PAUL W. MASON
Plaintiff and Appellant
DONNA SHALALA, SECRETARY OF HEALTH
MICHAEL FRIEDMAN, ACTING DIRECTOR OF FDA
Defendants and Appellees
ON APPEAL FROM
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DIST. OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIV.
HON. JEREMY FOGEL PRESIDING
U.S.D.C. No. C-97-20686 JF
Paul W. Mason, In Pro Per
P O BOX 1417
Patterson, CA 95363
Tel: (408) 897-3023
Fax: (408) 897-3028
Plaintiff-Appellant Mason hereby (a) Motions for Oral Argument, (b) sets forth reasons why oral argument should be heard in this case, (c) presents a citation of new, pertinent, and significant Supplemental Authority.
Prof. Jerry Goldman studied the Ninth Circuit Screening Program, and concluded that the perception of justice may be compromised by screening;1 i.e., lack of oral argument. Perception of justice is crucial in this case, which involves a FDA blunder and coverup of 10,000,000 deaths since 1930, with needless deaths continuing at a rate equal to the entire Viet Nam War every 100 days. If this Appeal should be dismissed without oral argument, it would most likely appear to some people as an exhaustion of legal remedy, capping the previous exhaustion of the FDA's administrative remedy, and thus leaving no recourse but direct physical remedy against the death-causing agencies.
While I am not willing to make the same sacrifices that John Brown made, I do have over 100,000 web-visitors per annum to my Magnesium Web Site at http://www.mgwaters.com, with an average visit time of 2.5 minutes each, and with many repeat visitors spending many hours on my site. At least a few of these visitors may feel a need to do something to stop a Crime Against Humanity, as did John Brown 150 years ago, or Raoul Wallenberg 55 years ago. Oral argument may be a useful signal that the judicial system does work, and is willing and able to stop a crime against humanity, and that the heroics of a modern John Brown will not be required.
On 12/31/00, President Clinton signed the 1998 Rome Treaty providing for an International Court of Justice to prosecute genocides and crimes against humanity in those instances in which national courts fail to stop any genocide or crimes against humanity. While this treaty is not expected to be ratified by the Senate any time soon, it does raise the expectation that this court must be equal to the challenge of stopping this American genocide and crime against humanity, without supervision or oversight from the International Court of Justice.2
Paul Mason, Appellant pro se January 10, 2001
Jerry Goldman, Appellate Justice Economized: Screening and Its Effect on Outcomes and Legitimacy, in Restructuring Justice 138 (Arthur D. Hellman ed., 1990). See also, Paul D. Carrington et al., Justice on Appeal 17 (1976). http://app.comm.uscourts.gov/report/comments/GOLDBLA0.htm
January 1, 2001. U.S. Newswire, Statement by the President, released by the White House. (see attached copy).
This page was first uploaded to The Magnesium Web Site on March 21, 2001