John Richard Hance
I am one of the so-called "Montana Freemen"
Thu Mar 4 13:38:28 2004
64.140.158.118

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: I am one of the so-called "Montana Freemen"
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 21:39:06 -0500
From: John Richard
To: apfn@apfn.org
CC: brentj@webt.com


Greetings!
I just came across your web page about the goings on in Montana a few years back. I think it unfortunate that the last update to that page was made in 2002, but when I consider that the "Montana Freemen" thing is uninteresting "old news", that fact really isn't surprising.

Allow me to introduce myself. My name is John Richard Hance. I am one of three Hances who showed up in Montana from North Carolina about two weeks before the FBI, BATF, etc. showed up to kidnap LeRoy and Dan. I stayed on as a guest at the ranch throughout the entire seige, was subsequently kidnapped along with everyone there on June 13, 1996. I went through the phoney court shenanigans for two long years and was then sent to a Federal Correctional Institution for another three years and two months. I am out and getting back to my shattered life.

I wanted to comment on some of the information on your website, if you will give me a few minutes of your time to do so. I have read J. Patrick Shannan's book on what happened in Montana, and first I want to state that among the thousands of articles, books, reports, testimonies, etc. that I have read and heard his came the closest to capturing the truth, in its purest form, of what took place "behind the scenes". His insight into Common Law is the result of many years of research on his part, and the book does give the reader a great deal of insight into what was accomplished by the so-called "Montana Freemen" and what they were trying to accomplish. But for some reaon J. Patrick Shannan claimed to have interviewed "all 23 Freemen" in order to gain accuracy in what he wrote. The thing is, I never spoke to the man in all the time I spent in Montana at Justus township, in Yellowstone county jail, or in any of the Federal facilities I was held in. I have never heard his voice, and I never wrote him any letters of any kind. In fact, I think Patrick only spoke with two or three of the men while they were at Yellowstone county jail. So I really don't know why he would make such a claim, except that perhaps he thought it would look good to prospective readers and might even help to sell a few more of his books. Either way, in light of the fact that his was the best, truest account of what happened to us all I never spoke up to rebut this blatantly false claim. I mention it now to you just so that there is some record that J. Patrick Shannan did indeed lie in his book about that point. My story has never been told, and unless I have totally missed my mark, I believe the same is true for the rest of the men and women of Justus township. Our voices were silenced by all the noise the media was making and by the perverters of justice in the federal courts. I would very much like to have the oppotunity to get my story out there someday, but thus far that has been impossible, and I honestly don't think anyone in America really cares how much injustice was perpetrated on all of us back then. They probably wouldn't read my story if it was told...

Anyway, I am rambling a bit. The other thing on your site I wanted to mention is that we all were very aware of the name Justus in the Bible. It was indeed where the township's name was derived.

Brent, if you would like to have proof of a tyrannical Federal Government to show to others, just look at what was done to us men and women. Gagged in open court, beaten endlessly once taken out of court by burly men brandishing billy clubs and lead-lined "sap" gloves, pepper sprayed by US Marshals for the simplest things like praying, physically tortured in an attempt to coerce us to grant them jurisdiction. The list goes on and on; if I could write them all down in this email, I believe it would fill up a small hard drive.

I am open to new contacts, new lines of communication on these and other subjects. If you choose to respond to this email, I will write you back, but please don't send it to jrh143@hotmail.com (from which I am writing this). Instead please send any responses to j_hance143@yahoo.com. I check it about twice a week.

Thanks for your time.

Sincerely,

John Richard Hance

-----------------

RE:
The Montana Freemen ~ The Untold Story

Montana Freemen Face New Indictments

by Roger Roots
Jubilee Correspondent

The 24 common law lawyers and Constitutionalists charged in the Montana Freemen case now face new federal indictments.

On November 22, 1996, the government issued a superseding indictment against many of the main Freemen justices including LeRoy Schweitzer, Daniel Petersen, Rodney Skurdal, Dale Jacobi and Richard Clark. The new indictment was supposedly drafted in response to materials seized after the 81-day standoff at Justus, Montana during the Spring and Summer of 1996.

The Freemen lawyers face numerous federal charges including conspiracy, bank fraud, threatening federal judges and possession of firearms while under felony indictment. The new indictment does not add additional charges as much as it rewords the same charges that were filed previously. This is an attempt by the Justice Department to remedy the grave errors it has already made in prosecuting and arraigning the accused. Comments made on the record by visiting federal judge James Burns in July of 1996 which apparently recognized LeRoy Schweitzer and others as justices of their common law court (Vol.8 No.6 Jubilee) may also have contributed to the need for the feds to start over from scratch.

This violation of due process is merely one example of how the Justice Department and the judiciary are waging a no-holds-barred, Constitution-be-damned war against the exploding Constitutionalist movement. Yet ironically the new indictment represents a startling admission by the government that the former indictment, and its resultant multi-million dollar siege and propaganda efforts were ill-founded. The former indictment contained nearly 60 counts, while the superseding indictment contains only 40. It can thus be said that the feds have already DROPPED nearly 1/3 of the charges against the Freemen leaders by default. The mainstream press has said nothing of this silent but obvious capitulation.

A RETURN TO NUREMBERG?

Evidently the U.S. government will try to present the Freemen case in the format of a gigantic show trial reminiscent of the infamous Nuremberg Tribunals following WWII in Germany. All 14 of the main alleged conspirators will likely be boxed together in a single courtroom for trial. Apparently the 8 others charged with relieving, comforting, and assisting will be lumped together in a separate trial. Legal scholars have long criticized such mass trials as a bane on due process of law and a way prosecutors can get around holes in individual cases by flooding a trial with propaganda of a collective nature; most jurors tend to convict out of difficulty in sorting out the evidence in relation to each individual.

In addition to the Nuremberg tribunals, this same technique has been used by the Jewish world government against patriots in several monumental cases during the 20th Century. Perhaps the most infamous American case was the Great Sedition Trial of 1944 in which some 26 patriotic isolationists were tried during the height of the Second World War for conspiring to overthrow the government. Just as in the Freemen case, the ADL and other Jewish organizations exuberantly pushed the prosecution. Also similarly, the feds tried several grand jury indictments before they could get one that would withstand event the most modest legal challenge. Thousands of pieces of evidence including allegedly seditious writings (those opposing FDR's deceitful tactics to bring about American entry into the war) and testimony of questionable authority were seen and heard by a Washington, D.C. jury. After months of trial the judge died in his sleep and the case was finally dismissed at war's end.

This same surreal scenario was played out again in Fort Smith, Arkansas by an ADL-spurred federal prosecution again for sedition. (See Vol. 2 No. 1 Jubilee) After mountains of outrageous testimony and conflicting evidence of so-called sedition was spewed out in the federal courthouse, a jury could only conclude that the allegations of the accused seditionists (i.e., that the federal government itself is seditious and cannot be trusted) were 100 percent correct. A verdict of not guilty was returned for all defendants. (One of the 14 defendants was Louis Ray Beam, Jr., who writes for The Jubilee Newspaper on occasion.)

With the prosecution of the Montana Freemen characters, the Zionist occupation government is again targeting what it percieves as the most serious threat to its power: law without lawyers and courts without legislative or executive sanction. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has urged the Justice Department to establish a task force to concentrate on Freemen activities just as it did against the skinhead movement in the 1980s. The ADL has also drafted a model statute against common law courts that several states are in the process of enacting.

BAR-LICENSED STAND-INS?

It has occurred to some supporters that the federal court may go so far as to boot the accused men and women out of the courtroom during trial and replace them with government-licensed bar association attorneys. This will of course be done under the pretense that the accused are disruptive after one or more of them objects to the proceedings (which they must do to preserve an issue for appeal). This practice has been developing since the earliest court hearings involving the Freemen patriots. Several of the men have lasted only 10 minutes or less before being dragged away for attempting to place their objections into the record.

Both the prosecutors and the judiciary have repeatedly hinted that the Freemen trial will be conducted using stand-in agents of the public defenders office. These public pretenders are said to be preparing themselves for just that purpose. On cue, they will render a pre-packaged defense that can be counted on to stay within the boundaries framed by the government.

Even during the 1996 stand-off at Justus, Montana, U.S. Attorney Matteucci was expressing hope that the men would all surrender and accept government-licensed lawyers. (Isn't it odd that U.S. prosecutors desire their opponents to be represented by bar attorneys?) Later, only those who accepted bar-lawyers were granted bail.

During a September, 1996 misdemeanor trial of Freeman supreme court justice LeRoy Schweitzer (for willful failure to file) a federal judge was even more brazen. Schweitzer had no business in the courtroom unless he is taped and chained, said U.S. Judge Charles Lovell. The judge overruled every objection of Schweitzer, even for not allowing Schweitzer to read the very statute that he was accused of violating. After the jury voted guilty, the judge even told them he agreed with their verdict.

As of this writing no exact date for trial has been set.
http://www.jubilee-newspaper.com/freemen3_93_1.htm 

• Re: I am one of the so-called "Montana Freemen" — Oceania Investigations, Thu Mar 4 22:37
• Introduction Pat Shannan's Musings — Pat Shannan, Thu Mar 4 14:30
• Special Events : Health & Freedom Rally — Bypass The Press, Thu Mar 4 14:22
• THE STANDOFF "MONTANA FREEMEN" — RESEARCHER, Thu Mar 4 14:15
• Announcing the Terra - a Currency for the World — Jesse, Thu Mar 4 14:46