Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0240.004 2010-2012 Dan A. Cole P.O. Box 630 Keaau, Hawaii 96749 F- F Telephone: (808) 966 -9229 ``21 2 Email: Cole Flaxv aii, ahoo.com TESTIMONY IN OPPISITION: To Res. 88 -11: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE REN'I ENTION OF SPECIAL COUNSEL BY THE HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL TO PROVIDE LEGAL OPINION REGUARDING (1) FORM AND /OR LEGALITY OF BILL 29, DRAFT 4, THE PROPOSED OPERATION BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAI'I FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 -2012 AS ADOPTED BY THE HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL ON JUNE 1, 2011; (2) THE VETO MESSAGE FOR BILL 29, DRAFT 4, AS TRANSMITTED BY THE HONORABLE MAYOR WILLIAM P. KENOI, DATED JUNE 15, 2011; (3) THE LETTER BY CORPORATION COUNSEL LINCOLN S.T. ASHIDA TO FINANCE DIRECTOR NANCY CRAWFORD, DATED JUNE 14, 2011, REGUARDING BILL 29, DRAFT 4. Testimony to be presented in both Oral and Written formats before the SPECIAL MEETING OF THE HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL, on Friday, June 24, 2011; LEGAL NOTIFICATION required by United States Code, 18 U.S.C. §4 Misprision of felony as by and through this Testimony of Dan A. Cole , the Council, identified as an authority under the United States is being made known the actual commission of felonies cognizable by a court of the United States, where such felonies include, but not limited to, 18 U.S.C. §1344 Bank Fraud, 18 U.S.C. §371 Conspiracy to Commit offense or to defraud United States, 18 U.S.C. §2 Principles & 18 U.S.C. §3 Accessory after the fact to knowing and knowingly violations in patterns and history of violations to the federal RICO Act codified by 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Definition (1) "racketeering activity ". COMES NOW, Dan A. Cole, to Testify, Allege, and Aver that the necessity for authorizing the hiring of special counsel to provide legal opinion to the Hawai'i County Council regarding Bill 29, Draft 4, Mayor William P. Kenoi's veto of Bill 29, Draft 4, and Corporation Counsel Lincoln S.T. Ashida's June 14, 2011 legal communications alleging legal infirmities is moot on a plethora of State of Hawaii and United States Legal Statutes, Legal Doctrine, and Legal Maxims Where the aforesaid actions of the County Council are alleged to be knowing and knowingly acts and actions, or non -acts and non - actions as identified under the Legal Doctrine of assenting- silence which states: The principle that an accusation will be taken as true, despite silence by the accused, if the accusation was made under circumstances in which silence can be fairly said to be an agreement. Calm No. 0. ' Ro To: = '' t n,,f. 4 i4tft and identifies an indirect confession by Council Members to the use of their Official Position in violation of 18 U.S.C. §242 Deprivation of Rights under Color of Law: Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under the color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution of laws of the United states. For the purpose of section 242, acts under "color of law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official's lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his /her official duties. Persons acting under the color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prison guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim. and in conspiracy against rights as, 18 U.S.C. §2 Principles and/or 18 U.S.C. §3 Accessory after the fact, where such Official Actions or Official Non - Actions were such knowing and knowingly acts and actions undertaken in pattern and history of violations of the federal RICO Act, RE: 18 U.S.C. §1961 Definition (1) "racketeering activity ", (A) Extortion, RE: Hawaii Revised Statutes, HRS §707 -764 Extortion (1)(i) Take or withhold action as a public servant, or cause a public servant to take or withhold such actions. Such actions are identified as knowing and knowingly actions, or non -acts and non - actions by the County of Hawaii and it's agents, to include members of the Hawaii County Council acting in their official position in violation of 18 U.S.C. §241 Conspiracy against rights, where Records of the Council as held in the Clerk's Repository of Records, County of Hawaii, identify that that two or more officials and/or agents of the County of Hawaii did conspire to oppress, threaten and/or intimidate a person, Dan A. Cole, and to deny said person of his State and Federal Constitutional rights and freedoms to petition the government in redress of grievance, rights of due process of law, and equal protection of the law, et. al. in conspiracy with State of Hawaii, and United States judicial authorities, Officers of the Court and Judges to instill in a person, Dan A. Cole, through legal coercion and/or means of compulsion sufficient in kind and degree to subject a person having the same general station in life to believe he had no reasonable means of escape and no choice except to remain in the service of the aforementioned agents by means of legal coercions that aforementioned officials and agents, in knowing and knowing violation of 18 U.S.C. §1584 Sales into involuntary servitude in that the aforementioned agents and officials did in fact have the legal authority to deny and deprive a person, Dan A. Cole, of his State and Federal Constitutional guaranteed rights and freedom to petition the government of redress of grievance, rights to due process, rights to property and equal 2. protection of laws thereby violating a person's, Dan A. Cole, Thirteenth Amendment right to be free from involuntary servitude. See United States V. Kozminski, 487 US. 931 (1988). The County Council, County of Hawaii and the Mayor, County of Hawaii have both abdicated their rights under the Hawaii County Charter by and through the acceptance and use of Joint Counsel, that Counsel being the Hawaii County Corporate Counsel Office, and the Mayor appointed and Council approved Corporation Counsel, Lincoln S.T. Ashida thereby preventing any true Legal and/or Ethical separation of the Administrative and Legislative branches of the County government and their functions of the Chief Executive Officer vested with all the executive powers of the County and legislation and public policy formulation of the Council. Counsel Ashida cannot serve two Masters in legal opposition without being in conflict for to do so would be a fraud upon his client the County of Hawaii. Caveat emptor; qui ignorare non debuit quod jus alienum emit: Let the buyer beware: for he ought not act in ignorance when he buys what another has a right to. The Council is, or should have been, aware that Mayor Kenoi, as of March 2, 2011 may no longer have the Legal Authority to act as the County's Executive Officer. The Council should have done it's due diligence after having been made aware of the alleged and averred rational and prior illegal acts and actions in violation of a plethora of statutes and provisions of the Hawaii County Charter, Hawaii Revised Statutes, United States Code, Securities Act of 1933, et. al., that precipitated Mayor William P. Kenoi's actions in vetoing of Bill 29, Draft 4 in response the Council's amending Bill 29 with the fabricating of a "Council Adjusted Expense Account" is related directly to the issuance of the March 2, 2011, $10M General Obligation Bond Anticipation Notes, Series "A" and Series `B" that were issued upon the "Authorizing Authority" of Bill No.: 311 (Draft 3), Reference: C- 154.14/FC -188, Ord. No.: 11 -40, signed by Mayor Kenoi on May 4, 2011 with an Effective Date: May 4, 2011, two, (2), months after Mayor Kenoi's signature, and that of County Finance Director Crawford, appeared on and IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE COUNTY OF HAWAII, STATE OF HAWAII, did thereby certify, recite and declare that all conditions, acts, and things essential to the validity of the Note and the series of which it is part exist, have happened and have been done; that every requirement of law affecting the issuance thereof has been duly complied with;... . The Council is, or should be aware of by the fact that in addition to their availability to Legal Counsel of the Corporation Counsel Office there is a Council Member that is a Licensed Lawyer in the State of Hawaii and former State Deputy Attorney General, where the Council should have been made aware of the common meaning of the Legal Maxim Causa et origo est materia negotii: The cause and origin of the matter are the substance of it. "The law regards the original act" 3. i Each Council Member, jointly and severely , is aware by way of a thirty-nine, (39), page 17 June 2011 letter and testimony from Dan A. Cole, RECEIVED 2011 JUN 20 AM 9 26, County Clerk, County of Hawaii, with attached documentation SUBJECT: TESTIMONY IN COMMENT for Council's Special Session to override Mayor Kenoi's veto of the County's $367.3 million budget.; 18 U.S.0 §4 NOTIFICATION to an authority under the United States RE: 18 U.S.C. §1344 Bank Fraud, 18 U.S.C. §1961 "racketeering "; Hawaii Revised Statutes, HRS §485A -501 General fraud, et. al. I call the Council's attention to the PREAMBLE of the County of Hawaii Charter: WE, THE PEOPLE OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAI'I, in the State of Hawai 'i, with due respect for and in support of the laws of the land, do adopt this CHARTER OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAI'I Please review the above PREAMBLE in light of you own Sworn Oath of Office and notice that any further action in reference the approval of, or to override Mayor William "Billy" Kenoi's veto thereof Bill 29, Draft 4 will be identified as a knowing and knowingly act or action in violation of a aforementioned plethora of County, State and Federal Statutes thereby removing any and all, making moot, General Obligations of the County and the interest and principal payments as a first charge on the general fund of the County, removing the full faith and credit of the County to the punctual payment of the principle and interest on the March 2, 2011 County of Hawaii Bond Anticipation Notes Series "A" and Series "B ", wherefore the County of Hawaii "OFFERED" to Bank of Hawaii and Bank of Hawaii made "Purchase Confirmation" and purchase of, the Non - Rated, March 2, 2011 County of Hawaii Bond Anticipation Notes in the above series pursuant to the Master Issuance Certificate, wherein the Certificate states that each Participating Institution is expected to conduct it's own "due diligence" in purchase of the Notes. In addition the people of the County of Hawaii are absolved of any obligation for providing Legal Counsel, payment or repayment of any incurred fees and/or fines to Hawaii County Council Members in respect to any criminal indictments, trials or civil torts brought against them, and where such legal actions are therefore to be brought against the Council Member, persona, and not Council Member, body politic. DATED: June 24, 2011, Hilo, Hawaii er Dan A. Cole 4.