(no green text on purpose)
(from David Lane's writings)
>http://www.davidlane1488.com/maynard.html
Maynard C Campbell
The following is dedicated in honor of my friend and kinsman, Maynard C. Campbell. Maynard, an honest and thoroughly decent man, was murdered the evening of January 16, 1997 as a culmination of years of Federal deceit, treachery and malice. I take this opportunity to honor a brave man, first by a little history of his life and second by showing some of his work, exposing the unconstitutional usurpation of jurisdiction by the Federals over crimes and alleged crimes which fall under the purview of the individual states.
MAYNARD C. CAMPBELL
I first heard of Maynard Campbell shortly after the Federal assassins murdered Vicki and Sammy Weaver. Maynard had written a short book exposing the lies and treachery of the Federals' hired guns and I saw advertisements for the booklet in various publications. The Federals, therefore, trumped up some false charges that Maynard had cut down a few trees on Federal property and issued a warrant for his arrest. The fact that Maynard had a deed to the property was ignored by the Federals and at the subsequent trial the Federal whore on the railroad, i.e. judge, would not allow the jury to see the deed as plain evidence that the charges were a hoax. Anyway, the next time I heard of Maynard was on the radio. He had cursed the Federal devils and vowed not to surrender. A siege ensued and eventually Maynard did allow himself to be arrested, a mistake for which he berated himself continually. After his arrest and the usual perjury circus, called a trial in a Federal court, Maynard was sentenced to 13 years in the Federal gulags. Remember, all this was over a few trees. Of course, they enhanced the charges to "threatening Federals," i.e. telling the truth about the Federal assassins and perjurers. Maynard did not hide either his emotions or the truth.
Bear in mind, that even if he had cut down a few trees on Federal property, an appropriate penalty would have been a warning or small fine. Now, thirty years ago, Maynard had worked for a short time as an electronic technician for the Denver Police Department. So, after the verdict, the Federals sent him to Leavenworth and then to the High Security Prison here in Florence, Colorado, knowing full well, of course, that for a high profile ex-cop it was a death sentence. Maynard's spirit was not broken, though, and he did not surrender. He studied and made himself into the foremost authority on the Federal usurpation of jurisdiction. Thousands of challenges to these unconstitutional prosecutions were soon being filed in the Federal courts, and the beast's hatred for Maynard grew ever greater.
Maynard arrived here in Florence in early 1996, as best I remember. I would describe him as a charming Irishman. Despite his age, 55 years, he reminded me of a little boy at times, always excited over some new discovery, but, also, exploding with verbal imprecations over Federal treacheries. He was a trencherman at the table, and I constantly teased him about his weight. But, with feigned reluctance I would finally surrender my hamburger, hot dogs or other meat dishes, just to see the delighted grin on his face as he gobbled them down. Being a vegetarian myself, it was no sacrifice. Being a skinny old man, nearly 60 years old, I could not enforce protection for Maynard from the "good old boys" and "Code of the Convict" and druggie-drunk types. But, as much as possible I tried to spread an umbrella of protection with words and reason. Maynard had no vices; he did not drink, smoke, use drugs, gamble, and of course he had no use for homosexuals. So these practices which cause 99% of the violence in prison should have had no bearing. Unfortunately, Maynard lived in a different unit from mine, and even worse, there was no warning of what would happen.
Regardless of who did the actual killing, the responsibility for the murder of this brave and decent man belongs to the Federals who falsely and maliciously first imprisoned him and then insured his death by placing him in a high security prison. I grieve over the death and imprisonment of each and every one of the uncountable martyrs destroyed by this incalculably evil government. But, not since the death of Robert J. Mathews have I been this saddened. At each meal I catch myself glancing around to look for Maynard's cheerful face and impish smile. Farewell my friend. You did your tour of duty with honor and courage!
FEDERAL JURISDICTION
Although there were some deceitful agents of international finance among them, the majority of America's founding fathers had ideas of freedom which are reflected in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Recognizing that governments inevitably and as standard practice prosecute political dissent as common crimes, the founding fathers denied the federal government jurisdiction over all but a few, narrowly defined possibilities. In memory of Maynard Campbell I will use some of his wording to demonstrate. In the United States of America we have two separate and distinct, mutually exclusive jurisdictional systems. "State jurisdiction" includes the law-making power to regulate, control and govern real and personal property, individuals and enterprises within the territorial boundaries of any particular State. "United States" or "Federal jurisdiction" is extremely limited and defined, lawfully exercised only in areas external to State legislative power and territory and specifically delegated by the Constitution. In spite of the clarity of this simple principle the Federal government has been operating totally out of bounds.
So, where does the U.S. Constitution allow the United States government to exercise jurisdiction? Article I, Section 8, Clause 17, US Constitution: "To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such district (not exceeding 10 miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the consent of the Legislature of the State where the same shall be for the erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful buildings."
The Supreme Court stated, "The laws of Congress do not extend into the territorial limits of the States, but have force only in the District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the National government." Caha v. US,. 152 US 211, 215 (1894). "No jurisdiction exists to enforce federal criminal laws until consent to accept jurisdiction over acquired lands has been filed in behalf of the United States, as provided in Title 40, USCS 255" Adams v. US, 319 US 312 (1943). This is stated unequivocally in a government publication called " JURISDICTION OVER FEDERAL AREAS WITHIN THE STATES," subtitled "Report of the Interdepartmental Committee for the Study of Jurisdiction over Federal Areas within the States," published by the US Government Printing Office in 1956/1957 in two volumes as follows: The inescapable fact is that Federal criminal jurisdiction exists only in Washington, D.C., the Federal enclaves within the States, the territories and possessions of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State. PERIOD!!!!!
Over 100,00 people languish in Federal prisons today, and almost every single one was fraudulently convicted. Over a million others have gone through this injustice and hell previously. So, who are the real criminals? The Federal prosecutors and judges use "smoke and mirrors," such as the Interstate Commerce clause, to disguise their treachery and unlawful assumption of jurisdiction. It is deception. It is not what a crime was; it is not the motive; the place where the alleged crime happened is the only criterion for determining jurisdiction. To be sure, the Constitution permits the national government to adjudicate disputes between the several States in matters of commerce, but the alleged crimes of individuals do not, never have and never were meant to fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal government. All this Maynard proved by research beyond debate by reasonable men. So now, I think you have a further idea of why this true man of honor was murdered.
David Lane
>https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/85/638/490513/
>((( FACTS )))
>The material facts are undisputed. On October 9, 1992, Maynard Campbell and Eileen Kunkel were indicted for theft of government timber. Agents obtained an arrest warrant for Campbell and a summons for Kunkel. Unaware that Campbell would be present at Kunkel's residence, agents first served Kunkel's summons. Campbell read Kunkel's summons and the attached indictment also naming him as a defendant, at which point he became angry and threatened that if the agents "mess with me," "something similar will happen like what happened in Idaho" where "Randy Weaver [shot] deputy marshals." As agents were leaving the home, Campbell reached behind his back for what the officers thought (and what Campbell later admitted) was a handgun.
And dropping this, just in case.
>https://www.scribd.com/document/148015398/Catalogue-of-Silent-Tools-of-Justice-Maynard-C-Campbell-OCR