David Haeg is fighting for the Alaskan Grand Jury and why you should care
On January 2, 2023, the controversial guest David Haeg was on
the Alaskan Michael Duke’s Show. Haeg has been fighting for his constitutional rights
and to prevent the government and Alaska courts from shutting down and active
grand jury. He has been exposing corruption in the Alaska government and
judicial system after a horrible experience with them.
In his account, he was tazed 10 times while showing evidence
to the court under Judge William Morse. Haeg’s guest appearance on Duke’s show was
to raise attention to the very suspicious ending of the most recent grand jury.
Haeg reminds the people of Alaska the need for the grand jury is not just a
Kenai problem, but should make all Alaskans concerned.
On February 7, 2023, Haeg and supporters spoke before the
Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly. Haeg was asking for the assembly members to
create a resolution to condemn the suspension of the Alaska grand jury. In
doing so, Haeg hopes the assembly’s support will stop the Alaska Supreme Court changing
rules to prevent the peoples’ right to a grand jury.
In defense of the grand jury, Haeg is calling for a State-wide
courthouse sit in. The event will be held on March 15, 2023. On Haeg’s
websites, alaskastateofcorruption.com and alaskagrandjuryassociation.org, Haeg writes
for people to begin the sit in at 8:00 am. He asks for support to sit in “until
the Alaska Supreme Court rescinds the rules unconstitutionally suspending the
Grand Jury's power to investigate, recommend, or indict corrupt officials.”
According to Haeg v. State of Alaska, 3KN-10-01295 CI, A-13501, “David Haeg
was a licensed master big game guide operating in game management unit 19.”
It was March 2004 when Haeg was permitted by the State of Alaska to hunt for
the local wolves. After accusations were made, the State decided to renege on a
reasonable plea deal. Once the State had eyes into his operations and assets it
decided to take all of Haeg’s property. The property included his personal
plane, and a nice profit to the State.
The legal assault on Haeg’s rights is an assault on all
Alaskan rights. If the State can take all of his property by making criminal
charges then the State can take from all Alaskans. With criminal charges the
State was able to see into Haeg’s assets. After discovering Haeg had something the
State coveted, the State decided previous plea deals made between the State and
Haeg were not enough to take possession of his assets.
Haeg reports approximately seven grand juries have been
convened and suspended over the years. The most recent suspension of the grand
jury, on June 29, 2022, happened after Executive Director at Alaska Commission
on Judicial Conduct Marla Greenstein was subpoenaed by the grand jury. Greenstein
has been the lead judicial misconduct investigator for the past 33 years, since
1989. She has reigned over 8,000 cases of complaints against Alaskan judges. Haeg
and others claim Greenstein has been falsifying investigations into corrupt
judges for decades.
On July 4, 2022, Haeg filed a criminal complaint against
Judge Jennifer Wells:
“On June 29, 2022, a Kenai grand jury, by
majority vote, voted to investigate evidence of public corruption within
Alaska’s judicial system. Prior to witnesses being sworn or evidence presented,
Judge Wells ordered the grand jury to stop investigating and permanently dismissed
the grand jurors from duty. Jurors never got to see or hear anything; not even
direct evidence that the only investigator of Alaska’s judges for the last 30
years and counting (Marla Greenstein) is falsifying official investigations to
keep corrupt judges on the bench – and then falsifying certified documents to
cover up.”
Haeg’s complaint reported that prior to the June 2022 another
grand jury was ended in March 2022. This grand jury involved Judge Jennifer Wells.
She and Deputy Attorney General John Skidmore ended the grand jury’s
investigation. Haeg wrote:
“Although the Governor was
informed and Criminal Director Angie Kemp was assigned to investigate (she
admitted Skidmore is her boss), nothing happened. At least four other grand
juries are known to have been stopped by the same officials/entities and the
grand jury was investigating – with nothing done when complaints were filed. To
pass a resolution protesting the forgoing, Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly
found evidence that grand jury investigations have been stopped for the last 30
years.
Parts Removed From the Original
Alaska Grand Jury Handbook
After Haeg began to call for a grand jury, suspiciously, the State created a new handbook that looked like directions to an elementary school student. Haeg complains vital language was removed. For decades the government has been dumbing down its material used for informing the people.
The government is removing the discussions of statutes and
case law within the Grand Jury Handbook, because they want the law to be only
understood by the elite. This is similar to ancient religions, when only priests
could read and speak the language of the Gods. This always creates a permanent
underclass.
Much like how blacks were kept from learning how to read and
write, the government plans to give handbooks giving directives and not
informative to the people. If the handbook quotes case law and names statutes
it ts seen as bread crumbs for those American’s looking for their rights. And
the government and courts do not want the people to know what their rights are.
Within the original Grand Jury Handbook’s first section, Importance
of the Grand Jury, the editing removed language that was obvious and clear to
the people that a grand jury was their right. Quoting the original handbook:
In time of peace no citizen can
perform a higher duty than the of Grand Jury service. No body of citizens
exercises public functions more vital to the administration of law and order.”
According to the original Grand Jury Handbook section III(a),
The Accusing Body as to Serious Crimes:
Thus the citizens themselves, by
this representative body of Grand Jurors, hold in their own hand the control of
the maintenance of law and order throughout the state, through prosecution for
crime. The importance of this power cannot be overestimated.
The Alaska government and judicial servants, that would be subject
to the people’s grand jury, have been wielding a great deal of influence, and
pressure to prevent Haeg successfully seeking a grand jury. The handbook avoids
the language meant to describe the authority the public has over the grand
jury. Judges and legislators changed the
Grand Jury Handbook by removing the following:
“In order that the Grand Jurors
may not be subjected to partisan secret influence, no one has the right to
approach an individual member of the Grand Jury in order to persuade him that a
certain Indictment should, or should not, be found. Any such individual should
be referred to the district attorney, in order that he may be heard by the
Grand Jury as a whole. On the other hand, a citizen is at liberty to apply to
the Grand Jury for permission to appear before it in order to suggest or urge
that a certain situation should be investigate.
According to the original Alaska Grand Jury Handbook, Nature
of the Grand Jury, III(b), one of the most important duties of the peoples’
grand jury includes:
“[T]he additional important duty
of making investigations on its own initiative, which it can thereafter report
to the Court. Thus a Grand Jury may investigate how officials are conducting their
public trust, and make investigations as to the proper conduct of the public
institutions, such as prisons and courts of justice. This gives it the
power to inspect such institutions, and if desired, to call before them those
in charge of their operations, and other persons who can testify in that
regard. If as a result of each investigation the Grand Jury finds that an
improper condition exists, it may recommend a remedy.”
This previous quote explains the people have the right to
convene a grand jury and conduct investigations. The jurors are allowed to see into
the acts of the corrupted officials, become knowledgeable about the active
procedures in question and to make a report of the findings. The jurors can
recommend removing officials, ask for changes to procedures and even recommend criminal
charges of officials.
The Grand Jury and the Constitutional
Rights of the People
The Alaskan Constitution relied on legal debates discussed
among America’s Founding Fathers. In the spirit of the U.S. Constitution, the
states created their constitutions with similar elements that would be
familiar to most Americans as their federal rights. The Founding Fathers of
America debated heavily on the concepts of due process, authority of powers,
and the peoples’ right to a grand jury.
Starting with the spirit of the U.S. Constitution, the 5th Amendment provides the people the right to a grand jury. In 1789, Founding Father James Madison argued the Grand Jury Clause. The State legislature relied upon his commentary in the creation of the State of Alaska’s Constitution, Article I, § 8, Grand Jury. The U.S. 10th Amendment provides for federalism, discussing the source of powers that give the state legislature authority to create laws not addressed in the U.S. Constitution. The Alaska Constitution reaffirms the people are the source of power in Article I, § 2. Source of Government. While the U.S. 14th Amendment addresses the right of due process, so does Alaska’s Article I, § 7, Due Process.
Grand Jury Clause
The U.S. Constitution 5th Amendment says:
No person shall be held to
answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or
indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval
forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;
nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in
jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a
witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use,
without just compensation.
The AK version Article I, § 8 states:
No person shall be held to
answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or
indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the armed forces in time
of war or public danger. Indictment may be waived by the accused. In that case
the prosecution shall be by information. The grand jury shall consist of at
least twelve citizens, a majority of whom concurring may return an indictment. The power of grand juries to investigate
and make recommendations concerning the public welfare or safety shall never be
suspended.
According to the 2018 Alaska Grand Jury Handbook, The
grand jury acts as both a “sword” and “shield” of justice. It acts as a sword
when it investigates crimes and charges defendents with crimes. It acts as a
shield by protecting accused persons from being charged when there is not
enough evidence of a crime.”
The American Bar Association Model Grand
Jury Act states:
The purpose of the grand jury is
to inform the public of situations requiring administrative, judicial, or
legislative corrective action – not the castigation of individuals.” Detractors
of the use of grand juries claim a grand jury violates the public servant’s due
process, because usually there is only the prosecutors in the room presenting
evidence to the jurors.
Haeg refers to Yule Kilcher of Homer, Alaska, at 1328, and the commentary made by the Alaskan Founding Father and now deceased Senator Yule Kilcher. Yule was an immigrant in the 1940s from Switzerland during tensions between major powers in the Great Wars. According to Kilcher, discussing the use of a grand jury, [Yule Kilcher of Homer, Alaska] at 1328:
“I recall personally a situation
eight or nine years ago that brought it to my attention forcefully how the
grand jury can be utterly vital. The grand jury in its investigative power as
well as for the fact that it is sitting there as a panel sometimes is the only
recourse for a citizen to get justice, to get redress from abuse in lower
courts…it is the only safeguard a citizen occasionally has when for any reason
and very often for political reasons, a case is not dealt with properly. The
grand jury can be appealed to directly, which is an invaluable right to the
citizen.”
During the Alaska Constitutional
Convention, Kilcher argued, “[T]he grand jury in its investigative power as
well as for the fact that it is sitting there as a panel sometimes is the only
recourse for a citizen to get justice…’ (Kilcher, 1328)
Source of Power
The U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment states:
The powers not delegated to the
United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are
reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The Alaska Constitution follows suit with its own statute
regarding the source of power behind the State’s government. According to
Article I, §
2. Source of Government, the source of power is not designated to any
official or entity, but with the people alone.
Alaska Article I, § 2. Source of Government:
All political power is inherent
in the people. All government originates with the people, is founded upon their
will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the people.
The judicial branch in Alaska must be reminded the U.S. 14th
Amendment gives the State’s legislature the power to create laws. The courts
are writing legislation with little input from the legislators. This process
violates the Alaska Article I, § 2, because legislators are elected by
the people to create laws.
In the passing of Criminal Rule 6 and 6.1, the Court and
legislature had operatives using speed to quickly bypass members of the Rules
Committee. The rush denied representatives the time to debate changes affecting
the rule.
Mr. Haeg’s complaint about the most recent grand jury being
suspended includes a conflict-of-interest that affected his legal case’s result.
The judge presiding over his trial, Margret Murphy, was seen
with the prosecutions main witness, Trooper Gibbens, as he chauffeured Murphy around
town during Haeg’s trial. The relationship between the two required the recusal
of Murphey.
In Haeg’s letter to Greenstein, Haeg reported at least four
witnesses were available to testify to the many times they saw Judge Murphy with Trooper
Gibbons. Greenstein signed off she interviewed the witnesses. All of the
witnesses deny any such contact with Greenstein. This raised questions about a
conflict-of-interest. Black’s Law Dictionary defines conflict-of-interest as, “A
real or seeming incompatibility between one’s private interests and one’s
public or fiduciary duties.”(Black’s Law Dictionary, pg. 363)
Due Process Clause
Lastly, the U.S. 14th Amendment regarding due process was
created by five sections, the following sections are relevant to this article:
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.
Section 5
The Congress shall have the power
to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. The
Alaska Constitution Article I, § 7, Due Process, states the following “No
person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law. The right of all persons to fair and just treatment in the course of
legislative and executive investigations shall not be infringed.”
Alaska’s Due Process Clause is addressed in Article I, § 7, Due
Process:
“No person shall be deprived of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law. The right of all persons to
fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive
investigations shall not be infringed.”
According to the Constitution Center:
“The Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment echoes that of the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth Amendment,
however, applies only against the federal government. After the Civil War,
Congress adopted a number of measures to protect individual rights from
interference by the states. Among them was the Fourteenth Amendment, which
prohibits the states from depriving “any person of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law.”
Alaskan's right to a grand jury, Article I, §
8, is
also affected by the State’s Due Process Clause, Article § 7, in a similar way. According to the Bill of
Rights Institute, “Due process is not a particular right in and of itself.
Rather, it is a blend of rights, customs, procedures, and legal traditions that
have evolved over the centuries alongside our modern understanding of the
requirements of the concept of “justice.”
The Due Process Clause is invaluable in criminal cases. The denial
of due process leads to the imprisonment of the innocent. The defense the accused
can claim is the denial of due process, which involves poor evidence handling
and improper procedures, among others.
According to the Blackstone Institute, Sir William Blackstone
(1723-1780) was an Eighteenth-Century English scholar. He was influenced by
the Ten Commandments when he created the Blackstonian philosophy. The Founding
Fathers relied upon Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England to write
the U.S. Constitution. His work is so valued to Americans that more book copies of
his writings have been sold in America than sold in Europe.
Blackstone discussed, “It is better that ten guilty persons
escape than that one innocent suffer.”
The Bill of Rights Institute explains how valuable
due process was in the creation of the Constitution. “The most numerous and
most well-known due process protections, however, are found in the Bill of
Rights. Indeed, nearly half of the Bill of Rights is devoted to the
requirements of due process throughout the three stages of law enforcement:
accusal, determination of guilt, and punishment.”
History of the Grand jury
According to the Bill of Rights Institute:
“Most persons in the United
States would consider due process quintessentially American. However, the
concept of due process of law, and many of the individual rights that are
associated with it, evolved from English law. In 1215, King John was forced to
accept limitations to his prerogatives in the Magna Carta. These limitations
redefined the relationship between the king and the barons, and granted a body
of rights and protections to the nobles that would, over time, become deeply
rooted in English common law.”
Furthermore, the Bill of Rights Institute explained how
important due process was in the creation of the Constitution. “The
most numerous and most well-known due process protections, however, are found
in the Bill of Rights. Indeed, nearly half of the Bill of Rights is devoted to
the requirements of due process throughout the three stages of law enforcement:
accusal, determination of guilt, and punishment.”
One of the earliest American cases using a grand jury was
the case of John Peter Zenger. Zenger was a newspaper publisher and
inconvenience to the Royal Governor of New York, William Cosby. Zenger was a
writer and publisher of politics and criticism. William Cosby entered the scene
as an outsider who began to abuse the subjects he was meant to represent.
According to the Constitutional Rights
Foundation, BRIA 22 3 b John Peter Zenger and Freedom of the Press, in
1732, Governor Cosby traveled to colonial New York to become the Royal
governor. He immediately wanted to seize half the wages of the acting governor Rip
Van Dam. A lawsuit by Cosby was filed to do just that.
“Without the approval of the
colonial assembly, Cosby appointed a special court of three justices to hear
the case without a jury. In April 1733, Van Dam’s lawyer argued that the
special court was illegal. The Chief Justice, Lewis Morris, agreed. But the
other two justices, James DeLancey and Frederick Philipse, sided with Governor
Cosby.”
Cosby’s actions are similar to what happened with the recent
Alaskan grand jury, in Haeg’s situation. Cosby was after the wealth of his
predecessor, like the State of Alaska confiscating Haeg’s wealth. Cosby was a
tyrant using his influence within the government and courts. Like Gov. Cosby,
the courts stacked the deck with judges on his side. In both Haeg’s and
Zenger’s cases the government and courts showed disdain for the people and
their right to the grand jury process.
According to the Constitutional
Rights Foundation, “As early as 1275, the English Parliament had outlawed
"any slanderous News" that may cause "discord" between the
king and his people. Slander, however, only referred to the spoken word.
Published works became a much more serious threat to kings and parliaments
after the invention of printing greatly enhanced communication in the 1400s.”
Per the Constitutional Foundation, John Peter Zenger was a political critic, journalist and publisher of The New York Weekly Journal. Zenger was a harsh critic of Cosby. Cosby’s prosecution was Zenger was suspicious and rejected by many New Yorkers. The charges against Zenger included the serious offense of “seditious libel."
In Zenger's time seditious libel was enforceable, it is
no longer a prosecutable offense likely due to further debates on freedom of
speech. In Black’s Law Dictionary, page 1056, seditious libel is ”…made with
the intent of inciting sedition.” Meaning, Zenger published criticism of
the British Crown by questioning the authority of the Royal Governor of New
York.
President James Madison argued the Grand Jury Clause
within the First and Second American Continental Congress. The many Founding Fathers
repeated their support for the use of the grand jury, describing it is often
the only avenue for the people to have due
process against a runaway branch of
government. This is why the Alaska Constitution made the peoples’ use of
the grand jury unable to be “suspended”.
According to the White House page on James Madison, President
James Madison served as the fourth president of the United States, during 1809-1817.
He is known as the “Father of the Constitution”. He joined two other men
in the writing of the Federalist Papers: Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. The
writing of the Federalist Papers was an attempt to make the Constitution favor
the people and to prevent tyranny.
Alexander Hamilton was Founding Father, a soldier, delegate,
lawyer and was confirmed by the Senate as the first Secretary of the Treasury
(1789-1796) under President George Washington. Hamilton was a promising young writer
from the West Indies. He was sponsored to come to America to study at King’s
College (now Columbia University) after writing to the Royal Danish American Gazette about
a horrible storm the West Indies suffered. At only 17 years old his writings were so well developed they were being confused as the writings of the brilliant judicial mind of John
Jay.
Native Virginian John Jay was confirmed as the first Chief
Justice of America in 1789, after passing the bar in 1768. He was educated at
King’s College. Also, Jay served as a
diplomat to Spain and participated in the creation of the Treaty of Paris.
On June 8, 1789, with the Federalist Papers were written and
distributed. Madison made a monumental speech introducing the Grand Jury Clause.
At the drafting of the first Constitution many felt it was lacking. So, Madison
presented 20 Amendments. Among them included the Grand Jury Clause. He was
urging the representatives to include the Grand Jury Clause, because he
considered the right to a grand was an element of due process.
When James Madison made his June 8, 1789 speech, he argued the U.S.
Constitution required his Amendments to be introduced. Madison felt a duty to speak
for his constituents. He said:
“If I thought I could fulfill
the duty which I owe to myself and my constituents, to let the subject pass
over in silence, I most certainly should not trespass upon the indulgence of
this house. But I cannot do this; and am therefore compelled to beg a patient hearing to what I have
to lay before you. And I do most sincerely believe that if congress will devote
but one day to this subjects, so far as to satisfy the public that we do not
disregard their wishes, it will have a salutary influence on the public councils,
and prepare the way for a favorable reception of our future measures.”
Unlike Madison’s calls for patience, the Alaskan Supreme Court action
led to an abnormal process in the Alaskan legislature to change the language to
Criminal Rule 6 and 6.1. The rush prevented enough time for the majority of the
Rules Committee to respond. Only three representatives were able to respond in
time before the rule change was immediately approved, and put in affect just
before the hearing scheduled to discuss the subpoenaed chief investigator of
the judicial branch, Marla Greenstein.
As Madison introduced his amendments, he said, “We have
in this way something to gain, and, if we proceed with caution, nothing
to lose; and in this case it is necessary to proceed with caution; for while we
feel all these inducements to go into a revisal of the constitution, we must
feel for the constitution itself, and make that revisal a moderate one.
The majority of the representatives that had time to respond
to the court wrote letters in response that were more inquisitive than
informative. The members had questions they needed answered before giving an
opinion. Just like Madison asking for the time to fully debate issues, the committee
members called for clarity and hearings.
According to Haeg’s site, under document SCO 1993 History,
only three members of the Rules Committee were able to respond to a last minute
request. These men included Judge Thomas Temple, private defense attorney John
Murtagh, and Assistant Public Defender Doug Moody.
After Haeg gained enough influence and support, Haeg has
seen seven grand juries be repeatedly interrupted. On the Michael Duke’s show,
Haeg explained the last grand jury issued a subpoena for the Executive Director
of the Alaskan Commission on Judicial Conduct, Marla Greenstein. She has been
serving as the lead investigator into judicial misconduct for 33 years, and has
lorded over 8,000 complaints.
How many judges have been repeat-offenders? How many times
has Greenstein realized she made mistakes in previous decisions? And would she
ever admit her mistakes? Likely, not. If Greenstein had to admit one case was
conducted illegally then all of her decisions would be in question. Greenstein’s
position holds too much power.
Haeg places emphasis on the following Alaska Constitution’s language:
“The power of grand juries to
investigate and make recommendations concerning the public welfare or safety
shall never be suspended.”
Black’s Law Dictionary defines “suspend” as, (1) “To
interrupt; postpone; defer.” Also, (2) To Temporarily keep (a person) from
performing a function, occupying an office, holding a job, or exercising a
right or privilege.” With this definition, the law is clear, the writers of
the Alaska Constitution meant for no intervention from powerful people with
conflicts of interest.
Conclusion
The reality is Alaska is in a constitutional crisis.
Alaskans are having their rights stripped away from them silently by the
government every day. The State of Alaska preventing a grand jury from
proceeding violates core constitutional principles. Including violating important legal
clauses, like those mentioned above: due process, source of powers and the grand
jury. The State and its courts are fighting to be right, while Haeg is fighting to
set things right.
2016 Alaska Grand Jury Handbook. (2016, September). Alaska State of Corruption. Retrieved February 9, 2023, from https://www.alaskastateofcorruption.com/2016%20Alaska%20Grand%20Jury%20Handbook.pdf
2019 Alaska Grand Jury Handbook. (2019, May). Alaska State of Corruption. Retrieved February 9, 2023, from https://www.alaskastateofcorruption.com/Alaska%20Grand%20Jury%20Handbook.pdf
Alaska Constitutional Convention 1955-1956. (2023). The Alaska State Legislature. Retrieved February 10, 2023, from https://akleg.gov/pages/constitutional_convention.php
Alaska R. Criminal P.6. (2021). CaseText. Retrieved February 5, 2023, from https://casetext.com/rule/alaska-court-rules/alaska-rules-of-criminal-procedure/part-iii-indictment-and-information/rule-6-the-grand-jury#:~:text=Alaska%20R.%20Crim.%20P.%206.%20Download.%20PDF.%20As,district%20in%20which%20the%20matter%20under%20investigation%20occurred.
Amdt5.2.1 Historical Background on Grand Jury Clause. (n.d.). Congress.gov. Retrieved February 7, 2023, from https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt5-1-1-1/ALDE_00000854/
Amending Criminal Rule 6 and Criminal Rule 6.1 concerning grand jury. (2022, November 29). Alaska State of Corruption. Retrieved February 12, 2023, from https://www.alaskastateofcorruption.com/SCO%201993.pdf
Black’s Law Dictionary (10th ed.). (2014). Thomson Reuters.
BRIA 22 3 b John Peter Zenger and Freedom of the Press. (2006, season-03). Constitutional Rights Foundation. Retrieved February 12, 2023, from https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-22-3-b-john-peter-zenger-and-freedom-of-the-press
Constitution of The United States. (1787). Congress.gov. Retrieved February 9, 2023, from https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/
Criminal Complaint against Judge Jennifer Wells to Dunleavy, Taylor and Legislature. (2022, July 4). Alaska State of Corruption. Retrieved February 11, 2023, from https://www.alaskastateofcorruption.com/Judge%20Wells%20Criminal%20Complaint.pdf
Due Process of Law. (2023). Bill of Rights Institute. Retrieved February 12, 2023, from https://billofrightsinstitute.org/essays/due-process-of-law
Haeg v. State of Alaska, 3KN-10-01295 CI, A-13501
James Madison. (2023). White House. Retrieved February 10, 2023, from https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/presidents/james-madison/?fbclid=IwAR0vILhZ7lUo6iInbEBDES88tBYEmEpBo5gsOXqFex1E7poAtXJ29wmLuxI
James Madison Speech to Congress June 8, 1789. (2019). Revolutionary War and Beyond. Retrieved February 9, 2023, from https://www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com/james-madison-speech-june-8-1789.html
Judge M. Murphy Complaint. (2006, April 24). Alaska State of Corruption. Retrieved February 8, 2023, from https://www.alaskastateofcorruption.com/Highlighted%20Greenstein%20Evidence.pdf
Judicial Ethics Column. (2022). American Bar Association. Retrieved February 10, 2023, from https://www.americanbar.org/groups/judicial/publications/judges_journal/editorialboard/ethics_column/?fbclid=IwAR0h_60528RmvQfNiMOCev5Tzksb-QwLu6D0507WxY_cTjwnhmdbDqkQ0eA
Kilcher Family Homestead. (2023). Alaska.or. Retrieved February 8, 2023, from https://www.alaska.org/detail/kilcher-family-homestead
Magna Carta. (2021, October 21). History. Retrieved February 12, 2023, from https://www.history.com/topics/european-history/magna-carta
Michael Dukes Show. (2023, February 2). Thursday 2/2/22 - Headlines, David Haeg - Grand Jury; Rep Tom McKay #Alaska #Live #news. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCiCPmvCuho
Original Alaska Grand Jury Handbook. (n.d.). Alaska State of Corruption. Retrieved February 9, 2023, from https://www.alaskastateofcorruption.com/Original%20Alaska%20Grand%20Jury%20Handbook.pdf
SCO 1993 History Memo. (n.d.). Alaska State of Corruption. Retrieved February 12, 2023, from https://www.alaskastateofcorruption.com/SCO%201993%20%20History.pdf
Sir William Blackstone. (2023). Blackstone Institute. Retrieved February 12, 2023, from https://blackstoneinstitute.org/sir-william-blackstone/
Sir William Blackstone: Quotes. (2023). Britannica. Retrieved February 12, 2023, from https://www.britannica.com/quotes/William-Blackstone
The Constitution of the State of Alaska. (1956, April 24). Office of Lt. Governor. Retrieved February 8, 2023, from https://ltgov.alaska.gov/information/alaskas-constitution/
The Fourteenth Amendment Due Process. (2023). National Constitution Center. Retrieved February 12, 2023, from https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/amendment-xiv/clauses/701?fbclid=IwAR2qFW54cI-CC69lPX1LkXvMG6SODa_J2rTAQAk0c3xMo1z5Q6620S_AYcs
Good job!
ReplyDelete