facebook twitter you tube

Public Responses


Duarte Case

Aug 29, 2017

Dear fellow American

Please forward the following email to all those who love Liberty and Justice.


We the People of Stanislaus County for Constitutionally Limited Government


The Duarte case settlement. The Modesto Bee 8/16/17

Summary of Apparent Facts

1. There was no significant environmental damage as evidenced by the settlement which did not require any site restoration. The prosecutors and government agencies did not require restoration of the land where the alleged environmental abuse occurred. If there had been any significant environmental damage, the focus would have been on restoring that environmental damage.

2. The objective of the environmentalists was to take money from the Duartes. They demanded up to $45 million, but settled for $330,300 in fines and an additional $770,000 to be paid as “compensatory mitigation such as purchasing wetlands credit. The money will be spent restoring wetlands on Sacramento Valley properties other than his”. However much of the money would probably go to enriching environmentalists.

3. The alleged violation of the waters of the United States provisions occurred on land, not in any water. Also, it did not involve any pollution or any effect on water quality.

a. The Constitution does not contain any authorization for Congress or government to declare jurisdiction over any water or land for any purpose other than military or nation defense, and Washington DC.

4. The activity objected to by the government environmentalists was planting wheat on private land.

a. The environmentalists did not want the land where the alleged violation occurred, which is in Tehama County, or to have it set aside because it had some environmental value. What they wanted was money from the Duartes who are located in Stanislaus County.

5. There was no justice. The judicial proceedings were administrative processes enforcing government regulations. Real justice is based on defending the unalienable rights of persons. The first duty of a judge or jury is to judge the law and determine if the law is legitimate, Constitutionally authorized, and being applied appropriately; before there is any consideration of whether or not an individual violated the law.

a. The 10 year restriction on the use of private land is cruel and unusual and unwarranted punishment.

b. The judicial proceedings were not judging damages to persons as required by common law and the Constitution 7th Amendment.

c. The judicial proceedings and settlement were a violation of the U.S. Constitution with at least eight counts

d. The settlement is a crime of extortion, and all those who are party to it or benefiting from it are criminals

6. The damaged party in this case was the Duarte family and business

a. The government activities, judicial proceedings, and settlement are also damages to the employees of the Duartes, to the economy of Stanislaus County, and to the unalienable rights of all persons in the United States

b. The judge who ruled that the Duartes violated the waters of the United States provision of the Clean Water Act, is guilty of violating the law of justice for not first judging the law; and also is guilty of being a criminal accomplice, and is personally responsible for the 1.1 million extortion which was facilitated by the judge’s unconstitutional decision.

7. The settlement agreement is not a legitimate contract. Legitimate contracts are agreements that both parties enter into voluntarily and which both parties obtain reasonable benefit. This agreement, like most made with government influence, was made in duress, under threat, and was only accepted to avoid the threat of higher costs, which were threatened to be 20 to 45 million.

8. The environmental acts and regulations are not about the environment. They are about creating government dominion over the people, their lands, their livelihoods, and their resources.

a. This is not about the Duartes, they are just the current, close to home, financial target of the environmentalist extortion process. The question is, who and how many have been, or will become, victims of the same environmental extortion racket.

b. This is about We the people standing up for liberty and justice, through Constitutionally limited government, and bringing those who are guilty of grand larceny and abuse of government power to accountability and civil justice.

Evidence and Conclusions

1. The judicial proceedings and settlement were a violation of the U.S. Constitution with at least eight counts. The U.S. Constitution requires the government to :

a. Establish justice, -1st sentence

b. Insure domestic tranquility, -1st sentence

c. To secure the blessings of liberty for the people, -1st sentence

d. Be limited to specifically authorized functions which do not include any jurisdiction over private property or the authority to make any environmental regulations, Article I Section 8

e. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land, Article VI

f. Defendants have a right to witnesses and evidence in their favor, Amendment VI

g. All matters and disputes over $20 are to be determined under the basis of common law, which is the law of the people not the law of government agencies, and is based simply on identifying what actual damage was done to whom and who is responsible for the damages. Amendment VII

h. That there will be no cruel or unusual punishment, Amendment VIII

2. The relatively low settlement in comparison to the extremely high numbers that were demanded is evidence that the government agencies and environmentalists knew that their activities are unconstitutional, and their laws and regulations have no legal basis. The environmental acts were created to expand the power and authority of government, to establish unjust unconstitutional regulations and have them accepted by the oppressed people, and also to take whatever money they can from people.

3. We the people have a duty to establish justice, and that the Constitution is the supreme law; and to correct injustices such as the Duarte case; and bring those who benefit from and perpetrate environmental extortion to accountable justice.

Needed Actions

· The Stanislaus County District Attorney should prosecute criminal charges and civil damages against all persons involved in or benefiting from the environmental extortion against the Duartes

· The Stanislaus County Grand Jury and District Attorney both have duties to initiate criminal indictments against any and all persons and parties attempting to use government powers to take away money, property rights, water, livelihoods, or resources from any person residing in Stanislaus County

· The Stanislaus County Supervisors and all elected officials and court officials have taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, which means they have a duty to declare that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and to act to protect the unalienable rights, properties, and livelihoods of persons from the abuse of government powers.

· The Stanislaus County Supervisors should take a stand that the Endangered Species Act and the other environmental and resources control acts do not have Constitutional authorization, are therefore automatically Constitutionally nullified, and it is therefore a crime for any person to try to implement them within Stanislaus County.

· The Duartes should not pay any of extortion money, taken by the government process to benefit the environmentalists.

· The Stanislaus County Sheriff should arrest and incarcerate any individual who comes into Stanislaus County with the intent of taking money or property from the Duartes as a result of this environmental extortion process.

· We the People of Stanislaus County for Constitutionally Limited Government will:

o Prepare documentation of the Constitutional notification of the Endangered Species Act and other unconstitutional environmental acts.

o Prepare documentation of local jurisdiction and that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

o File criminal charges against all persons who are involved in prosecuting or benefiting from the environmental extortion process against the Duartes and any other similar victims.

o Hold meetings educating the public on Constitutionally limited government and their unalienable rights.

o Draft a County Ordinance imposing jail time and fines for implementing the Endangered Species Act and another unconstitutional acts within Stanislaus County

o Petition the government for removal of the judge who ruled against the Duartes and stopping all taxpayer funded pay, benefits, and retirement, for that judge.

· We the People of Stanislaus County need to take a stand both publicly, and in public documents, declaring Constitutionally limited government within Stanislaus County and local jurisdiction. The burden of proof should be on every State and Federal agency to prove that they had specific Constitutional authorization for their activities and regulations. They should be held personally accountable for any damage caused to any person from the government activities they participate in.

· Every elected Representative has a choice of either acting to re-establish Constitutionally limited government, liberty, and justice; or to play politician, sound good, and stand by as the plague of expanding government power brings us under domination and political and financial bondage.

· We the people must hold elected representatives accountable, not by voting them out of office, but by pressing criminal charges for violating the US Constitution.

Sincere defenders of liberty and justice

We the People of Stanislaus County for Constitutionally Limited Government

Reid Johnson, President