed as being mad by a herd of California cows who have never heard of snow. Ontario is reported to be the richest of Canadian provinces but if the Supreme Court is to be believed despite their most recent 66 paragraph judgment in Syl Apps Secure Treatment Centre v. B.D., 2007 SCC 38 July 27 that indicates a prejudice at the Supreme Court, is also the most corrupt, recently claiming the life of a former justice. What seems to have happened is that the rich Ontario judges have tricked the United States into trading a greater than $7 million settlement for a few slaves.
8. The US must not be robbed by French speaking thieves taking unfair advantage of our national weakness for slavery. While torture is not evident in Noriega’s detention in Florida where people are generally gunned down when inspecting prisons, to make a political statement, it is in the case of the author who is suffering a new slow acting pain in the ass that is not very responsive to Advil. The un-redressed torture causing death in the UN war tribunals in the European Union rule out extradition of Manuel Noriega to Europe whereas there is obviously a conspiracy regarding claims surrounding the wrongful deaths of the innocent Milan Babic and Slobodan Milosevic whose parents both committed suicide. Under the International Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment A/39/51 (1984) no State shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. The US border is hereby secured against three flagrante delictos by two French speaking countries who we pray will return money stolen from US nationals.
9. The arrest and detention of Manuel Noriega was a serious failure of our international system of justice that amounts to cruel and unusual punishment and treatment that has led to a dangerous fad and proliferation of international criminal tribunals who have seized the United Nations. The defense of Manuel Noriega must be very vigorous. Only Panama has a valid case for extradition after this lengthy and unjust period of time under statute of limitations because the Panamanian case involves murder of Panamanians by a Panamanian. Furthermore whereas Noriega is a Panamanian national, a former President, he is entitled to return to his homeland, to be near his family. Panama must be permitted to protect their cultural heritage and their entire consular staff and Parliament have the duty to see the safe return of their former dictator to their historians. Panama's ambassadors and lawyers are directed to communicate with Mr. Noriega in federal prison at Miami FCI, 15801 S.W. 137th Ave., Miami, FL 33177 (305) 259-2100 for procedural direction under Art. 36 of Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963.
Sanders, Tony J.