Translate

Thursday, January 9, 2020

Vol VII No. 788 - Part 2 - Entity State Court is Not the Court of Original Jurisdiction and are Identity Thieves!

Crooks
https://www.ilind.net/…/intermediate-court-of-appeals-agai…/
Appeals Court again rules against claim that annexation was illegal
Posted on January 4, 2020 by Ia...n Lind
On the morning of December 11, 2019, three judges of the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals convened in the Supreme Court Courtroom in downtown Honolulu to hear oral arguments in an appeal in the case of State of Hawaii vs. Windyceslau D. Lorenzo, also known as Kamehameha VI.
Yes, you read that right.
Since at least the early 1990s, Lorenzo has claimed to be “His Majesty Kamehameha VI, King of the Hawaiian Islands, seventh Great Grandson of Kamehameha I, duly recognized and confirmed by the Alii Nui Konohiki Council of Chiefs under the Constitution of 1840, in the Kingdom of Hawaii.”
Of course, despite the pretensions, he’s only one of many claimants competing to speak for a kingdom that in hard reality ceased to exist with the overthrow in 1893.
In 2013, Lorenzo filed warranty deeds in the Bureau of Conveyances transferring title to three parcels of Waimanalo land, a total of approximately 335 acres, to his wife. The source of Lorenzo’s ownership of the property was identified as an earlier 1998 deed:
Deed of Rose P. Lukela, “Grantor”, to Windyceslau Donato Lorenzo, dated August 26, 1998 and recorded at the Bureau of Conveyances as Document No. 98-126382, conveying all claims of the grantor in and to the lands of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
Lukela was also known as Rose P. Lorenzo. The basis of Lukela’s claim of ownership in the Waimanalo properties was not identified.
The state later challenged the 1998 deed in court and succeeded in having declared frivolous. It was expunged from the state’s records.
The state then challenged Lorenzo’s 2013 deeds, which were based on the on the deed that had already been throw out. Following a June 2015 hearing before Judge Victoria Crandall, title was found to be properly vested in the State of Hawaii. The three deeds were found to be frivolous and ordered to be expunged from the state’s land title records. In addition, Lorenzo was fined $5,000, and was enjoined from filing any further related deeds without prior authorization from the court.
Lorenzo then filed an appeal to the Intermediate Court seeking to reverse Crandall’s ruling.
Lorenzo was represented in this appeal by Williamson Chang, a professor at the University of Hawaii’s William S Richardson School of Law, who has become a widely quoted advocate of the theory that Hawaii was never legally annexed by the United States, one result being that therefore post-Kingdom land titles granted under the authority of the territory and state are invalid.
Chang had touted his opening brief in the appeal for its presentation of evidence of “the failure of the United States to acquire Hawaii….”
The judges of the Intermediate Court initially said oral arguments would not be held in the case, but Chang strongly objected. In a legal motion filed on September 30, 2019, Chang pressed the court to reinstate oral arguments because there were, in his words, “numerous issues that had not been covered.” Chang said he was prepared to address the legislative intent of the 1959 Admissions Act by which Hawaii became a state, as well as details of the Congressional debate over annexation in 1898.
In response to Chang’s motion, the court reversed itself, and on November 14 issued a notice setting the oral arguments for 10 a.m. on December 11. The stage was set for Chang to expound his theories.
But when the case was called, neither Williamson Chang or his client, Windyceslau D. “Kamehameha VI” Lorenzo, responded. Neither was present for the hearing that had been scheduled specifically at Chang’s request.
Less than two weeks later, the three-judge panel issued a summary disposition order rejecting each of the arguments raised by Chang and dismissing Lorenzo’s appeal.
https://ilind.net/misc%20/2019/summary_disposition.pdf
The court found that the idea “that the 1898 Joint Resolution did not actually convey the islands of Hawaii to the United States, has been considered and rejected by the Hawaii Supreme Court,” citing the recent decision In re Conservation Dist. Use Application HA-3568.
https://law.justia.com/…/supreme-…/2018/scot-17-0000777.html
In that case, the Hawaii Supreme Court explicitly rejected Williamson Chang’s position that annexation was faulty because it was not accomplished through a treaty of annexation.
Citing relevant cases, the court held: “The United States Supreme Court has thus indicated that the process by which Hawaii was incorporated into the United States was lawful and binding, and we are bound by this determination.”
And as to the ownership of the Waimanalo parcels that were the subject of Lorenzo’s deeds, the court noted the history of the properties prepared by E. Mahoe Collins, the state’s abstractor, which traced the title back to the Great Mahele. The court noted that the history had not been challenged.
“Collins did not find any transfers or conveyances made by the State or its predecessors to Lorenzo or Rose P. Lukela (aka Rose P. Lorenzo), from whom Lorenzo claims he received transfer of the Parcels,” the court wrote in its decision. “Other than Lorenzo’s argument that the 1898 Joint Resolution failed to transfer the lands of Hawaii to the United States, which has been rejected by the Hawaii Supreme Court…he does not assert any challenge to Collins’s affidavit.”
Williamson Chang was ordered to pay $100 for his failure to appear for the December 11, 2019 oral arguments without good cause.
See More
Comments
  • Jazzmin Mahinatea That's so disrespectful why would they post something like this? Even if they want to be recognized as Hawaiian Americans why would they create something so ignorant and dismiss their own mo'i so sad this kine
    6
    Write a reply...

  • Maka O Kalani Minihan Losers without a purpose. I feel sorry for them, honestly.
    1
  • Hau'oli Yockeman Looks like Iges look alike wants to be “bounded” just saying
    3
  • Tutu Watson Does anyone know why the two folks didn't show up for hearing?
    2
  • Cy K Mullen Sr. We Need The International Law and Rulings..Not Judged By False Representation Of Illegal Occupiers..Of Course They Gonna Rule Against Our Kingdom..AutoMatic!!! HEWA!!!!
    3
  • Rosehill E. Les Ryan Thompson (who runs Disruptarian Radio where he breeds hate for Hawaiians, and has announced running for county council ๐Ÿ™„) he lives in Puna for the last 3 years from America and is an affiliate with Ken Kudo and Lisa Malakaua.
    5
  • Greg Kane-O'Shea Could be propaganda propped up in the US election year.
    3
  • Duane N Row Our lahui is better then these Hawaiians who chose too still listen too the haole and believe they are American brainwashed.
    But that's ok because they will all see when tbe mighty wave rises....
    7
  • Kristal Ayala As the rest of the world leaders that already acknowledge that it was in fact illegal and is war crimes... this is irrelevant why would anyone further appeal or persue judicial process within the corrupt system that is admittedly and illegally responsiSee More
    3
  • E Kaahui They didnt come against Kamehameha because Kamehameha would have died fighting and killing as many foreigners as possible.They came against our queen and extorted her into signing documents beyond her will.So they need to get that through their f@#kin heads especially the coconut kanakas.They should be killed for treason and betrayal of the Hawaiian Kingdom.Death to our enemies long live the Hawaiian Kingdom!!!!!!
    9
  • E Kaahui Pro Hawaii means pro Hawaiian no middle ground either you are for us in liberation and freedom of oppression or you are against us and chosen to be an enemy.
    8
  • Frank Silva Wrong court
    5
  • Alexander Kalauokalani Pe'a Who would win in a man to man fight? 7 foot tall Kamehameha... Who fought along side his own warriors and one his civil war on the battle field... who rumored to lift the 2 ton Naha stone... Or 6'3 243 Donald Trump who avoided the draft. Kamehameha wouSee More
    3
    • E Kaahui Alexander Kalauokalani Pe'a Those living in Hawaii with kind of stupid mentality just need straight up lickens.Sometimes gotta put Kapu Aloha on the back burner in dealing with these scrubs.The only language they know and respect is cracks kealoha.
      3
  • Ric Parish In America Slavery was legal. Until it wasn't. Banning women from voting was legal. Jailing interracial couples was legal. America and their cronies have had legal atrocities since its beginning. Fkk Amelika.
    3
  • Elizabeth Sand Amen I love how they make a claim and say to click but you cannot actually see what it says without joining a private private group. Cowards to make a claim and not allow for rebuttal.
  • Tane Inciong A primary case of the fox guarding the henhouse syndrome. Wrong court. USA court will not rule against itself.
    This should be in a neutral court and under international laws and jurisdiction.
    1
    • E Kaahui Tane Inciong We have to force the negotiations by creating conflict and chaos to the world order trying to control Hawaii.We need our own organized Hawaiian secret society to look out for ourselves against foreign invaders.
    Write a reply...

  • Amelia Gora the entity State does Not have the court of "original jurisdiction".... The Hawaiian Kingdom Supreme Court has the original jurisdiction still…. https://iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com/.../hawaiian...
    Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii Legal Documents: Court of Original Jurisdiction - Researched Evidence by Amelia Gora (2019)
    iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com
    Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii Legal Documents: Court of Original…
    Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii Legal Documents: Court of Original Jurisdiction - Researched Evidence by Amelia Gora (2019)
    2
    Write a reply...

  • Amelia Gora U.S. Supreme Court justices documented there was no annexation...
    No photo description available.
    2
  • Amelia Gora Joyclynn Costa documented that the Doctrine of Political Question shows that two (2) nations - U.S. and the Hawaiian Kingdom were part of her case...the judge released 15+ of kanaka maoli.. see: IOLANI - The Royal Hawk: Updated: "The Doctrine of ...https://iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com/.../the-doctrine...

    Amelia Gora Mahalo..."Doctrine of Political Question" ... Joyclynn Costa Yes when you look at, especially developments they claim to own portions of LCA/RP according to the Doctrine it may appear to be with in the courts jurisdiction but it is not, It is of a political matter. 1.
    Updated: "The Doctrine of Political Question" Applies to All Land Cases.....Important, Mahalo Joyclynn Costa!
    iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com
    Updated: "The Doctrine of Political Question" Applies to All Land…
    Updated: "The Doctrine of Political Question" Applies to All Land Cases.....Important, Mahalo Joyclynn Costa!
    2
  • Amelia Gora https://iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com/.../the-doctrine...
    Joyclynn Costa
    · 22 hrs ·


    11 years ago on April 13th on a Friday myself and 3 others stood in front a Judge. We were accused of Criminal Trespass II reduced to Simple Trespass. The day we got arrested they put it on the 10 news about activist fighting for "Hawaiian" land. Wrong, we were standing for our rights and kuleana. After being looped in the system for months we had our day in court. The Prosecutor said if we could prove separation of jurisdiction and powers from both the State of Hawaii a...nd the United States the Judge could recognize our claim. Our point was they could not apply their authority on Hawaiian Nationals. There were 16 arrested that day. On April 13 on a Friday I delivered what the prosecutor requested. I handed the clerk, to hand to the Judge, a letter from the late Senator Inouye. He was a United State Senator for the State of Hawaii. (two birds w/ one stone) He could not come to our trial due to a mandated Constitutional Separation of Powers. I looked it up and found within the Separation of Powers was "The Doctrine of Political Question". In this doctrine it speaks of land if created by another Country can not be decided in court. It is of a political matter between the Executives. The Judge took a look at the letter asked a few questions flipped thru his books and accepted my oral motion to dismiss with prejudice. The prosecutor had nothing else to rebut and the Judge rendered a decision to grant the Dismissal with Prejudice. I know this was not of my doing but the grace of ke Akua that worked this case. You see we were not suppose to appear that because the case was already dismissed w/out prejudice. The Judge asked why our names were on the calendar and all they could say was it was a mistake. My dad stood with me and he had his say in court. A week later all others were also dismissed w/prejudice. All 16!!!! Since then we have lost a few of those warriors. This post is dedicated to them. I miss you Bradah Lonohiwa Kekahuna.
    Updated: "The Doctrine of Political Question" Applies to All Land Cases.....Important, Mahalo Joyclynn Costa!
    iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com
    Updated: "The Doctrine of Political Question" Applies to All Land…
    Updated: "The Doctrine of Political Question" Applies to All Land Cases.....Important, Mahalo Joyclynn Costa!
    3
  • Angie Merola Why not we make our own courts...there is enough of us believe.. so why not.. what are we waiting for!!!๐Ÿค™
    1
  • John Keohohina Jr. If Kamehameha was alive n Trump was looking at him like that he would have broke him in half n feedum to the mano MOKU O KEAWE ๐Ÿ”ฅ ๐Ÿ’ช๐Ÿฝ
    1
  • John Keohohina Jr. Kekuhaupio would have smashed him before Kamehameha would get to him in loyalty n royalty MOKU O KEAWE ๐Ÿ”ฅ ๐Ÿ’ช๐Ÿฝ
    2
  • Vernal Stevens So if annexation is not necessary, why not use the joint resolution to force all countries with natural resources wanted by the US, to become states of the US Union. That way it will eliminate the need for war, there would be no cries for independence, native languages can be banned, religions can be converted to US preferences, US military can occupy huge areas of these countries and not have to pay for damages, you could even force them to pay taxes, AND. the US Supreme court would make it all legal. Don't think for a moment this is bullshit, they've done exactly that to Hawaii.
    2
     
Write a comment...

No comments: