A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE CASE INVOLVING GORDON KAHL

[Mark T Pitcavage]

In article <838286283$11...@atype.com>,
Wilhelm E. Schmitt <sch...@freenet.msp.mn.us> wrote:
>
>Here are the first few paragraphs of a 14 page paper I wrote
>summarizing the 77 page legal briefs prepared by Yorie Kahl's attorney
>John DeCamp which will describe the circumstances which led to Yorie's
>imprisonment and more. You may find the complete paper at:
>http://www.future.net/~thetruth/kahl_sum.html
>
>A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE CASE INVOLVING GORDON KAHL
>
>It is quite likely that historians will view Sunday, February 13, 1983
>as the date on which the Second American Revolution began in earnest.
>For it was on that day a group of U.S. federal marshals converged on
>Medina, North Dakota and set up a roadblock, intending to assassinate
>Gordon Kahl; to silence him because he was a vocal income tax
>protester and public critic of illegal and immoral activities in that
>State by judges, bankers and attorneys, many of whom were members in
>Masonic Lodges where they took blood-curdling oaths to protect and
>defend each other in virtually any and all circumstances.

I'm sure what you really intended to say was that they meant to arrest him for
violating his parole conditions.

>
>The attempt to murder Gordon Kahl failed because he was unexpectedly
>armed and also had excellent combat skills. The skirmish ended with
>two federal marshals dead, a third wounded, two local policemen
>wounded and out of action, and Gordon's young son, Yorie, severely
>wounded and near death.

"Unexpectedly armed"? It was well known that he was -always- armed except when
in the grocery store. It was the very fact that he was well-armed which caused
the law enforcement officers to try and pick him up in a location outside of
town.

>After taking Yorie to a nearby clinic and then to a hospital where
>emergency surgery saved Yorie's life, Gordon disappeared and was the
>subject of an intense manhunt by federal agents for several months.
>Finally he was located in Arkansas because the daughter of a nearby
>family "snitched" on Gordon's location to federal authorities,
>probably to get the sizable cash reward that had been offered by the
>federal government. While Gordon was seated watching television to get
>news of his son's trial which was then in progress in North Dakota,
>the house in which he was living was surrounded by heavily armed
>federal and local forces. The local sheriff entered the house,
>stealthily approached Gordon from behind, and shot him in the head
>without giving him any chance to surrender. Thus was the federal
>government's program to silence Gordon Kahl brought to a successful
>conclusion, on June 3, 1983.

Did you mention the fact that Gordon shot and killed the local sheriff?

>
>As a direct result of the "shoot-out," Yorie and another young man, a
>local farmer named Scott Faul who happened to be present in one of the
>cars when the marshals sprung their roadblock, were charged with and
>convicted of second degree murder, assaulting federal officers,
>harboring a fugitive and conspiracy. Each received two concurrent life
>terms plus 15 years. At the time this is being written (July 1996),
>they have been in prison in excess of 13 years and were repeatedly
>denied parole. As will be shown later in this summary, there was no
>legal ground for the interdiction of Gordon Kahl in the first place;
>the marshals deliberately removed their badges and did not identify
>themselves as they stepped from their cars and pointed guns at Yorie
>whom they mistook for Gordon Kahl; the marshals did not give Gordon
>any opportunity to surrender but one of them fired the first shot,
>striking Yorie; Yorie Kahl fired at no one but was immediately
>grievously wounded, whereupon Gordon, seeing his son shot down before
>his eyes, opened fire and was solely responsible for the deaths and
>wounding of the members of the federal "hit" team. It will also be
>shown that Yorie and Scott did not receive fair trials but were
>victims of gross bias on the part of the judge and some members of the
>jury. May I say to those readers who are inclined to doubt the
>truthfulness of the foregoing statements, I sincerely hope you will
>read on.

Hmm. The appeals courts seemed to think that the trials were fair.

[Wilhelm E. Schmitt]

Here are the first few paragraphs of a 14 page paper I wrote
summarizing the 77 page legal briefs prepared by Yorie Kahl's attorney
John DeCamp which will describe the circumstances which led to Yorie's
imprisonment and more. You may find the complete paper at:
http://www.future.net/~thetruth/kahl_sum.html

A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE CASE INVOLVING GORDON KAHL

It is quite likely that historians will view Sunday, February 13, 1983
as the date on which the Second American Revolution began in earnest.
For it was on that day a group of U.S. federal marshals converged on
Medina, North Dakota and set up a roadblock, intending to assassinate
Gordon Kahl; to silence him because he was a vocal income tax
protester and public critic of illegal and immoral activities in that
State by judges, bankers and attorneys, many of whom were members in
Masonic Lodges where they took blood-curdling oaths to protect and
defend each other in virtually any and all circumstances.

The attempt to murder Gordon Kahl failed because he was unexpectedly

armed and also had excellent combat skills. The skirmish ended with
two federal marshals dead, a third wounded, two local policemen
wounded and out of action, and Gordon's young son, Yorie, severely
wounded and near death.

After taking Yorie to a nearby clinic and then to a hospital where

emergency surgery saved Yorie's life, Gordon disappeared and was the
subject of an intense manhunt by federal agents for several months.
Finally he was located in Arkansas because the daughter of a nearby
family "snitched" on Gordon's location to federal authorities,
probably to get the sizable cash reward that had been offered by the
federal government. While Gordon was seated watching television to get
news of his son's trial which was then in progress in North Dakota,
the house in which he was living was surrounded by heavily armed
federal and local forces. The local sheriff entered the house,
stealthily approached Gordon from behind, and shot him in the head
without giving him any chance to surrender. Thus was the federal
government's program to silence Gordon Kahl brought to a successful
conclusion, on June 3, 1983.

As a direct result of the "shoot-out," Yorie and another young man, a

local farmer named Scott Faul who happened to be present in one of the
cars when the marshals sprung their roadblock, were charged with and
convicted of second degree murder, assaulting federal officers,
harboring a fugitive and conspiracy. Each received two concurrent life
terms plus 15 years. At the time this is being written (July 1996),
they have been in prison in excess of 13 years and were repeatedly
denied parole. As will be shown later in this summary, there was no
legal ground for the interdiction of Gordon Kahl in the first place;
the marshals deliberately removed their badges and did not identify
themselves as they stepped from their cars and pointed guns at Yorie
whom they mistook for Gordon Kahl; the marshals did not give Gordon
any opportunity to surrender but one of them fired the first shot,
striking Yorie; Yorie Kahl fired at no one but was immediately
grievously wounded, whereupon Gordon, seeing his son shot down before
his eyes, opened fire and was solely responsible for the deaths and
wounding of the members of the federal "hit" team. It will also be
shown that Yorie and Scott did not receive fair trials but were
victims of gross bias on the part of the judge and some members of the
jury. May I say to those readers who are inclined to doubt the
truthfulness of the foregoing statements, I sincerely hope you will
read on.

Before this case can be correctly understood, the events leading to
the confrontation at Medina must be examined in detail. Gordon Kahl's
Saga consists of four significant episodes: (1) Preliminary causes;
events leading to the confrontation at Medina; (2) the "shoot-out" at
Medina, North Dakota on February 13, 1983; (3) the trial, May 9
through June 24, 1983, during which Yorie Kahl and Scott Faul were
convicted; and (4) the death of Gordon Kahl on June 3, 1983. Each of
these episodes will be discussed in as much detail as this short
summary permits. For a more extensive treatment, the reader should
consult the two habeas corpus briefs filed in the North Dakota Federal
District Court on Yorie's behalf by his attorney, John DeCamp, during
April, 1996.

<snip>

These two briefs will be scanned and uploaded to a web page which will
be announced after completion.

Wilhelm E. Schmitt
sch...@freenet.msp.mn.us
--
No man escapes when freedom fails;
The best men rot in filthy jails,
And those who cried, "Appease! Appease!"
Are hanged by those they tried to please.

[Wilhelm E. Schmitt]

jman...@skypoint.com (Jim Manson) wrote:

> "M. M. Sierra" <mmsi...@pacbell.net> wrote:

> >Wilhelm E. Schmitt wrote:
> >
> >BLAH, BLAH, BLAH..
> >
> >Wilhelm:
> >Where do the flying saucers figure in this story ??

> >
> >> No man escapes when freedom fails;
> >> The best men rot in filthy jails,
> >> And those who cried, "Appease! Appease!"
> >> Are hanged by those they tried to please.
> >

> >In my gut, I know you're nuts

> Funny you should mention flying saucers. Wihelm was working on a
> "ray gun" that would scramble a humans mind hundreds of yards
> away right before he went to prison.

Mr. Jim Manson,

You accused me in private e-mail of lying. A mere assertion
without evidence carries no weight. A fundamental dictum of
logic is: "He who asserts must prove." From your comments
it is apparent you won’t deal with the details of what I
wrote about the Gordon/Yorie Kahl case. You prefer to use
epithets and smear tactics. However, I will continue to
conduct the discussion using evidence and will document my
assertions.

Previously you wrote:

> Yep- Schmitt was a political prisoner all right- lets see-
> grenade launchers, light machine guns, explosives.
> I could also point out he was turned in by a rival protester
> group to emliminate competition- i.e. greed.
>
> Hmm...then there's the bank robbery plans which included
> hostage taking. Too bad his buddy decided to spill his guts
> (i.e. Mr. Porter) about the whole thing. The death threats to various
> people also, I'm sure, were political speech and should have
> been protected. How come you guys keep claimng that the people
> involved in the Kahl debacle and the Mathews debacle should
> go to jail? That would simply make them political prisoners also under
> your definitions.
>
> Granted the Kahl arrest was not a good idea- but they were hardly
> an assassination squad, they simply didn't think anyone was loony
> enough to start shooting over a "stale misdemeaner" warrant.
> They were wrong.
>
> If the government ever decided in an organized manner to even remotely
> begin operating like you allege, none of you would be here right now
> talking about it. If they had wanted to kill Kahl, believe me, they
> have people that could do it and nobody ever would have known about
> it. The best defense to your claims is that you are all still around
> and still discussing it.

I am not at the present time dealing with my case. But for
general information: You assert that my imprisonment
involved my possession of (1) grenade launchers. [Wrong. I
was not charged with having "grenade launchers."] (2) light
machine guns. [Wrong again. Only one rifle was seized; it
was *semi-automatic* and had never been altered in any way.
However, it was alleged by the federal prosecutor to be a
"machine gun" because "it was too easy to convert to full
automatic fire." The jury, composed of persons who were
typical products of "government" schools, and who had never
learned to think for themselves, accepted that false
argument, and obviously knew little about guns.] (3)
Explosives. [Wrong again, as I understand the definition of
explosives, none was found.] (4) I was not "turned in by a
rival protester group," and no "greed" was involved. (5)
Mr. Porter did not "spill his guts." [In fact, he refused to
testify against me, and as a result the feds concocted a
totally false case against him in retaliation.] (6) There
were no "bank robbery plans." [It was only a *contingency*
program to be put into effect if and when the totalitarians,
Marxists and other mattoids successfully impose their terror
in America. From all current indications, they have success
within their grasp. My position was and is that the Bill of
Rights (common law) protects the rights of citizens to
discuss any subject, to travel freely, and to make
observations in public. This is all I and my associates
did. Since each of these activities is protected
individually, they certainly must be protected in their
aggregate; otherwise, individual rights mean nothing. (7)
Death threats to various people. [Wrong again: say, this is
getting monotonous! I challenge you, Manson, to identify by
name any person or persons who received death threats from
me or any of my associates.]

But let’s assume that I did indeed have "machine guns,"
"grenade launchers," and "explosives." Perhaps Mr. Manson
ought to check _Black’s Law Dictionary_, Fifth Edition and
note the definition of "arms." They are defined as
"ANYTHING A MAN WEARS FOR HIS DEFENSE OR CARRIES IN HIS HAND
AS A WEAPON." All the items I possessed came under this
definition, and therefore were properly possessed by me. My
prosecution, conviction and imprisonment merely illustrate
just how far the federal government has departed from the
constitutional limitations it should observe.

As a matter of fact, after my conviction and sentencing to
26 years in prison, an IRS agent confided to a friend of
mine that I had not been prosecuted because I was a danger
to anyone, but rather to halt my public criticism of the IRS
and "income" tax, the payment of which I was proving, in
letters to newspapers, was not legally required.

Too bad that Manson didn’t determine the *facts* before he
spouted off about my case. He is just as egregiously wrong
about the Gordon Kahl case.

Manson then followed up with the charge that just before I
went to prison, I was working on a "ray gun" to scramble a
human’s brains. It appears to me that someone else must have
succeeded in this and already used it on Manson. [Again,
Manson is either just plain confused or deliberately
obfuscating. The facts are that two federal government
agent provocateurs approached me and tried to interest me in
such a project, obviously to create grounds for later
portraying me as a dangerous "mad scientist." After
discussing the proposal with these fedgov parasites, I
emphatically rejected any involvement, and my rejection was
established in court, as these two admitted that I had
rebuffed their proposal. (Of course, it is now known the
fedgov has such a weapon that can "microwave" human bodies
at long range. The weapon has been demonstrated in the
recent downing of a military helicopter---whether by design
or accident--- in which some citizens found in the wreckage
the bodies of the crew, cooked to a crisp with no evidence
of flame or blood oozing from any wounds )]

However, let’s remain on the subject of the Kahl Saga.
Attacking me and my case, and injecting the topic of "flying
saucers" constitutes an example of what controversialists do
when they can’t contravene their opponent on a given issue:
they change the subject. I’m sure the technique is obvious
to all intelligent and educated people. [M.M. Sierra, take
note.]

Wilhelm E. Schmitt
sch...@freenet.msp.mn.us
Gordon/Yorie Kahl case summary -
http://www.future.net/~thetruth/kahl_sum.html

[Wilhelm E. Schmitt]

mpit...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark T Pitcavage) wrote:

> In article <838286283$11...@atype.com>,
> Wilhelm E. Schmitt <sch...@freenet.msp.mn.us> wrote:
> >
> >Here are the first few paragraphs of a 14 page paper I wrote
> >summarizing the 77 page legal briefs prepared by Yorie Kahl's attorney
> >John DeCamp which will describe the circumstances which led to Yorie's
> >imprisonment and more. You may find the complete paper at:
> >http://www.future.net/~thetruth/kahl_sum.html
> >
> >A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE CASE INVOLVING GORDON KAHL
> >
> >It is quite likely that historians will view Sunday, February 13, 1983
> >as the date on which the Second American Revolution began in earnest.
> >For it was on that day a group of U.S. federal marshals converged on
> >Medina, North Dakota and set up a roadblock, intending to assassinate
> >Gordon Kahl; to silence him because he was a vocal income tax
> >protester and public critic of illegal and immoral activities in that
> >State by judges, bankers and attorneys, many of whom were members in
> >Masonic Lodges where they took blood-curdling oaths to protect and
> >defend each other in virtually any and all circumstances.

> I'm sure what you really intended to say was that they meant to arrest him for
> violating his parole conditions.

The marshals did not intend to arrest Gordon Kahl. They
knew very well that his term of parole had expired. In
addition, the head U.S. Marshal, Ken Muir, had been ORDERED
to leave Gordon alone and to file the warrant for his
arrest. By interdicting Gordon, he violated standing orders
from his superior in Washington, D.C. If you will read the
77 pages of the two briefs, you will find material that
backs up the charge that Ken Muir lusted for a bloody
shoot-out (he called it "the real thing") and that he
intended to kill Gordon and justify his murderous act by
making it look as if it occurred during legitimate law
enforcement.

> >The attempt to murder Gordon Kahl failed because he was unexpectedly
> >armed and also had excellent combat skills. The skirmish ended with
> >two federal marshals dead, a third wounded, two local policemen
> >wounded and out of action, and Gordon's young son, Yorie, severely
> >wounded and near death.

> "Unexpectedly armed"? It was well known that he was -always- armed except when
> in the grocery store. It was the very fact that he was well-armed which caused
> the law enforcement officers to try and pick him up in a location outside of
> town.

Gordon Kahl was not "always armed." Again, it appears that
you have not read the summary thoroughly. U.S. Marshal
"Bud" Warren went to see Gordon and found him at church.
During all of 1982, he traveled widely and openly throughout
the U.S. Do you think that if Marshal Muir and his fellow
officers believed that Gordon was always armed, they would
have gone to "get" him armed with only pistols?

The marshals wanted to grab him in town. The reason they
went outside town is described in the summary of the briefs:
The Medina Chief of Police would not allow the action in the
town. So your statement that the marshals were concerned
about Gordon being armed and so went out of town to pick him
up doesn't hold water.

> >After taking Yorie to a nearby clinic and then to a hospital where
> >emergency surgery saved Yorie's life, Gordon disappeared and was the
> >subject of an intense manhunt by federal agents for several months.
> >Finally he was located in Arkansas because the daughter of a nearby
> >family "snitched" on Gordon's location to federal authorities,
> >probably to get the sizable cash reward that had been offered by the
> >federal government. While Gordon was seated watching television to get
> >news of his son's trial which was then in progress in North Dakota,
> >the house in which he was living was surrounded by heavily armed
> >federal and local forces. The local sheriff entered the house,
> >stealthily approached Gordon from behind, and shot him in the head
> >without giving him any chance to surrender. Thus was the federal
> >government's program to silence Gordon Kahl brought to a successful
> >conclusion, on June 3, 1983.

> Did you mention the fact that Gordon shot and killed the local sheriff?

Gordon did not shoot Sheriff Mathews. Evidently you did not
read the entire summary. See Section (4) THE DEATH OF
GORDON KAHL. Mathews was shot and killed after Gordon's
death, as Mathews stood near the corner of the garage
outside the building. The bullet that killed him was fired
by a law enforcement officer. An FBI agent at the scene
testified to this at trial.

> >As a direct result of the "shoot-out," Yorie and another young man, a
> >local farmer named Scott Faul who happened to be present in one of the
> >cars when the marshals sprung their roadblock, were charged with and
> >convicted of second degree murder, assaulting federal officers,
> >harboring a fugitive and conspiracy. Each received two concurrent life
> >terms plus 15 years. At the time this is being written (July 1996),
> >they have been in prison in excess of 13 years and were repeatedly
> >denied parole. As will be shown later in this summary, there was no
> >legal ground for the interdiction of Gordon Kahl in the first place;
> >the marshals deliberately removed their badges and did not identify
> >themselves as they stepped from their cars and pointed guns at Yorie
> >whom they mistook for Gordon Kahl; the marshals did not give Gordon
> >any opportunity to surrender but one of them fired the first shot,
> >striking Yorie; Yorie Kahl fired at no one but was immediately
> >grievously wounded, whereupon Gordon, seeing his son shot down before
> >his eyes, opened fire and was solely responsible for the deaths and
> >wounding of the members of the federal "hit" team. It will also be
> >shown that Yorie and Scott did not receive fair trials but were
> >victims of gross bias on the part of the judge and some members of the
> >jury. May I say to those readers who are inclined to doubt the
> >truthfulness of the foregoing statements, I sincerely hope you will
> >read on.

> Hmm. The appeals courts seemed to think that the trials were fair.

Again, if you will READ the summary and/or the actual
briefs, you will discover that the reason Yorie's appeal
failed is that his boob attorney, Warren Sogard, failed to
address the issues that would have overturned the conviction
on appeal. Also, Sogard failed to enter objections many
times during trial and so did not preserve the issues for
appeal in the first place. In addition, you evidently did
not read the dissenting opinion of Judge Lay (Chief Judge of
the Eighth Circuit Court Appeals), who wrote: "The record
amply demonstrates the defendants [i.e., Yorie Kahl and
Scott Faul] did not and could not receive a fair trial in
the District of North Dakota."

PLEASE READ THE ENTIRE SUMMARY AND/OR THE TWO BRIEFS.

Wilhelm E. Schmitt
sch...@freenet.msp.mn.us
Summary of Gordon/Yorie Kahl briefs -
http://www.future.net/~thetruth/kahl_sum.html

[Jonathan Williams]

Wilhelm E. Schmitt wrote:

<snip>

> Again, if you will READ the summary and/or the actual
> briefs, you will discover that the reason Yorie's appeal
> failed is that his boob attorney, Warren Sogard, failed to
> address the issues that would have overturned the conviction
> on appeal. Also, Sogard failed to enter objections many
> times during trial and so did not preserve the issues for
> appeal in the first place. In addition, you evidently did
> not read the dissenting opinion of Judge Lay (Chief Judge of
> the Eighth Circuit Court Appeals), who wrote: "The record
> amply demonstrates the defendants [i.e., Yorie Kahl and
> Scott Faul] did not and could not receive a fair trial in
> the District of North Dakota."
>
> PLEASE READ THE ENTIRE SUMMARY AND/OR THE TWO BRIEFS.

A good neutral source of information on this subject, mentioned previously
in another thread, is James Corcoran's (sp?) "Bitter Harvest."

Jonathan
jonv...@iastate.edu