GA Up & Coming Magazine - Part 2

Twinity 

Performing Live - If I remember correct this group is Souldisiac

Souldisiac

These photos If I can recall properly was around August 2002

 

Georgia Up & Coming Magazine visits Tama-Re Egypt of the West

Georgia Up & Coming Magazine 

 

Marc Lamont - Al Jazeera English

 https://youtu.be/-y6Byx77qxM?si=ov7qLdVCq6u-lw_8

Soft coup 

Did the Federal Government ever proved Jurisdiction?

 December 16, 2003 ~ Pre-Trial Hearing 

Line 9:  Mr. Davis:  That is correct, Your Honor.  I would also like to point out to the court we have a supplemental motion that we filed today needs to heard, A MOTION TO DISMISS THE INDICTMENT - FOR FAILURE TO ALLEGE A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW.  That we think is very significant motion that needs to be heard.  And I have — there’s a curtesy copy on your desk.  

To access the entire motion (or file) you can download it by clicking below

http://nuwaubianfacts.com/Downloads/december16thhearing.pdf

Keep reading till page 8 and Dr. York’s attorney Mannie Aurora it continues argue the fact that the federal government lacked jurisdiction in this case.  He explains how the “Man Act” counts combined with molestation counts does not connect to the money structuring count.  

That’s why the government used RICO, the first indictment were out of the statue of limitations.

Rule 8 & Rule 14 - must be met and never did.

(a) Claim for Relief. A pleading that states a claim for relief must contain:

(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new jurisdictional support

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_8

Rule 14:  - click here to access 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_14

(4) Motion to Strike, Sever, or Try Separately. Any party may move to strike the third-party claim, to sever it, or to try it separately.

DR. YORK COULD  NOT HAVE A FAIR TRIAL - The federal government never proved jurisdiction and they lacked it. 

Who is Attorney Adrian Patrick?

Adrian L. Patrick is a seasoned criminal defense attorney based in Georgia, with over 25 years of experience representing clients in serious criminal matters at both state and federal levels. His practice, the Law Offices of Adrian L. Patrick, Snellville, is located in Snellville, Georgia, where he offers legal services across a wide range of criminal defense areas, including violent felonies, federal crimes, and motor vehicle offenses.

In the early 2000s, Patrick served as the defense attorney for Malachi Z. York, leader of the United Nuwaubian Nation of Moors, during York's federal trial on charges of child molestation and racketeering. Despite Patrick's defense efforts, York was convicted in January 2004 on multiple counts related to child molestation and racketeering.  Following the conviction, Patrick was initially dismissed but was later rehired to handle York's appeal. 

Throughout the trial, Patrick maintained that the government's actions were an attempt to indict the organization rather than focusing solely on York as an individual.  He also contended that the federal government lacked jurisdiction in the case and advocated for York's release from federal penitentiary.

Patrick's extensive legal experience and commitment to his clients have established him as a dedicated advocate in the field of criminal defense.​

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LACKED JURISDICTION IN THE CASE

Attorney Adrian Patrick argued that the federal government lacked jurisdiction in Dr. Malachi Z. York’s case based on several legal and constitutional grounds. Here are some of the key points often raised by York's defense team:

1. State vs. Federal Jurisdiction – Patrick and the defense contended that the allegations against York, primarily related to child molestation and other crimes, should have been handled at the state level rather than by federal authorities. Typically, child molestation cases fall under state jurisdiction unless there is a specific federal statute that applies.

2. Lack of Federal Nexus – The defense argued that the federal government failed to establish a direct connection between the alleged crimes and federal law. In order for federal charges to apply, the prosecution needed to prove an interstate or federal element, such as crossing state lines or using federal facilities.

3. Unlawful Federal Prosecution Tactics – The defense also suggested that the case was politically motivated and that the federal government unfairly stepped in to prosecute York when it should have remained a state matter. They claimed that the federal charges were a way to target the Nuwaubian Nation rather than York as an individual.

4. Questionable Venue and Due Process Issues – Some arguments suggested that York’s case was improperly moved to federal court and that the venue selected was unfavorable to him, potentially violating his right to a fair trial.

5. Double Jeopardy Concerns – There were also claims that York was initially facing state charges in Georgia, which were later dropped in favor of federal charges. The defense viewed this as a possible violation of double jeopardy protections, though the government argued that dual sovereignty allowed both state and federal prosecutions.