James Stewart Arrested for Skipping Bail in Rawesome Raw Milk, Farm Cases; Michael Schmidt Legal Gain
(Additional information and links have been added to this article since it was first posted.)
Just when it seemed as if the Rawesome Food Club case couldn't get any more bizarre...it got more bizarre, a lot more bizarre.
A case that has seen brutal infighting among two of the originators of Rawesome (James Stewart and Aajonus Vonderplanitz), as well as accusations that a farmer supplier (Sharon Palmer) illegally provided raw milk to the club under a herdshare, has now seen one of the defendants in the case skip bail, and get caught in a struggle and re-jailed.
The most recent problems started when James Stewart, the former operator of the Rawesome Food Club in Venice, CA, failed to show for two court dates--one in Los Angeles last week in connection with charges of illegally selling raw milk, and one in Ventura County Wednesday in connection with charges of illegally raising funds for Sharon Palmer’s Healthy Family Farms, located in Santa Paula, in Ventura County.
Stewart was out on bail in both cases--$30,000 in the L.A. County case and $100,000 in the Ventura County case. The $30,000 bail in L.A. County had been provided by a friend, and the $100,000 in Ventura County was provided by Mark McAfee, in the form of the deed on his Fresno, CA, home. Once Stewart failed to show for the two cases, the nearly 10% upfront cash bond paid in each case (about $3,000 in L.A. County and $9,000 in Ventura County) by a relative and a friend was immediately forfeited.
Just to make a bad situation worse, Stewart failed to show last week to be arraigned on a third set of charges related to his alleged failure to pay state income taxes.
Bench warrants were issued for his arrest in both places, and new bail set: $250,000 in L.A. County and $500,000 in Ventura County.
Thursday evening, three bail bond agents caught up with Stewart. In California, the bail bond companies, which insure the bail posted by a defendant and are thus at risk when defendants jump bail, have certain police powers, including the power to arrest those under their jurisdiction. Think of them as the repo guys for the accused they back on bail. They were from l'il Zeke's and Chickie's bail bond services.
As you can see from the photo above, the bail bond agents arrested Stewart outside his apartment, after a scuffle in which they used their cars to corner his car, and then pulled him from his car and subdued him with Mace. (A video of the arrest has been posted on YouTube.) They then took him to Ventura County jail, where a court officer refused to grant bail, saying Stewart was a flight risk. (Another take on Stewart's arrest is posted by Mike Adams at Natural News.)
The bail bond agents, together with Mark McAfee, who stood to lose $100,000 if Stewart remained at large, tried to convince Stewart Wednesday and Thursday via phone to turn himself in. When he said he wouldn't, they put together legal documents to request an extension of the bail agreements. But when Stewart agreed only to sign the documents, but not appear personally in court, the bail bonds agents went after him.
Mark McAfee, who had gone to Los Angeles today after learning that Stewart had skipped bail, was present when Stewart was arrested. When Stewart saw McAfee, he voiced anger: "Mark, why are you doing this to me?"
McAfee told me he was "relieved, and very saddened." It's easy to understand both emotions.
McAfee was relieved that his home was no longer on the line. "They could have put a lien on my home." But like many who have tried to help Stewart, he was also saddened that the food rights advocate wouldn't work with a top-notch criminal defense lawyer to take full advantage of the strong legal defense he had. Instead, Stewart has spent much of his time since he was first charged nearly a year ago, along with Sharon Palmer and Victoria Bloch, consulting with various legal advocates who suggested Stewart could avoid the charges by asserting so-called "sovereign-man" and constitutional claims. His two co-defendants have been mounting legal defenses in anticipation of trials in both L.A. County and Ventura County.
It's difficult to know where exactly Stewart went astray. My sense is that the entire legal affair may just have gotten to be too much for him to handle emotionally. On top of the three criminal cases, he has been sued (together with Sharon Palmer) in at least one civil suit, by his one-time close collaborator, nutritionst Aajonus Vonderplanitz, and real estate developer Larry Otting. They accused Stewart and Palmer of defaming Vonderplanitz and Otting in connection with emails that criticized the two--a charge that seemed ironic since it was Vonderplanitz and Otting who put up the now-famous Unhealthy Family Farms web site that made serious accusations against Palmer and Stewart in connection with allegedly supplying outsourced, and contaminated, food to Rawesome Food Club; the site has been taken down sometime in the last month. These were charges that Vonderplanitz and Otting took to the Ventura County prosecutor, who declined to take any action. His only action was to charge Otting for being part of the alleged fraud scheme involving bank and personal investor loans to help Sharon Palmer gain a lease on Healthy Family Farms.
Plus, Stewart has already been jailed twice in connection with both the L.A. County and the Ventura County criminal charges, the first time for three days and the second time for a week. In the second jailing, he maintained he was tortured, having been left in a cold room overnight, without being fed, to get hypothermia.
It’s easy to come down on Stewart for trying to opt out of the whole awful affair. Certainly the government prosecutors can’t be more pleased with a key defendant clearly withering under the pressure. That has been part of their intent all along, to break the defendants by piling on charges, and hopefully intimidate others thinking of using the Rawesome Food Club model.
Stewart isn't the first in the growing food rights movement to crack--several farmers and food producers have left the fray. Stewart held on much longer than they did.
I certainly don't feel as if I can call Stewart to task, since I have no idea how I would react to the kind of pressure he was under. No one who hasn't been there knows how they might handle the situation.
It's important to keep the big picture in mind, and in the big picture, the government is able to assemble a mammoth array of forces to frustrate, intimidate, obfuscate, delay, torture, and otherwise assert its will. The U.S. government is no different than any other government in this respect. The more threatened its rulers feel, the more tools they will bring to bear to beat back the threat, and in the Rawesome case, they have assembled a formidable array of tools via numerous federal, state, county, and local agencies, headed up by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
If enough people can stand up to the pressure, can watch what happened to James Stewart and feel more determined than ever to prevail rather than feeling intimidated, the battle can be won. Which leads me to more upbeat news...
**
It is never a simple matter for a defendant who has lost to the government to convince an appeals court to take another look at the case, whether in Canada or the United States. But on Thursday, the lawyer for Canadian dairy farmer Michael Schmidt convinced an appeals court to re-examine his conviction on 13 counts of violating the province’s dairy laws.
This was the case that Schmidt won three years ago, when an Ontario judge ruled that Schmidt’s cowshare was truly a private organization, whose members could put themselves outside the bounds of the public food regulation system.
The government convinced an appeals court to reverse Schmidt’s exoneration—something that couldn’t happen in the U.S., which bans double jeopardy (being found guilty later on charges you have previously been acquitted of).
So Schmidt appealed the reversal, with his lawyer, Karen Selick of the Canadian Constitutional Foundation, arguing there has been an absence of legal precedent to adequately guide the judges in the case. She also argued that cases thus far have contradicted each other.
The government vehemently opposed having the appeal heard, maintaining that there was no important public interest to be served.
Judge Eileen Gillese agreed with Schmidt. ""You've got two decisions standing and they conflict," the judge noted, according to Sun News Canada. "That's what the leave to appeal would resolve."
This site's mission is to provide news and analysis about food rights and raw milk. Increasingly, our access to privately available food is under attack by government and industry forces that seek to impose their choices on us. The Complete Patient seeks to provide up-to-date information and encourage the development of community to maintain traditional food acquisition options.
I am deeply saddened and disappointed...
Me too, Mark. James is obviously coping with a lot. But I think this situation is all too predictable, and we as a society should be doing more to prevent these kinds of abuses and breakdowns. It doesn't help that in the "land of the free", we imprison a larger percentage of our population than any other country on the planet.
There's a great quote, as it regards the problem you are facing:
I think it must be conceded that it is possible to create a society in which the response to market failure is not a swing to socialism, but an exacerbation of individual efforts to stay ahead by making and spending yet more money. Does the public health service have long waiting lists and inadequate facilities? Buy private insurance. Has public transport broken down? Buy a car for each member of the family above driving age. Has the countryside been built over or the footpaths eradicated? Buy some elaborate exercise machinery and work out at home. Is air pollution intolerable? Buy an air-filtering unit and stay indoors. Is what comes out of the tap foul to the taste and chock-full of carcinogens? Buy bottled water. And so on. We know it can all happen because it has: I have been doing little more than describing Southern California.
Now it is worth noticing two things about the private substitutes that I have described. The first is that in the aggregate they are probably much more expensive than would be the implementation of the appropriate public policy. The second is that they are extremely poor replacements for the missing outcomes of good public policy. Nevertheless, it is plain that the members of a society can become so alienated from one another, so mistrustful of any form of collective action, that they prefer to go it alone.
-Brian Barry, The Continuing Relevance of Socialism
Who needs television these days...
Wow, people put up money in good faith and his actions have the potential to jeopardize their home-life... Shows his poor quality in his character. This action ensures his business practices were questionable.
If James wants to dispute the court's jurisdiction , he cannot voluntarily appear in court.
Fine approach to test out if he had posted his own bail. Would you want him testing it out with your house or other assets pledged as bail, and subject to forfeiture if the approach doesn't work?
Didn't Stewart make a big point in the beginning that he was not a "sovereign"? Was that not true at the time or has he become a sovereign since his arrest?
You raise a good point, Amanda, and I was never clear on what exactly James' position was on the "sovereign man" silliness. It would help us understand what exactly was going on here if this question could be clarified.
These "Libertarians" who go around promoting these "soveriegn man" ideas need to actually study history and political theory before they go around promoting such misguided legal doctrines. It helps to actually understand what "Soveriegnty" originally meant, in late-Feudal and early-Capitalist societies (What, aren't they familiar with Thomas Hobbes?)
I think David Graeber had a pretty good explanation of popular soveriegnty and its relationship to modern capitalist democracy in this Occupy Wall Street "Free University" lecture:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK0H8Nbzu8M
One more detail -- This does all seem to come back to the McAfee bond, at least it appears so from the timeline. There was a warrant from LA County for his not appearing but it was a day after not appearing in Ventura that the bounty hunters came. In the video of the arrest that Mike Adams posted, it is also clear that the bounty hunters were taking him to Ventura. Maybe a moral to the story is that you are going to be a sovereign, you need to find other sovereigns to post your bail.
Congratulation to Michael Schmidt! Michael shows us all the way forward with his committment to principles of democracy and justice!
Regarding the James Stewart case, once again, we see how the Libertarian/Constitutionalist fundamentalism (so-called "Soveriegn Man" claims) causes people to act irrationally and creates much larger problems for the broader raw milk movement.
We can see how well this "Constitutionalist" strategy has worked for Mike Hartmann in MN, and the repurcussions which his antics have had on others in the raw milk community in MN. It continues to trouble me that this kind of fundamentalism is the norm for the raw milk movement in much of the US, and the fundamentalism needs to be repudiated by the movement leadership if we are to move forward.
A raw milk movement which tries to place itself outside of society will never be successful. Our goal must be to transform society, not to "opt out" of it.
Bill, yes there are some in the raw milk movement who are fundamentalist - they have a right to their beliefs. However, the food rights/raw milk movement from what I can see is made up of an extremely diverse group of people. Don't be so fast to stereotype. I'm not defending James, putting Marks house, and the money of others in jeopardy without their knowledge was wrong. While it's not good for raw milk to be associated with this latest turn of events it's not so scary either. Lots of people cave in to pressure, freak out, breaks the rules, act strangely; ironically, James actions makes all this seem more instep with society...more normal. Hmm
Baily,
I'm not suggesting James is a fundamentalist in the religious sense. The "fundamentalism" I'm talking about here is the "free-market" libertarian/constitutional fundamentalism, although that kind of fundamentalism often does go hand-in-hand with religious fundamentalism.
Bill, I know what you were suggesting. Perhaps the word your looking for here is extremism. Which exists in all walks of live (including socialism). Not holding our judicial, legislative and executive govermnemt systems accountable to the constitution is what got us into trouble in the first place. You are using the actions of James S to make it sound like anyone fighting for constitutionality is a radical political fundamentalist. Could it not be that these are just the actions of a very broken man, and should not be used to charecterize the raw milk or food rights movements?
Hear hear!
Ken
The evidence is in: raw milk is heading into the black market economy under a new government "War on Real Food."
This story should serve as a cautionary tale for those who are relying on the "system" to work for them. You can’t clean up mud by climbing into the puddle.
We need a new operational paradigm, not a “constitutional awakening.” The power is not in the hands of citizens, in spite of all the pamphlets and buttons I see everyone wearing. The only power we have is that which we’re allowed to have by the enforcers.
Just know that there can be a difference between "legal" and "right." Choose to live by your moral principles, which may not be reflected in current law enforcement. Understand, though, there may be repercussions.
P.S. In terms of a resistance movement, raw milkers should consider James Stewart an out-and-out traitor for jeopardizing the livelihood of others in the movement.
Chaunce, very well said. If Michael Schmidt stopped with what was legal he would have lost a very long time ago. The key ingredients of breaking the law for the right reasons are integrity, ethics and morals. These traits are why Michael lives to fight another battle.
Bill,
You are "dead-on" with your assessment of Mike Schmidt verses James Steward and their handling of their individual cases and conditions. Mike engages the system in reality with grace and intelligence ( and great legal advice )....James Stewart appears to depart reality, fire his attorneys, takes advice from people that think they know the law from out of state ( las vegas ) breaks his contracts with the court and his bail agent and his friends that bail him out and then expects everything to be OK....his advisors told him to not worry about the bench warrant...becuase it was from a judge with out authority and all court actions would be quashed.
Let me tell you. No one is going to play those kinds of games with my home and my family. I tried for 24 hours to convince James to work with me and the bail bond company to extend his bail terms and appear before the court to make this all right. He refused and refused. He instead insisted that he stay hidden and would not even meet with me.
I am deeply saddened by this turn of events. If James wants to proceed in this fashion...he will need to get another friend to post his bail. I place my family first ( our home was placed in jeapardy and not once did James mention that his actions were going to cause me to lose my house )and I teach and fight in this reality.
It is all so very sad. James had also breached his agreement with Arnell. Arnel was another friend that had posted a $30,000 bond.
James was a fugitive from "two bench warrants" and did not seem to think that this was any big deal as lond as he stayed in hiding. He refused any help to fix the problem by working with the courts or the bail bondsman. These were his choices. Sadly....he is not getting good advice and his advisors are not sharing his jail cell with him. That is the really sad part. Those that advised him have no consequences for their piss-poor horribly missguided bad advice.
That is not how the world works.
Is it possible that James is going through a mental crisis & breakdown & is not able to reason correctly? This does not sound like him at all. Perhaps he has fallen into a deep state of delusion to the point that he is doing & making these irrational actions? Why would someone as smart as James is fire good attorneys, start listening to those that he shouldn't, not listen & be reasonable to good friends? There is something much more deeper going on with him & he may need immediate medical intervention. This is NOT normal behaviour.
I share your sentiment!
Ken
I don't know James Stewart or any of the people involved in this ordeal, but I know for sure this will not help the raw food/raw milk movement and the goals we are trying to achieve. He just gave the whole community a black eye and gave the gubment regulators more ammunition. They'll probably be sending him thank you notes for a long time to come.
And even though Michael is winning his fight (congrats, BTW) he lives in Canada where there is obviously still some semblence of reason. Not so in the USA.
What a waste.
Or maybe it's his true colors shining through? A man who turns on Claravale to get OPDC in stores, who aids his supplier of eggs and meat to buy conventional or organic eggs and sells them as grass fed free range from the farm eggs and doesn't let his customers know? Hmmm... Why are you all do quick to trust and defend this man? His actions have been self serving in the past, and so are they now.
@ Kristen P: What are you reading, Kristen? I haven't seen anyone here defending James Stewart's actions. I don't know about his past, but evidently at one point people thought he was worth trusting, so something happened. I don't pretend to analyze people but he has been under quite a bit of duress recently. His current actions were selfish, but we don't know the reasons and we shouldn't make judgement calls.
Excuse me. We all know James personally now and have so much sympathy for him? The guy worked outside the law day one at Rawesome. Blinded by the white stuff, good lord.
@ Kristen P: I'm sorry, but you don't seem to be able to read or comprehend very well. I stated above, clearly, that I don't know James - and who said ANYTHING about sympathy? I said we shouldn't pass judgement.
You are ready to jump on the bandwagon and convict him without a trial. And then you say "white stuff" (which could mean one of two things) so you're making assumptions about him, personally, as well. Unless you KNOW him well enough to know what he's doing all the time, hmmmm?
You remind me of a sister-in-law of mine. She's not happy unless she's spreading vicious rumors and trashing people, even if she has no idea what the truth is. She doesn't care about truth, she cares about gossip. If the shoe fits . . .
Speaking of shoes, you haven't walked a mile in the moccasins of the people involved in this rawesome raid either. So maybe the message about not passing judgement too quickly should apply to many others here, as well. Every comment you've ever made here has been haughty and self-serving, and not just on this subject but all of your posts on past topics, as well. You appear to be a hateful person who can't wait for others to step in something and then not be able to get it off their shoes.
At one point you mentioned not posting here any more. I wish you'd stuck to your guns on that, but you manage to show up and comment whenever there's something hateful you can say.
I agree with you, Kristen. James character is suspect to me. So far he has seemed to get by with "what are you doing to me". It's all being done *to him*, he has no culpability. If for no other reason because of Mark's house and the other fellow who put up money for his bail, he should have stepped up and acted like a man, not a whimpering baby.
Thanks for this, Deborah. And thanks too for always bringing humanity into the discussion. I tend not to comment much here because I don't want to get caught up in rhetoric. But here's some truth for those who will hear it: James Stewart is my friend. He has a big heart (one of the kindest, most generous I've ever seen) and possesses not a single malicious bone in his body. Contrary to all the unwarranted slander, he is not a liar or conspirator or fraud, by any definition. But neither would he be the willing poster-child for raw milk freedom. He is, as we've seen, simply a man - but a man of food, and not of the law - a man whose reality has been shaken in this relentless pursuit by a government whose corruption has been repeatedly demonstrated and seldom held accountable. Of course, James was scared. Of course, he didn't want to go back to prison (especially after the way he was treated following his arrest in March). That cannot really surprise us. Ask anyone in the field, and they'll tell you... Stress and fear (especially at the levels he's endured) can alter the brain. And though this situation is now worlds away from what most of us would have wanted for him, for those who've risked so much to help him, or for the raw milk discussion in general, James Stewart deserves at least our compassion - if not our action and renewed commitment to help change our broken government. Whether we ourselves would have gambled with the livelihood and homes of others is not even material. James's choices are his own, and he must wrestle with them now, for better or worse. Those of us who care about him must trust that he did what he felt necessary, just as Mark has apparently done what he felt necessary to protect his own family and property. Indeed, I too am deeply saddened and disappointed by these events... What a fiendishly cleverly designed criminal system, to set the price of lawful liberation at the ruin of our dearest friends and family.
Thanks for sharing your perspective.
Leo Tolstoy suggested and I am inclined to agree that, “Robbers, are far less dangerous than a well-organized government.”
Ken
@ Ken: Ha! Good one. Heck, I trust the mafia more than I trust our gubment.
You are quite welcome, Angela. My heart goes out to James and what he is going through. There is no doubt in my mind (especially based on my medical experience) that his behaviour is very consistent to stress, devastation & trauma. Who wouldn't suffer a major departure from their normal behaviour & mind-set after going through what he has been going through? It just amazes me at those who are so ready to condemn & be so cruel when they are not there, they have no clue what is going on, they do not see what a person is going through, etc. Just by watching the video of him being taken into custody, you can clearly see his confusion, how frightened he is & how his behaviour is just not normal, it was heart-rending to watch. I can also imagine how devastated he has been by the brutal betrayal by someone he had considered to be a friend (Aajonus Vanderplanitz), who, by the way, is a fraud himself!! I don't care how educated, how self-taught a person has become, how much they had "studied" things, how many lectures they have given, how many people they have interviewed, you do not obtain a fake PhD to put behind your name. Go out & earn it legitmally (like many of us have), go to an accredited school/university, take all the required courses, earn your Masters, then Bachelors, then your PhD. And for heaven's sake...DO NOT see & treat "patients" without any type of certifications and licenses!!! How he continues to get away with this is beyond me!! I would never dream of, let along, attempt to see & treat patients again without renewing my P.A. license. Yes, it seems that James' live is spiraling out of control & I hope & pray that the right people can help to restore things correctly with & for him.
James has obviously not been drinking raw milk because the natural healing properties would have protected him from the stresses of the federal crusade against his just operation. Seems pretty clear to me that he's drinking regular pasteurized milk which is filling his body full of toxins which his body is unable to digest and is leading to his iterative and irresponsible behavior.
*irrational*
Go have a beer and watch the Olympics.
I thank Aajanous for the primal diet, the education of what real food is, and saving the life of someone very close to me thru his strict diet. I now drink 2 gallons raw milk a week , thanks to OP ,eat raw eggs like candy for the past 3 years, and try to stay away from GMO grown food whenever possible. Not saying everyone should do that but it works for me. The primal diet is good to read about and study and educate yourself about anything food related.Written by this person with the questionable phd. I believe Rawsome has been one of the best pure food sources in Calif. that was brought on by this person with the questionable phd. If you need the Credentails thats great. Personally I could care less.
TheGirlsGoneRaw...Thanks for sharing your observations about James. I had gotten to know him over the last couple years, and had a similar sense about his sincerity and caring nature.
Just one additional note about our "fiendishly designed criminal system"... as I recall it, prosecutors in the initial Rawesome case charging illegal sale of raw milk invoked a California law that prevents defendants from using "ill-gotten gains" to post bail. It's designed to keep drug traffickers from using all their cash to easily raise bail money, but it was applied to James Stewart (as well as Sharon Palmer; Victoria Bloch was released without bail) to prevent them from using any of their own money, forcing them to raise money from friends and relatives as acceptable bail. The "ill-gotten gains" in this case were considered to be revenues from raw milk.
Angela - Thank you for your wise and balanced answer. Although I haven't known James for long, I have heard many stories about his past generosity, creativity and incredible business networking skills that almost single handedly helped many, many sustainable farmers, food artisans and Real Foodists by connecting food producers with consumers. Nevertheless, I've been incredibly disappointed myself by the trend of his choices of the last 6 months or so. Kudos to both Victoria and, in particular, Sharon who are both subject to enormous pressure and nevertheless, are maintaining positions of sanity, consistency and integrity in the face of enormous stress.
" it possible that James is going through a mental crisis & breakdown & is not able to reason correctly?"
If this is the case, then he requires a psychiatrist for correct diagnoses and treatment and is not mentally stable to stand trial. His friends should notify whomever and inform them of his mental problems.
Absolutely, Sylvia, that was my point exactly. I only hope that his friends will recognize this need & help to obtain it for him.
Girls gone raw,
I share your sentiment....totally!
James is in a horrible place and none of us should ever be critical or judging of that place. He needs help. Real help. Some many of us have tried to deliver this help, but becuase of his special set of conditions, tragically he could not receive it.
I wish him clarity and the inner strength to find his true north and listen to those that can help. He has done nothing to deserve jail ( all things he has done can be negotiated and settled if he was clearly thinking )....until this series of poor choices brought on by terrible counsel. Because of his own confusion with reality and listening to people with no dog in the fight or flesh in the game...he has taken a wrong turn.
He needs and deserves compassion....he needs a very good lawyer and the judgement to follow good counsel. This is a web that will tangle him up so tight...if he persists in his delusion.
Follow Mike Schmidts example...use clarity and strategy as acts of total engagement. He hides from nothing and engages with the brilliance of a world class chess player. Engagement not hiding!! When Mike shows up at court...he brings hundreds of people and the goodness of being right and he argues to the souls of those that hold court. James follows a course of disengagement and hiding away. Could not be two strategies farther apart.
Disengagement invites incarceration and self inflicted abuse. Listening to the right people takes a strategic and thoughtful thinker. I hope that some quiet time will bring this light to him.
James does not belong in jail.
Mark
@ Mark: James is definitely disengaged, as you stated above. He needs to be kept away from whoever is trying to"guide" him and give him this bad advice. He then needs some time to himself to collect his own thoughts. Then he needs an advocate who will help him find decent legal counsel. He sounds like someone who could and would face up if he wasn't listening to screwy advice. This "advice" may be coming from well-meaning people but it's doing James a lot of harm in the present by keeping him from facing up to his obligations. I wish him good luck.
If you watched the Youtube video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYTP9C7jtrI you will hear James pleading for someone to call "Fred", this is the person that has been providing James with the legal advise. The advisor is Fred Gutierrez who is being investigated by the FBI for scamming folks in Hawaii and across the US. He has been hosting seminars that provide the type of advise that James followed that is landing people in jail across the country.
Fred, his wife Nina and Kelby Smith have been at this for some time, encouraging folks to become sovereign. Kelby Smith is actually part of an organization that call itself the Republic that is lead by Tim Turner. You can learn more about these people at www.eftscam.com . The Republic has declared war on the United States Government (yes, I know this sounds bizarre). If you go about 18 minutes into this audio clip you will hear James defending Fred http://www.setoffdebt.com/download/interviews/EFT-Call-July-05-2012.mp3.
This may help explain where James' head was at, in thinking that he was above the law.
@ MarcLancaster: I know nothing about this Fred person you mention, but it would appear that what he's doling out is NOT legal advice. It would seem more like coercion. Coercion is defined as being required to do/say things or to submit to things others do/say to you, that you do not, or would not, voluntarily agree to do/say yourself or to have done to you.
James is obviously a little unhinged from all this, and needs realignment.
Does anyone know if he's still under the spell of this Fred person and his ilk?
@Sylvia, I agree that James needs to be evaluated. He has been under tremendous stress. It's all too easy to judge someone for their responses to circumstances, and to say "Well, I would never do that!" But stress does damage, and each person responds differently. I don't believe that James would have been willing to put people who so willingly helped him in financial danger under normal circumstances. But by any stretch of the imagination, these are not normal circumstances. Do I wish James had made better choices? You betcha. I'm just not sure that he was completely capable of doing so. What a shame.
I cannot imagine placing someone's livelyhood in jeporady, especially when they were gracious enough to have my back. To know that I not only let myself down but others would be devastating. If he has mental problems, then he should have them tended to, just as the shooter in Denver should. There are way too many unanswered question relating to the whole rawsome episode. No one like being the butt of fraud.
I am proud of this blog and the sanity it speaks ( at least most of the time). Even though we all may differ on our views of freedom, nutrition, sanity and many other things, I am proud that at least all of us are human enough to not become vultures when another good human being is needing serious help at many levels.
The Complete Patient is a good place to discuss, haggle, and rangle out our First Amendment Rights on what it is to be an American and gather diverse input on a better direction for us all.
Thank you David!
Thank you all....
Its not like mcafee hasnt been under a certain amount of stress and financail strain with the last couple of recalls. And correct me if Im wrong but I dont think organic pastures milk was even sold at rawsome while they were in business. A total stand up move to help out stewert on mcafees part.
After the first raid on Rawesome....I went to Rawesome and visited with James in person...face to face. That was a year before and long before the big raid that shut them down. I offered James all the OPDC products that he could sell at discounted special prices.
He was courteous and said he would call me back....but never did.
I will never forget the feel inside Rawesome. It was alive, thriving and filled with gorgeous healthy happy people. Rawesome was Awesome....but its leadership did not think strategically. In the USA a person does not take up a high profile and piss all over supermans cape. I tried to tell James just this. There was a certain mind state....a belief in immunity from all things bad.
I know about all things government. I have been in front of the federal judge on that one...with the FDA wanting me in jail and the elimination of OPDC from CA and the face of the earth. Thanks Gary Cox for your blistering and brilliant redress of those sterile food loving, PMO worshipping, baby immune system killing jerks.
You must have the soul of Ghandi and the mind of Schmidt to survive and thrive in this FOOD INC FDA reality. Denial does not work. Total engagement and building big markets works. I read the "Art of War" once a year just to stay focussed. I also read "Good to Great", a super good book on how to build team and move companies to good places with the right team.
I do not listen to idiots from Las Vegas that tell you to avoid hearings adn everything will be just fine...that the judge has no authority and that the bench warrant is not enforceable and that everything will be quashed.
This is really sad....James needs a good lawyer with a back ground in psych.
Mark
@Mark McAfee, In your compassion and your willingness to stand up for what you believe to be right, you went out of your way to help James in an untenable situation. With all that you yourself have gone through with government shutdowns and the like – resulting in loss of income and general hardships, this speaks volumes for your place in the community.
Victoria,
Your love, clarity and rational support for me though this ordeal has been wonderful and heartfelt.
As Mike Schmidt says...
THIS IS A WAR and Raw Milk is LOVE!
I could not agree more. Stay focussed and strong.
Thank you!! :-))
For any of you that think that the bond agents brutalized James, please know this. I do not like cops and do not generally do not trust many of them. Some of my best friends are cops...I know how they think. It is scary. It is their training that conditions them to immediately escalate against any threats to assure a sure and quick win....there is nothing fair about fighting with cops or Bond Agents for that matter.
That is why I was clear with the Bond Guys that they would use the very least amount of force required to take James into custody. James was not injured in the arrest and I had my camera ready incase something went wrong. Nothing went wrong. They did their jobs and used the appropriate amount of force required to arrest James.
James needs a good lawyer and from what I understand the lawyer that is representing Sharon Palmer has agreed to represent James for a smaller than normal fee. His friends are gathering funds right now and James will be ok...he needed the reality check to get back on track. He was flailing way out of control and making things worse and worse.
The last thing in the world he needed was to fulfil Amandas cruel joke and ride into Mexico in the trunk of someones car and make this a federal case with, FBI, Homeland Security and US Marshalls etc. It was my sense that this is where this was all heading.
That madness is now stopped.
Mark's reference above about me is to an email I sent him the night the warrant was issued. I asked if James escaped to Mexico in the trunk of Sharon Palmer's car. (For those following the on-going saga, Palmer was arrested in the past for bringing people illegally across the border.) Mark responded that he had spoken to James three times and things were not as they seemed. Indeed, they were not. Mark was rallying the bondsmen to arrest James. It's nice that Mark reports James was not brutalized, in contrast to the actual video where James asks them to stop hurting them.
Why Mark brings up a private e-mail I do not know (??), but I'll fulfill his expectations and add my commentary to this situation. This is my interpretation of events using a behavioral model from economics: Mark has been courting James and Rawesome because it would be a big market for him. The problem is that with the OPDC outsourcing scandal, his product didn't meet the Rawesome standards (ironically now that apparently there were outsourced products brought into Rawesome). Perhaps bailing out James was a way to gain favor and get the product back into the market. As things have unfolded and Rawesome appears to be at its end, there is little in it for Mark in terms of future Rawesome sales -- there isn't a lot of financial incentive to hold the bail bag. Had there been something in it, I'm sure Mark could have passed the hat with Mike Adams and brought James in differently if that's what needed to be done.
In any case, it definitely appears from Mark's comment that he led the bounty hunters right to an unsuspecting James Stewart. In fact, his comment suggests that he orchestrated the whole arrest. Now that Mark has spun this whole discussion into "it was an intervention into the life of a psychologically disturbed friend," his betrayal of the friend obviously demands hero worship of Mark McAfee. If in the process, Mark can create more Amanda haters, it's all the better of a victory. (Mark takes every opportunity to discredit people who speak out against his immoral business practices.)
This case and the on-going issue that is Mark McAfee is so depressing in itself, I'm just going to go garden.
Amanda
"The problem is that with the OPDC outsourcing scandal, his product didn't meet the Rawesome standards (ironically now that apparently there were outsourced products brought into Rawesome)"
Amanda, that is ironic in regards to not meeting rawsome's "standards" because of outsourcing. Guess it all depends on who is doing the outsourcing and what's in it for those involved.
Amanda, I am not a hater of either side and just trying to comprehend, as I'm sure many nonposting readers are. I feel like I'm reading a spy movie script as it develops in real time.
A couple of questions if you don't mind, since most of us don't know the principal characters firsthand:
a) Was "Palmer arrested in the past for bringing people illegally across the border" for bringing them in, or out of the country? Just curious and not a major factor but just so we can get the movie script right.
b) "Mark has been courting James and Rawesome because it would be a big market for him." Does this mean that Rawsome, after the raid still had / has a chance of providing a sales point that would actually interest Mark? I thought they were shut down forever and kaput.
c) "Mark's comment that he led the bounty hunters right to an unsuspecting James Stewart. In fact, his comment suggests that he orchestrated the whole arrest... in the process, Mark can create more Amanda haters." Are you suggesting that Mark lied to and entrapped James? And why would he care how many people hate you, do you have that much influence on his business??
d) "Mark takes every opportunity to discredit people who speak out against his immoral business practices." Conversely why do you take every opportunity to discredit Mark? What's in it for you? I don't believe you are a milk producer, so are you competing with him in some way we don't know? Please shed some light on these "immoral practices" for us ignorant shmucks.
I'm just going to go garden, I'll agree is great therapy.
Ora I realize you had asked Amanda your questions. Here are some links regarding some of Sharon's past escapades. Apparently she had temporarily fled the country to Mexico in 1999 I believe it was, and was apprehended by Boarder Patrol for transporting illegal aliens across the boarder in the trunk of her car. After being convicted for fraud and serving a sentence and receiving probation, she went into the raw food business. Several advocates for raw food allege she continued her fraudulent activities, selling commercially purchased food products as raw food to rawesome customers and James knew it.
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jul/19/business/fi-55157
http://articles.latimes.com/1999/sep/02/business/fi-5902
http://southpasadena.patch.com/articles/healthy-family-farms-to-stay-at-...
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/home-base-mortgage-brokers-accused-of-s...
http://www.thecompletepatient.com/article/2009/january/15/sharon-palmer-... ~~~~most crooks claim innocence
Ora -- Just search around this blog for OPDC outsourcing. It's easily found.
Thanks Sylvia for the other links.
I am sorry, but I just have to ask here, as I honestly do not understand this obsession with "outsourcing"...let me begin by first asking: how many here buy their groceries from Whole Foods, Trader Joes, and/or Sprouts? How many buy these store's house brands, i.e. Whole Foods 365 brand, Trader Joes brand & Sprouts brand? If so, news flash....all of those items are outsourced! Personally, I don't have a problem with outsourcing AS LONG AS I have a way to verify that they came from a trusted source, hence I honestly do not mind buying the house brands of Whole Foods, Trader Joes, or Sprouts. Also, many of the farmers markets that I go to also have outsourced items on their tables & not all of them have an 'outsourced' sign on them, nor any mention that they came from another farm and/or producer, but I know these farmers, I know their dedication to providing quality products & I have no problem that they are offering these additional products, produce, etc. This whole obsession, fixation around the word 'outsourced' has really gotten blown out of proportion. I guarantee that you are currently buying outsourced products & probably don't even know it. The only way to be sure, is if you personally make each & every food item yourself & let's face it...that is an impossible feat! There really is nothing wrong with outsourcing per se, unless it is abused, dangerous, or harmful. Take a look at your cupboard, refrigerator & freezer....I guarantee you have a number of items there that have been outsourced.
Just some food for thought!
Mark sold product sourced from a 10K dairy and his customers didn't know about it. To me, that doesn't really compare to your examples.
There is no difference, Amanda....outsourcing is outsourcing, no matter the person, the company, the product or the need. Do you think the customers of Whole Foods, Trader Joes, or Sprouts know that the products they are buying from those stores are ALL outsourced?! Are you insinuating that Mark was being negligent and irresponsible for going to a trusted source for the needed colostrum and additional milk for the butter and cheese?
Deborah -- I am saying that Mark sold product that did not meet his label claims. If the WF or TJ products don't meet the claims, then I have a problem with that too. I have no problem with outsourcing as a business model, as long as the product meets the marketing claims.
As for insinuating, I am not insinuating anything at all. Mark did not go to a "trusted source." He bought from a milk broker who bought it from a processor at a time of year when cows were not grazing (because of the climate in that region). When his cream was recalled in 2007 and he blamed the source (another large processor in CA), the processor was apparently surprised. The processor didn't know the cream was being sold raw. Milk brokers don't talk about transactions. They just sell milk and cream.
I am saying directly that Mark sold product that did not meet his label claims and, in fact, the actual dairy had no idea the product was being sold raw. What a food safety nightmare and a breach of trust with his customers. This went on from 2005-2009 at the very least. The profit from that product would easily pay James Stewart's bail.
Now what you are posting here, Amanda, is a completely different thing. A "product that did not meet his label claims" is something quite different from just a case of outsourcing. So, not knowing what the labels stated at that time, can you enlighten us on how the products did not meet the label claims? What should have been done at that time to meet the label claims? And, as I recall, this happened in the past, yes? I see that you claim that it continued from 2005 - 2009, are you sure that is correct or is that just an assumption? Obviously things have changed from that time and extra effort, extra care, and extra dedication in insuring a safe product is now in place, isn't that what counts the most now? As far as, the labels on WFs, TJs, or Sprouts, I am sure they are also not up to par, which again falls into the case of the customer not knowing that!
I believe that Mark did not notify the customers in the stores that he was outsourcing some of his products. His logo/cartons stated the products were from his animals/farm. Very misleading.
http://www.thecompletepatient.com/article/2009/november/4/raw-milk-outso...
Per mark's post:"On rare occasion in the past OPDC has purchased fluid milk to be used in Class 4a and 4b products."
Ora -- I have no idea what happened with this arrest, but I think you all are misunderstanding a key point. James missed his LA hearing and a warrant was issued for his arrest. Then he missed Ventura. That's where Mark's money was involved and Mark brought in the bounty hunters. He's now making a story about how his heart has swelled four sizes and he did it as tough-love for a friend. If we are friends in real life, Ora, and this happens to you or me, I would hope we would intervene before the second warrant and hope to keep ourselves out of jail.
As for "what's in it for me," good question. I make no money off of raw milk and have lost friends over it as Mark runs around calling me a liar. We're in some of the same social circles here. Notice in this thread, he just had to get a jab in and I had been pretty darned quiet considering all of the DRAMA here in California. Really, there were so many more jokes left unsaid. These LA guys are just a constant supply. Thank you for that.
Amanda
Amanda - I want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly. You think that Mark endangered his family by putting up his HOME up for collateral to bail James out of jail as a form of subtle blackmail to get Rawesome sales? When Rawesome doesn't even have a place of business and it looks like it won't for the foreseeable future?
I'm questioning Mark's motives in all of this, yes. He operates a $7M/year business in this precise niche market and has gotten press over this bail situation.
I have to disagree about Stewart "cracking" under the pressure of trying to prevail under and against the USDA and FDA. It comes down to not being honest. If you want to beat or change a system you must work within the system. Had he followed getting licenses and not defrauding people and being honest, things would be playing out a bit differently. However, he follows and relies on the twisted thoughts of "sovereign man" instead of well versed attorneys. "Sovereign man" has a criminal record (www.eftscam.com), lies about his credentials, has no official background in what he is doing and has led many people down a path of destruction while he preys on others desperation while professing his "free ministry". James and many others should be "verifying" what the validity and long term impact is of "sovereign man's" bile. Unfortunately when people get in desperate situations they reach for anything even if it is a mirage. It comes down to real issues of following real laws like the rest of the population. If a license is required, GET IT! IF there's a law, FOLLOW IT! There are laws such as paying taxes- PAY THEM! If taking money the way he and Sharon did it is a felony- DON"T DO IT! if you are selling raw milk-make sure you are following the rules. It can kill you or make you very sick. I use it, but am careful to buy from licensed, clean producers. James didn't show up for court. MORE than once. Friends of his were at risk for losing a lot of money if he didn't show up to court. Did he care? Didn't seem to. Seems a bit selfish to me. Then the video is posted and cries of unconstitutional this and that and right being violated! Hmph! James is breaking laws and then trying to say the law is unconstitutional. It's like a child who breaks the rules, is punished and then screams abuse because they didn't get television and were deprived of dessert. My advice is to get away from "sovereign man". Lots have lost their homes or gone to jail thanks to his advice. The sadness comes from those of us trying to make our food system cleaner and healthier by following the rules and doing it lawfully have to live the bad rap the dishonest ones give us.
James become friends with wrong group and listened to a real dirt bag! This Fred Gutierrez is a bad seed.
If there was a "like" button, I'd click it on Flippin's comment.
MW
Flippin,
It used to be against the law to harbor escaped slaves.
It used to be against the law in many states for blacks to use bathrooms and drinking fountains reserved for white people.
It used to be against the law in many states for blacks to ride in the front of public buses.
It used to be against the law in many states for unmarried couples to cohabitate.
It used to be against the law in some states for parents to home school their children.
It used to be against the law in most states to allow seriously handicapped or disabled children attend public school.
The only reason these and a multitude of other patently unjust laws were changed was because brave individuals defied them. Some died or went to jail. If they had followed your philosophy of blindly obeying even the most patently unjust laws, we'd have a much less free and open society today.
Since Biblical times, it has been common law that people are entitled to the milk of their own cows or goats. Yet a Wisconsin judge has declared it is against the law to drink the milk of your own cow if you don't have a dairy permit. Maryland completely forbids cow shares or herd shares. California has declared they are against the law. Wyoming has a proposed regulation to do the same. But in all those places, brave farmers and other individuals committed to food rights are defying those laws and regulations. And one day before long, I'll be able to add those to the list of unjust laws that were once in effect, and done away with because brave people wouldn't stand for the government telling them what foods they can and can't put in their bodies.
James Stewart has long been committed to people having the right to consume the foods of their choice. For years, he defied patently unjust laws in the name of food rights. Yes, he made some tactical errors in the last few months in dealing with his legal defense. But I assure you, he didn't err because he was selfish. If anything, he has been too giving to people like you. Fortunately, most of those who have had access for many years to the nutrient-dense food he provided will be forever grateful to him.
David - if there was a LIKE button...I'd click on it big time for your post...you are so spot on!!
Apparently cults are alive and thriving. Surprised they couldn't find a better soundtrack for background music.
MW
David,
I respect and admire your support for James and what he did. You may misinterpret my remarks. I AM one of those people who will fight for the rights of those when it is unjust. UNJUST is a key word. There is a correct and incorrect way to go about change. James will not be very effective in a confined space. Correct?! An aside, I think everyone would get a giggle from your statements if you "saw" me and the color of my skin and knew the battles I have faced through my life because of it-a changed law doesn't necessarily breed acceptance of people...I had to giggle with your examples, but I digress. Your examples are definite civil rights and human rights and equality issues. But I don't think we can put this on that level. We all have the responsibility to be good citizens. We all have the responsibility to do our best to follow the law. Not drinking and driving is a good example. You can get multiple DUIs and have a wonderful kind giving heart, but the time you harm someone when you are driving or worse yet end someones life through your negligence will result in serious consequences. Blatant defiance of a law is many times just stupidity or martyrdom. There is a way to make change and a way to hinder change. Fortunately, we live where we can make changes and challenge laws. Blatant disregard for the law is not going change anything. Can you give me an example of how any of the charges against James or his actions are helping anyone? It takes knowledge, education, motivation, and cooperation of a following of people at the very least.
I want my family to eat good healthy food from nutrient rich soil. So I educate them, I give them the knowledge of where and how to get healthy food. I join cooperatives with others for free range eggs, and pastured meat, organic fruits and vegis, cold pressed oils etc. I don't support companies who use GMO products. I plant organic seeds. I educate and assist others to do the same. I try to make my footprint as minimal as possible. It takes people to make change. It takes credibility to make change. There are many people trying to help make change in our much too depleted poisoned food supply. We need all of us to do it the right way-which is to follow the regular laws in the process. NOT sneaking around in parking lots handing off unlabeled products. Not hiding. Not jumping bail, not taking advantage of friends and putting them at risk. Being credible helps immensely.
I want to know if the animals my milk came from are certified as healthy and steroid free. I want to know what those animals have been fed. I want to know exactly when that milk was put on the "shelf". I buy my milk raw. It's labeled as raw and I am aware of the "risks". If everyone did it the way James seems to be doing things, Monsanto and many others would be having a heyday. So James may have a great big heart and many will be grateful as he sits in a little room because he made "tactical errors" with the help of bad counsel. He is fortunate there were people who stood by his side and behind him-even though he risked allegiances and alliances and put others at risk. That isn't about making change. That isn't about making a difference. That isn't about selflessness. That doesn't even make sense. There will still be those of us who will continue forging forward smartly not "blindly". Plus we can do it with a big and generous heart. I'm not meaning to be so critical. I'm just saying...
James was and is a stickler for only the highest quality safest milk and other products he could find. But that is beside the point. The point James has been fighting for is the right to decide what foods we will put into our bodies. He respected the laws that limited what items the Whole Foods down the block could or would put on its shelves. (It could have put raw milk from permitted dairies on its shelves, but instead banned those products.) He asserted the rights of himself and members of his food club members to privately select the foods they would put into their bodies. If you didn't like the product selection, labeling, or something else, it was your privilege not to join and pay dues and sign the very explicit member agreement.
You ask, "Can you give me an example of how any of the charges against James or his actions are helping anyone?" The original 13 felony and misdemeanor charges (of August 2011) against James (as well as Victoria Bloch and Sharon Palmer) primarily grow out of a herd share arrangement Palmer had with Rawesome to supply raw goat milk from 40 goats owned by Rawesome. This gets back to our individual rights to buy shares in milk-producing animals. A win in this case will not only exonerate the Rawesome Three, but set an important legal precedent in favor of herd shares in California. The current law doesn't even mention them, but local prosecutors and state ag officials have declared them illegal, in their infinite wisdom that you are so respectful of, and have issued cease-and-desist orders against several. That is a cause worth fighting for. I'll be writing more about the legal challenges James faced.
I just have a minute, but the Food and Ag Code is extensive in terms of milk. The question revolves around commerce. The herd shares that got tapped had started advertising on the Internet. If you are not engaging in commerce, it seems strange to advertise. I support these guys, but they have to understand the FAC and play accordingly.
Most of the Rawesome stuff is so far from the original herd share issue, I don't think there's much of a chance it will have an impact in that area.
Amanda--According to CA prosecutors and CDFA (CA Department of Food and Agriculture), herdshares are illegal, period. Has nothing to do with advertising. Don't know where you get such ideas, as if Rawesome and Sharon Palmer would have been allowed to continue herdshare arrangement except for some "advertising" (and I don't even know what advertising you are referring to, since the undercover agents who acquired milk or cheese from Rawesome and Sharon Palmer did so via word of mouth). The other herdshares hit with cease and desist orders in CA--were they advertising, too? No mention of advertising in any of the charges, against Rawesome Three or the other CA herdshares that I am aware of.
Besides, herdshares not part of the "food and ag code." They are private, outside the food and ag code, which is why CA (and other states) fighting them. They are fighting any and all private arrangements for milk and meat--want everything designated public, and thus under their thumb.
I think that is where you and others are getting tangled up in your woolies. This is a fight over whether people can access food privately. Govt says no. The people say yes.
You seemed to be talking more generally about the herd shares in CA in your comment and the ones that got tapped were advertising for new customers. Rawesome was on the radar too. On the radar, herd share milk looks a whole lot like milk in commerce. California has laws about commerce. I can set up a friend to board and milk for me and give me my milk and probably could do it for the rest of my life. You and I know that's not how most of the herd shares are set up, certainly not those advertising on the Internet for new customers.
If there were a like button I’d click it on David’s comment.
It was and still is against the law for one to follow Christ’s commandment of love and refuse to take up arms.
"There are just laws and there are unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that an unjust law is no law at all... One who breaks an unjust law must do it openly, lovingly...I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the very highest respect for law." Martin Luther Jr.
Ken
That would be “Martin Luther King Jr.” whose statement is emblematic Michael Schmitt’s character.
Ken
David, while I appreciate the sentiment you express here, I think you are comparing apples and oranges.
The court rulings and regulations about cow-shares, which you are talking about, have little relationship to (for example) the struggles against segregation or slavery. Those rulings/regulations are about commercial cow-share agreements, that are organized through various LLC's and involved (sometimes) complex commercial ownership arrangements.
They were NOT in regards to dairy animals owned by individual farmers or private individuals.
I can assure you that in Wisconsin, a dairy farmer still has every right to drink his or her own raw milk, and can even sell that milk to employees of the farm. The legal issues arise when the farmer wants to make a business of selling milk to members of the public who are not involved in the day-to-day operations of the farm (regardless of whether they are technically "owners" or not).
This is a critical distinction, which cannot be overlooked.
I think by trying to compare the raw milk issue to some of these other struggles, you are doing a major disservice to the horrible injustice committed against those oppressed groups historically. There is just no comparison. Sorry, David.
Well said, Bill.
David- I'm with Deborah. You are spot on! I also believe there is an issue with too many unjust laws, rules and regs. While some laws may actually protect us, I believe many laws are not designed to protect us. Example: FDA approves legal sale of alcohol and tobacco over cannabis along with approving toxic pharmaceuticals while censoring the effective, safe treatments of alternative therapies. I've learned of James and the recent escapades mainly through natural news over the past couple of months. It seems like he made some bad choices but nothing that jail-time will rectify. Can you tell me how many fraudulent big bankers were sent upriver? I forget. Big banks have been extorting taxpayers nationwide for how long now? I am glad to find a site where for the most part, "like minded people" communicate the important issue of protecting our food supply. Thanks for offering hope:0)
Amanda.... Still riding that broom I see....
Hugs and kisses to you.
My dream for James two years ago was for Rawsome to become 100% legal and grow. That dream did not sink in with James. He chose another path.
Don't make me release the flying monkeys, Mark.
If you watched the Youtube video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYTP9C7jtrI you will hear James pleading for someone to call "Fred", this is the person that has been providing James with the legal advise. The advisor is Fred Gutierrez who is being investigated by the FBI for scamming folks in Hawaii and across the US. He has been hosting seminars that provide the type of advise that James followed that is landing people in jail across the country.
Fred, his wife Nina and Kelby Smith have been at this for some time, encouraging folks to become sovereign. Kelby Smith is actually part of an organization that call itself the Republic that is lead by Tim Turner. You can learn more about these people at www.eftscam.com . The Republic has declared war on the United States Government (yes, I know this sounds bizarre). If you go about 18 minutes into this audio clip you will hear James defending Fred http://www.setoffdebt.com/download/interviews/EFT-Call-July-05-2012.mp3.
This may help explain where James' head was at, in thinking that he was above the law.
I like Flipins comments and I see no reason to support James. It is very obvious to me that if he was willing to ruin others financially so that he could continue continue to play the role of a rebel or claim that he is fighting a cause - then he is nuts - PERIOD! If James has total disregard for Mark and others financial situation do you really think that he give a #$%@ about your milk! Clearly Mark did not bail James out on the condition that he jump bail and face the risk of losing his hard earned money. He trusted James and James blew that trust and with it he lost mine! He sounds no better than Fred Gutierrez, Nina Gutierrez and Kelby Smith whom he associates. James is not the person that some in this blog seem to think he is.... this goes well beyond the milk folks. Do some research on the people mentioned above, check out www.eftscam.com, listen to the youtube video and the audio clip listed above and you will start connecting the dots.
Oh, after reading Dave's comments it sounds like he is all for this rouge organization that has declared war against our government. This group, which James seems to be apart of, are nothing more than domestic terrorists.
Birds of a feather......
My oh my! Seems we are opening a rather large can of worms here. Where to start...?
Sylvia and Marc L bring up some very interesting information about the ethics, honesty, and morality of people such as Sharon Palmer and the Fred Gutierrez group. I have spent some time this morning doing some sleuthing on the internet to substantiate and confirm information. I must say things just keep getting curiouser and curiouser.
David-do you have anything to do with this Fred/Nina Gutierrez Kelby Smith terrorist/scamming outfit? I notice they are in Needham this weekend. This is your neck of the woods, correct? Maybe just a coincidence. I thought I'd just throw it out there.
I also reviewed some of the court papers where Sharon, Victoria and James seem to have scammed a number of people for a very large amount of money!
Please take the time to review the record:
http://foodpoisoningbulletin.com/wp-content/uploads/Felony-Complaint.pdf
and the sale of milk:
http://nourishedkitchen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/filed-HFF-Complai...
and of course there's this:
http://www.vcsd.org/pr-inmate-detail.php?booking_nbr=1279100
Mr. Churchlanefarm- so do you propose going around and blatantly breaking the law that you feel is unjust? Who gets to decide which laws are unjust? Is there a vote? or is is a personal thing? Sweet quote, but in reality this doesn't pan out so well. All is takes is a kook or a cult (what a great observation Milkyway).
Does the regular Joe get to be dishonest to the public? How about BIG business? If we sign a "membership" agreement does that eliminate the need to follow health standards? I think we are looking for a healthy clean food supply.
How do I know James is a "stickler for clean milk" or anything else? His credibility seem to rather tarnished as is those he associates with.
I think arguing the rights of what we ingest and who we buy from are not the real issue here. I think the real issue appears to be the almighty dollar and deceit and abiding by the law and not ripping people off.
With that said. I think I will graciously exit the conversation, and allow you all the space to chase your tails and defend the crooks- while truth, honesty and integrity are ignored or trampled on by shoes running around in the cow's dung.
...ENTER THE FLYINH MONKEYS
Flippin' and Marc L.: I have no idea who you two are but your commentary here is a breath of fresh air. I have been following the Rawesome court case since that last raid in August '11 and it has been extremely devastating to see this community rally around these people, namely Sharon Palmer and James Stewart. Like Amanda, above, who has written extensively about outsourcing by OPDC, it is my belief that Palmer outsourced and sold the GENERAL PUBLIC at FARMER'S MARKETS product that was not her own. Because of this I have gone from being a supporter of WAPF and the traditional food movement to being suspicious of everything and anything in regards to the traditional foods movement, especially where raw milk is concerned. You may be interested in reading what I have written at farmmuckraker.blogspot.com. Don't mess with the loyalty of mothers trying to feed their children good food. Betrayal hurts, and the truth will come out in the end. Thank you.
The key words in Martin Luther King’s statement are “openly” and “lovingly”.
Leo Tolstoy stated, “Christianity, with its doctrine of humility, of forgiveness, of love, is incompatible with the state, with its haughtiness, its violence, its punishment, its wars”.
What little knowledge I have of James Stewart comes from this blog. Yet despite the different pictures painted of the man I am inclined to side with those who are less judgmental and sympathetic towards his predicament.
People may not always make the right decisions and when they don’t all the more reason to constructively reach out and help them, not pile on more ridicule and persecution.
Indeed who gets to decide which laws are unjust? Which criteria do you use before you decide to “fight for the rights of those” who are suffering at the hands of injustice?
I agree with your suggestion that “there is a correct and incorrect way” to bring about change”. People like Vernon Hershberge and Michael Schmitt are good examples.
Ken
Excellent points, Ken!
Ken, its interesting that you mention MLK jr.
I too admire King, although its very important to understand the complexity of the man, and the historical situation in which he lived.
To begin with, there are numerous right-wing "Libertarians" who have sought to demonize King in the modern age, and their denunciations tell us much, despite their misguided ideology. For example:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/epstein9.html
Also, in his own time, there were some in the black power movement (such as Malcom X and the Black Panthers) who disagreed with his non-violent approach, and advocated that black communities take up arms against their white oppressors. There's much that has been editorialized about this conflict (between King and the black power movement) in various socialist journals, who charactarize King as a collaborationist with white liberals, worried more about the opinions of the northern middle-class than the plight of working-class blacks. I will leave those editorials for another day...
However, it must be pointed out that king did not start out as an advocate of strict non-violence. There are more than a few interesting antecdotes about this, in the below link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-winkler/mlk-and-his-guns_b_810132.html
Finally, as King's political philosophy matured, so did his attraction to democratic socialist ideology. The following article is very telling (and the quote that follows):
http://rajpatel.org/2010/01/18/martin-luther-king-we-are-not-interested-...
"You can't talk about solving the economic problem of the Negro without talking about billions of dollars. You can't talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You're really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry.... Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong... with capitalism.... There must be a better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism."
Just wanted to remind us all that the first two links referenced above as "the record" are merely complaint documents related to pending litigation. James Stewart, Sharon Palmer and Victoria Bloch are only *charged* with these crimes - a small but important detail that should not be ignored or forgotten. Proof of any alleged guilt remains the burden of prosecutors, and based on what I saw during the three-day March preliminary hearing in Ventura (for which I was present), the DA's case is in a pretty sorry state indeed.
That is, the first two links referenced by "Flippin".
Pages