Submit your own Writ of Habeas Corpus for Sam

May 1, 2009 by Ian
Filed under: Obscured Truth Network, ToDo, Update

Ivy and Marc Stevens have worked up a writ that you can fill out and file to help get Sam out of jail. The more that are filed, the more likely the superior court judge will look seriously at Sam’s case. Here are her instructions from the discussion thread on the FK Forum:

Download it. Put your name in the “your name” spots. Make sure the dates throughout it are correct (especially at the bottom in the signature line, the certificate of service, and the affidavit). And file them at Superior Court right there in Keene on Monday.

RevDebbie

Does one need to be a resident of NH in order to file this writ? (I reside in NJ.) If they will accept writs from out-of-staters, what's the address I should mail this to?
Zeus

What are the acceptability restrictions regarding who may or may not fill this out?
Sam's Dad

REVDEBBIE & ZEUS,

When Marc called the show he said that anyone in or out of state could submit a writ and then let the court sortout the acceptability restrictions and etc. I plan to overnight one myself from Texas and some of my close friends.
Zeus

Doubt it makes any legal difference but "delicti" is misspelled as "dilecti" throughout the document. So is "Superintendent". A quick Find & Replace will cure that though.
RevDebbie

I've got my writ completed and ready to overnight mail to the court on Saturday. Is the Docket Number supposed to be left blank, or do I need to fill it in? If I need to fill it in, what is the Docket Number?
Gredok The Destroyer

Considering the USPS charges a fortune for overnight delivery, does anyone know whether or not this can be faxed or emailed to someone locally and delivered or mailed from there?
charley hardman

The more that are filed, the more likely the superior court judge will look seriously at Sam’s case.

i suspect the relationship inverts temporarily somewhere between the second and millionth writ received. this has "backfire" written all over it.
Zeus

this has “backfire” written all over it.

If only we all had your kind of optimism and principles. What a wonderful world it would be…

…for those who think "1984" is an instruction guide for utopia.
http://libertyactivism.info bile

I've got a fixed version at http://jailedactivist.info/uploads/activists/sam-…
Ivy

Thanks for the corrected version, Bile, and thanks for catching those typos Zeus. I'm moving so quickly I didn't catch that. Much appreciated.

I can't take too much credit for this – this was all Marc Stevens' work, I just added a few NH specific cases and tweaked the format a bit to fit more what I've seen submitted in NH courts. So, thanks Marc!
Sam A. Robrin

May I make one more suggestion? Enter a version in which every instance of >>>>>>>> your name <<<<<<<< is in red, and every instance of the date is in blue, so that no instance is overlooked. (Yes, I could do it myself, but given my legal knowledge, I'm afraid I'd, well, overlook one.)
charley hardman

If only we all had your kind of optimism and principles.

you are not dealing with woodland faeries here, and "optimism" will not cover the ill-considered legal strategy of giving some tyrant a ready excuse to write off a pleading potentially helpful to the hostage.

as to my principles, you have no idea what you're talking about — obvious from your ludicrous invocation of Nineteen Eighty-Four. never argue from ignorance, fraudster; it's worse than noise.
Zeus

“optimism” will not cover the ill-considered legal strategy of giving some tyrant a ready excuse to write off a pleading potentially helpful to the hostage.

Sorry, Charley. This is just backpedaling noise. Your initial post advocated surrender and pessimism.

It is you who are being fraudulent by making negative comments and then backpedaling with talk about tyrants and hostages. Make up your mind. You're either for tyranny and despair or hope and liberty. Pick one.
charley hardman

Your initial post advocated surrender and pessimism.

not only demonstrable hogwash, but very much from the school of "you're either for us or against us". first comes honesty. after that, you can learn to read.

fraudulent by making negative comments and then backpedaling with talk about tyrants and hostages.

"you're either for us or against us!"

ahh, here it is semi-explicity:

You’re either for tyranny and despair or hope and liberty. Pick one.

the part you left out, of course, is the numskull premise that whatever harebrained nonsense ian "90 days in the cooler" freeman advocates represents "hope and liberty". however, matching my record in tyrants' court against that of the FK gang, my instincts speak best for the hope and liberty side.

sadly, you will likely continue to argue from ignorance. that's my real name above, BTW — perfect opportunity for you to withdraw instead of making inane and false allegations, "zeus".
Zeus

Here we go with the accusatory mutterings about my pseudonym again. It's a nickname and it has been my online handle for nearly 20 years. Get over it.

i suspect the relationship inverts temporarily somewhere between the second and millionth writ received.

Translation: I bet it's useless to send more than one so why bother?

this has “backfire” written all over it.

Translation: This is gonna go bad for you guys if you do it.

“you’re either for us or against us!”

Nice try, Charley, but illusions don't carry any weight. They have no substance.

Tyranny and Liberty are polar opposites. This isn't subjective (i.e. affected by a particular state of mind; results from the feelings of the subject), it is objective (i.e. without bias or prejudice; detached; impersonal) fact. Liberty is antithetical (being in direct and unequivocal opposition) to tyranny.

If you say you support liberty, you cannot support tyranny or vice versa. To claim otherwise is an illogical paradox and therefore, as I said before, you either support freedom and hope or tyranny and despair. Of course, if you're purposely deluding yourself otherwise in order to sleep better at night, I can understand that. I don't advocate it, but I understand it.

the part you left out, of course, is the numskull premise that whatever harebrained nonsense ian “90 days in the cooler” freeman advocates represents “hope and liberty”

And here the illusion evaporates completely and your true colors stand revealed.

Ian has nothing to do with this conversation. He has not advocated anything regarding the writs of habeas corpus anymore than Ivy or Sam's Dad have.

One wonders why you would evoke his name in the middle of this discussion (where he has not even posted), disparage him by trivializing his abuse by the state during the Couch Case, call whatever he advocates "harebrained" and "numskull" and so on when it is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to the current conversation.

I would submit that you are trying to confuse the issue by pointing at some other focus of your animosity and shouting "Look over there! It's Barney the Dinosaur!" and then attempting to kick me in the figurative nads.

Your illusion is gone, Charley. The secret of your "magick" stands revealed: It was nothing but deception. Sleight of hand. A trick of the light. Smoke and mirrors.

You might as well take a bow and walk off the stage with some dignity intact because you're not fooling anyone anymore.
charley hardman

It’s a nickname and it has been my online handle for nearly 20 years.

what's your meatspace non-zeus name?

Translation: I bet it’s useless to send more than one so why bother?

false.

Translation: This is gonna go bad for you guys if you do it.

the action advised — likely, yes. you got one nearly correct.

Ian has nothing to do with this conversation. He has not advocated anything regarding the writs of habeas corpus anymore than Ivy or Sam’s Dad have.

the ian who ostensibly posted this and wrote "The more that are filed, the more likely the superior court judge will look seriously at Sam’s case" is not ian freeman? evidence points otherwise.

One wonders why you would evoke his name in the middle of this discussion (where he has not even posted)

if ian freeman didn't create this very blog post, please alert him that his posting login has apparently been used by someone else.

trivializing his abuse by the state during the Couch Case,

false.

call whatever he advocates “harebrained” and “numskull”

false. even you should be godamned ashamed of yourself for that one.

COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to the current conversation.

noting that the legal recommendation here is from the screwup on the defense side of the 90-days fiasco is relevant as hell.

I would submit that you are trying to confuse the issue by pointing at some other focus of your animosity and shouting “Look over there! It’s Barney the Dinosaur!” and then attempting to kick me in the figurative nads.

Your illusion is gone, Charley. The secret of your “magick” stands revealed: It was nothing but deception. Sleight of hand. A trick of the light. Smoke and mirrors.

You might as well take a bow and walk off the stage with some dignity intact because you’re not fooling anyone anymore.

c'mon, you can write more paragraphs than that. the ol' joseph smith shuffle demands it.
Zeus

what’s your meatspace non-zeus name?

Nunya Bizwax. Come on, who didn't see that coming?

if ian freeman didn’t create this very blog post, please alert him that his posting login has apparently been used by someone else.

Better check your own login, someone else seems to be putting words in your mouth and it ain't me.

the numskull premise that whatever harebrained nonsense ian “90 days in the cooler” freeman advocates represents “hope and liberty”.

Despite your denial, the "90 days in the cooler" nickname you've labled Ian is a derogatory description regarding his sentence in the Couch Case. So that's lie #1.

Despite your denial, use of the term "godamned" and your admonishing request that I be ashamed for pointing out your own words for all to see, you cannot change the meaning of "Ian", "harebrained", "numskull", "nonsense" and "advocates". Lie #2.

Considering you don't seem to agree on the efforts being made by the activists visiting this site and have a huge, angry hard-on for Ian, why even bother coming here? If you aren't a troll, then what purpose does it serve? Do you find it amusing to make posts that lower morale, spread pessimism and defame people? Because that's all I've seen you do.

And yeah, I could write tons more paragraphs. There's no doubt about it. I'm an opinionated loudmouth… but I'm a principled one. What's your excuse?
Sam A. Robrin

In line with my request above, to wit:

"May I make one more suggestion? Enter a version in which every instance of >>>>>>>> your name <<<<<<<< is in red, and every instance of the date is in blue, so that no instance is overlooked. (Yes, I could do it myself, but given my legal knowledge, I’m afraid I’d, well, overlook one.)"

I counted three instances where the petitioner's name is supposed to go, two at the top and one at the bottom; and one instance where the date needs changing, at the bottom. Did I overlook any?
Sam A. Robrin

Sure enough–when I said, "I counted three instances where the petitioner’s name is supposed to go, two at the top and one at the bottom; and one instance where the date needs changing, at the bottom," and asked, "Did I overlook any?" the answer is, Yes, ONE MORE DATE below that, and TWO MORE INSTANCES WHERE THE NAME NEEDS TO GO AT THE BOTTOM.