IN – Orly v Election Commission – Zullo/Arpaio

On Friday, October the 12th you received court issued subpoenas for Sheriff Arpaio and investigator Zullo to appear at trial in Taitz, Swihart, Weyl, Kern, Kesler, Ripley v Secretary of State of Indiana and Elections Commission of Indiana to be held on October 22, 10am in the Division 4 of the Superior Court of Indiana in Indianapolis before Hon Judge Reid and testify regarding your findings of forgeries in Barack Obama’s birth certificate, Selective Service certificate and Social Secuity card. You are not asked to testify to something that is a secret, you are asked to authenticate in court before Judge Reid what you already stated publicly in press conferences. If you do not respond and agree to testify, I will have no other choice, but to file as early as tomorrow, October 15th an emergency miscellaneous case in Phoenix AZ and seek an order from Arizona judge to compel you to comply with the out of state subpoena and testify on October 22nd at trial in Indianapolis.

An emergency miscellaneous case… wow.. Let’s hope she gets her wish and we may see Arpaio and Zullo finally testify under penalty of perjury. This Country deserves to hear the truth…

I am somewhat worried that Orly fail to understand how to properly effect a subpoena though. Whenever one compels a witness to testify and said witness can claim State or Federal Sovereignty, things can get confusing quite quickly. Sterngard Friegen at the Fogbow has located an interesting case outlining some of the problems involved when asking a federal officer to testify:

 In re Subpoena on Collins, Voyle v. Smithkline, 524 F.3d 249. (D.C. Cir. 2008)

While in this case the Appeal’s Court overruled the lower court’s decision to have the case removed to Federal Court, it was done because the federal defendant was asked to testify about personal observations, not directly related to his official duties.