ColoradoProspector   CP Club Membership Info.

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Reply to this topicStart new topic
BLM MEETING, just got this update
post Jun 29 2015, 03:25 PM
Post #1

Diggin' In!

Group: Members
Posts: 22
Joined: 17-May 15
Member No.: 120,460

Ok if you live in or near the Canyon City area this is real short notice but you might want to go.
BLM meeting tonight, June 29th, at the Abbey in Canon City!

Important meeting with the BLM!
Tonight June 29th, 5:30 pm Cañon City, The Abbey, Benedict Rm, 2951 E Highway 50
From the BLM website:
"CANON CITY, Colo. – The Bureau of Land Management Royal Gorge Field Office is seeking public input to help guide its Resource Management Plan Revision for 668,000 acres of BLM lands along Colorado’s Front Range. The revision will combine the 1996 Royal Gorge Resource Management Plan and the 1986 Northeast Resource Management Plan, to create the new Eastern Colorado Resource Management Plan. The revision will also include a Master Leasing Plan for South Park.
The public is encouraged to stop by one of seven open house meetings anytime between 5:30 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. to talk to BLM specialists, learn more about the revision and provide comments. An informal presentation will be given at 6:30 p.m. each night."

We have seen the BLM closing roads throughout the west, threatening mines, and stealing cattle. What is going on, what is the ultimate agenda? Many of you heard David Justice speak at our meetings, on his battle to open the Cushman Creek Rd, which is NOT owned by the BLM, yet they have closed it. On whose orders?

David's case is going to sentencing on July 17th. Here is his letter explaining the case, and what he is facing for standing up for our rights, and the Constitution:

From the Desk of David Justice
Greetings to all whom this may concern,

For those who may not know, I have a date with the federal court on July 17, 2015 at 11:00 AM for sentencing in the case of the United States of America v. David Justice, 14-CR-271-REB. It has been almost a year since the jury trial rendered its guilty verdict, and nearly two years since the protest occurred for which I stand convicted.

It is my hope that many will find it within them to stand with me in the court room to show approval for restoring the road notwithstanding the judgment, as the gavel comes down and I am sentenced on the final judgment of this case.

To recap: Early on a Saturday morning in late July of 2013, twenty-three American patriots met at a remote county road on public lands west of Montrose, Colorado for the purpose of reclaiming a historic county road, traversing public land, known by locals as Cushman Creek Road.

I use the term “reclaim” specifically because to the best of our knowledge the United States Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”), under the guise of the power vested in it by its Travel Management Plan (“TMP”), had illegally seized the road.

I use the term “illegally seized” because locals who know the area well will tell you that Cushman Creek Road has existed for well more than a century. Those of us close to the case have compiled the evidence to prove its existence, primarily through use, as well as a Department of Interior map.

It is unfortunate that sufficient evidence did not get presented to the court during the course of the trial in a manner such that either the jury or the court could be persuaded to make a ruling on the status of the road. This, coupled with the trial strategy of the United States Attorney Michelle Heldmyer and BLM field manager Barbara Sharrow to ignore the road throughout the trial by pretending that it simply did not exist, the jury lacked the knowledge to reach any conclusion beside the story fed to it by United States Attorney.

Several post-trial motions were filed after the trial; but again, because sufficient evidence was lacking to make a legal argument concerning the jurisdictional status of the road.

I fired my attorney on grounds that pre/during/and post-trial efforts by my attorney were ineffective. I believe the record made at trial is inadequate; lacking sufficient evidence upon which an appellate court could make a fair determination of the legal issues concerning the status of the road. So, I went on offense, suing in a case known as a collateral action, a petition for a writ of prohibition, naming Judge Blackburn as respondent.

A writ of prohibition is an order issued from a higher court to cease and desist the proceedings in the trial court and to send the record of the case up for review in a tree judge supervisory court.

In the petition I declared all the facts of the case that weren't presented at trial and in so doing made a record the judge could look at. In my petition I charged Prosecution Attorney Ms. Heldmyer and Special investigator Robert Shalikus of prosecutorial/police misconduct and fraud on the court because they, directly or by omission, misrepresented facts material to the case. I charged Judge Blackburn with abuse of discretion, and my attorney with being ineffective—I had asked my attorney to raise these issues but he refused. By firing my attorney when I did, it opened the door for me to file this lawsuit for prohibition.

The allegations remain unanswered as the court summarily dismissed the case, finding that I had not made an adequate showing that the court had abused its discretion.

The next move is either, or both: 1) appeal of the final judgment, or 2) habeas corpus; in either case the objective will be to prove grounds exist warranting a new trial.

The bottom line is this. To win, the United States Attorney and the special investigator had to conceal or omit material, exculpatory facts. Exculpatory facts are those facts which support my innocence. The fact that my attorney was ineffective and not up to calling the court’s attention to this misconduct, was very costly. The jury was not fully informed nor apprised of all the facts material to this case.

State highway law defines the historic Cushman Creek road as a "public highway." This definition includes any fixtures attached to the road. This means that the barricade we removed was part of the road, and belonged to the road. It was not federal property. In like manner, the trees and shrubs we pruned, being inside the right of way, also belonged to the road and were not federal property.

The day we went up there to reclaim the road, we had a talk and explained the importance of not stepping one foot out of the right of way. All of the work we did was maintenance of the right of way within the scope of the right of way.

To get around this, United States prosecutor Ms. Heldmyer merely denied the existence of the right of way. Had my attorney been effective, he would have raised our defense as an “affirmative defense” (which means yes we did everything you said, but the property wasn't BLM property to begin with. The minute it was permanently installed on the county road, it became county property.

Cushman Creek Road is a county road, excluded from the operation of federal law by sections 509(a) and 701(a) and (h) of the Federal Land Policy Management Act (“FLPMA”), and under those sections is recognized as a historic right of way specifically protected.

But we did not prove it. Coupled with the fraud on the court, this is why we lost.

Regardless of its protected status, BLM field manager Barbara Sharrow occupied the road. She first authorized trail modification by construction within the right of way, installing traffic limiting barricades and re-designating it for limited use as a motorcycle / pedestrian / equestrian trail.

Cushman Creek Road is not the only protected road being illegally occupied by the BLM on Colorado’s Western Slope and across many other States. In fact, the BLM has admitting "establishing" hundreds of miles of new trails, but conveniently omits the fact that the new BLM trails are illegally constructed on top of legally protected public highways within State jurisdiction.

You might be saying to yourself: "if this statement is true, why don’t the counties do their job and protect the county roads?"

Colorado Counties are run by Boards of Commissioners. The only prerequisite to being elected as a Commissioner is to be a registered voter in the county. The BLM knows that the County commissioners generally lack knowledge and historic memory and so take advantage of commissioner boards or wait to act until they have a board of county commissioners they can bully into yielding to the BLM.

Some folks say that regardless that the road is a county road, and that the barricade is not owned by the BLM, the twenty-three patriots engaged in vandalism—or more disconcerting for them, an act of vigilantism.

Some folks say that the twenty-three committed an act of “civil-disobedience.”

With regard to the charge of "vigilantism" or "Civil Disobedience," I make this point of clarification.

The 23 of us who removed the barricade and pruned trees and shrubs from the Cushman Creek Road to restore it to its historical and traditional use were not involved in "Civil Disobedience." Civil Disobedience suggests that we engaged in activity technically illegal, thereby breaking the law.

This we did not do. We were merely maintaining the right of way. WE PERFORMED MAINTENANCE. THAT IS ALL.

To distinguish, rather than "civil disobedience," we engaged in the Civil Duty imposed on us under the fundamental principles of American law; a duty to exercise the power specifically reserved to the people under Article II of the Colorado Constitution and Article X in Amendment to the Federal Constitution.

Specifically, the principle we were operating under is the power which reverts back to the people when those elected or appointed to execute the respective offices of government not only fail to perform, but actively engage in insurgent activity subversive to the principles of American government.

In the case of Cushman Creek Road, the Federal Government, acting through its minion, the BLM illegally trespassed on the State of Colorado by illegally occupying, and thereby taking, a county road by planting a structure in a public highway belonging to the People of Colorado. In so doing the BLM assumed power over something that did not belong to the Federal Government.

The BLM engages in this tactic quite often. It, having the deep pockets, takes the bullying position that if the respective County Boards of Commissioners don't like it, their remedy is to sue. The BLM well knows the budgets of the Counties of rural Colorado do not factor in the costs of lawsuits for recovering roads illegally seized by the BLM and can't afford to sue. This knowledge makes BLM's occupation of County roads, intentional, and unconscionable.

Essentially, by assuming jurisdiction where it hasn't any, by erecting structures on property of the People of Colorado, the BLM has usurped what does not belong to them under the guise of the travel management plan, and thereby contemptuously encroached across Colorado's sovereign political boundary.

According to the fundamentals of American law, when a government becomes destructive to the purpose it was established to secure, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it. Exercising this right was not, and is not an act of civil disobedience, vigilantism, or vandalism.

If a long train of abuses and usurpations evidences a design to reduce the people under absolute despotism, throwing off that government and establishing new safeguards to secure our future security is not an act of civil disobedience, vigilantism, or vandalism.

It is a maxim of law that the greater power includes the lesser. The greater power is the counter-insurgency power, even the gospel of the kingdom of Heaven, to bring order to chaos. American government is out of order and a design has been evidenced to reduce the people under absolute despotism. This design is what causes the power to revert back to the responsible men and women to restore order by exercising their Civil Duty so to do.

Cushman Creek Road was not about a road. It was merely a non-violent act of maintenance capitalizing on an opportunity to resist evil.

Thanks for listening.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st February 2018 - 10:17 AM