Nope. They were charging me with forgery and intended to prove to the jury that I was trying to pass off the POMC's as regular checks. You don't understand forgery very well. That is when you forge one instrument to function like another.fortinbras wrote:from his linked message:Really not necessary to charge him with theft if (1) the forgery charge covers the same ground and (2) he didn't get the money. By the way, DM's claim that he was charged with forgery ONLY because his POMC was in the general configuration of a bank check is bogus; POMCs have been held to be fraudulent and worthless no matter what their size or shape.David Merrill wrote:....could only charge me with Forgery because the POMC's look a lot like a typical banker's check for guess what? - Private credit FRNs legal tender. They never charged me with theft.
That county prosecutor, it turned out, was promoted to State Attorney-General. How I wish that DM would "ruin" me the same way!David Merrill wrote: By the by; the morning after I filed that Return of Bill of Indictment (finding of facts) on the prosecutor, he cleaned out his office. The newpaper wondered why he was leaving office early but he would make no comment.
They released me when I would not admit that it could have passed muster with any knowledgeable cashier - no bank account # for instance. I did not claim to "ruin" him, the judge on the case probably told him he would face indictment if he continued running a vacant office. People who click the link can read what I mean there, in that complete context.
I thinks you did miss me. I have been busy drafting remedy for good people but came and found you all still going on about me.Pottapaug1938 wrote:Go back to sleep, David. You're still oh-for-everything; and we didn't miss your foolishmess while you were away.
John William SUTHERS is still to this day running a vacant office. His bond is no good! He had to subscribe it within 30 days - not 90. Here is what the state Constitution has to say about that.
And it is out of form statutorily too! Note how SUTHERS swears but fails to state any punishing authority (my mother's grave/a stack of bibles). Swearing by nothing is nothing. Form of Oath. Form of Affirmation. John William SUTHERS is not the attorney general unless you accept that he is running his office de facto.Section 10. Refusal to qualify - vacancy. If any person elected or appointed to any office shall refuse or neglect to qualify therein within the time prescribed by law [30 Days], such office shall be deemed vacant.
Within hours of publication of my lien against SUTHERS and SAMELSON (chief district judge) notice how SAMELSON changed to the same abherrant form:
SAMELSON's bond before.
SAMELSON's bond after.
To get it you have to look closely and see which oath was liened as bond. Too little too late though Kirk Stewart SAMELSON has since vacated his office and removed himself from IN GOD WE TRUST. How clever!