[Rick Montgomery]

in reply to: Ideal Time for Facts #2709

The Amicus Brief is a great title for a new best selling fiction novel. (For the record, consider the title now declared copywritten by me.)

All that aside, I am struck by the complete ambiguity of how the brief filed by the sworn AG of our State of California et al assumes that the CDAA in this case believes that as defendant it is a representative of the people, aka District Attorneys, elected with jurisdiction to represent.

“We the people” look at it this way. We don’t consider that un-sworn appointments trump representation in any case. Why would we?

The prosicurtorial immunity for representational office is respected from us, the private sector, because we understand the functional role it plays. We want our representation to be true to form.

Non-representational definition of a public official is not right, and should never be immune from a punitive position. Stated above, it is in direct conflict with intent. The AG in this brief assumes we believe such appointment of the defendant CDAA to be a legal representation. Clearly, it is not.

Isn’t this designation the entire argument?

Yes, it is.

This speaks to the direct issue of representation under Constitutional authority.

To all of you lawyers out there, this is what we the people are most concerned about: The Intent Of The Law.

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Ideal Time for Facts #2708

Here is the AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF from the Attorney General Mike was referring to:
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
Third Appellate
No. C051696

MILLER, et al.,
Plaintiffs and Respondents,
v.
FILTER, et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.

On Appeal From
Sierra County Superior Court Case No. 6293
The Honorable Stanley C. Young, Judge

AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
EX REL. ATTORNEY GENERAL BILL LOCKYER
IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS

BILL LOCKYER
Attorney General of the State of California
TOM GREENE
Chief Assistant Attorney General
MARY E. HACKENBRACHT
Senior Assistant Attorney General
WILLIAM N. BRIENGER
Deputy Attorney General
State Bar No. 121346
1300 I Street
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
Telephone: (916) 324-2512
Fax: (916) 327-2319

Attorneys for Defendants and Appellants

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATEMENT OF INTEREST 1
STATEMENT OF THE CASE 2
ARGUMENT 3
I. PROSECUTORIAL IMMUNITY IS IMPORTANT TO IMPARTIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 3
II. PROSECUTORIAL IMMUNITY IS BROADLY INERPRETED. 5
A. What conduct is immunized? 5
B. Who is Entitled to Immunity? 6
C. What Claims Are Barred? 7
III. IN THIS CASE, THE PROSECUTORS WERE PERFORMING FUNCTIONS THAT ENTITLE THEM TO IMMUNITY. 7
IV. THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS POWER TO CORRECT THE TRIAL COURT’S ERROR REGARDING IMMUNITY. 9
CONCLUSION 9
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
State Cases:
American Arbitration Assn. V. Superior Court(1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 1131 2
Amylou R. v. County of Riverside(1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 1205 6, 7
Baughman v. State of California(1995) 38 Cal.App. 4th 182 6
Blackburn v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 42 Cal.App.3d. 175 6
Buford v. State of California
(1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 811 9
Citizens Capital Corp. v. Spohn (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 887 6
County of Ventura v. Barry
(1929) 207 Cal. 189 8
Greene v. Zank (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 497 3, 8
Hardy v. Vial (1957) 48 Cal.2d 577 4
Howard v. Drapkin(1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 843 5, 6
Ingram v. Flippo(1998) 74 Cal.App.4th 1280 4
Jager v. County of Alameda
(1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 294 7
Jenkins v. County of Orange
(1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 278 7
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
State Cases: Page
Johnson v. City of Pacifica
(1970) 4 Cal.App.3d 82 2
Kayfetz v. State of California(1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 491 6
Kemmerer v. County of Fresno
(1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 1426 passim
Pearson v. Reed (1935) 6 Cal.App.2d 277 1, 4
People ex rel. Clancy v. Superior Court(1985) 39 Cal.3d 740 3
People v. Kempley(1928) 205 Cal. 441 8
Thiele v. RML Realty Partners
(1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1526 6
Tur v. City of Los Angeles(1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 897 7
Federal Cases:
Ashelman v. Pope(9th Cir. 1986) 793 F.2d 1072 5, 6
Butz v. Economou(1978) 438 U.S. 478 8
Coverdell v. Department of Health and Social Services
(9th Cir. 1987) 834 F.2d 758 3, 7
Forrester v. White(1988) 484 U.S. 219 5
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Federal Cases: Page
Gregoire v. Biddle(2d Cir. 1949) 177 F.2d 579 4
Horwitz v. Bd. of Medical Examiners(10th Cir. 1987) 822 F.2d 1508 6, 8
Imbler v. Pachtman(1976) 424 U.S. 409 3
Pierson v. Ray(1967) 386 U.S. 547 3
Stewart v. Minnick(9th Cir. 1969) 409 F.2d 826 6, 7
Rules of Court:
California Rules of Court,
rule 13 (c)(6) 1
Statutes:
Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16 2
Government Code
§ 820.2 4
§ 821.6 passim
§ 24102 sub. (a) 2
Other Authorities:
California Constitution
art. V, § 13 1
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
MILLER, et al.,
Third Appellate
Plaintiffs and Respondents, No. C051696
v.
FILTER, et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
STATEMENT OF INTEREST
The Attorney General files this brief in support of Appellants pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 13 (c)(6). The California Constitution gives the Attorney General “direct supervision over every district attorney,” and further charges the Attorney General to assist any district attorney when required by the public interest. (Cal. Const. art V, § 13.) To assist district attorneys, the Attorney General files this brief to underscore the importance of prosecutorial immunity in fostering unflinching and impartial law enforcement.
The office of public prosecutor is one which must be administered with courage and independence. Yet how can this be if the prosecutor is made subject to suit by those whom he accuses and fails to convict?
(Pearson v. Reed (1935) 6 Cal.App.2d 277, 287.) Although California courts have consistently applied prosecutorial immunity in a broad fashion, focusing on the functions being performed rather than procedural niceties, the trial court in this case denied immunity, focusing on technical details regarding the prosecutors’ appointments as deputies, and ignoring the prosecutorial function they performed. In the interest of firm and fair law enforcement, the Attorney General respectfully asks this Court to correct that error.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The elected district attorney of Sierra County appointed four deputies in 2001 and 2002; each signed an oath of office and took an oral oath administered by the Superior Court. [2 CT 422-423, 436-437, 442-443; 3 CT 450.] Despite a requirement in section 24102, subdivision (a) of the Government Code, no written documents appointing the four prosecutors were filed with the county clerk.
The four prosecutors [Appellants] played various roles investigating and prosecuting plaintiffs [Respondents] following the death of a mineworker whom plaintiffs employed. The investigation culminated in a grand jury indictment charging manslaughter. The Superior Court dismissed the indictment [CT 88], and a newly elected district attorney chose not to refile any charges. Plaintiffs filed a civil suit seeking over $51 million for malicious prosecution and other torts from the prosecutors who worked on the case. [1 CT 1375.] 1/
Based in part on the prosecutorial immunity set forth in Government Code section 821.6, the prosecutors filed demurrers and a motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16; those attempts at a quick resolution failed. Insofar as the demurrers were based on claims of immunity, they were overruled. [CT 19, 28, 118, 130.] In denying the motion to strike pursuant to section 425.16, the court below again concluded that the
1. This brief focuses on four individual prosecutors. Any liability of the fifth defendant, the California District Attorneys Association, would be derivative liability based on the actions of its four employees. If an employee is immune under Government Code section 821.6, so to is the employer. (Kemmerer v. County of Fresno (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 1426, 1435; Johnson v. City of Pacifica (1970) 4 Cal.App.3d 82 [demurrer without leave to amend]. Cf. American Arbitration Assn. v. Superior Court (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 1131, 1134 [“Not extending immunity for these act to the AAA, an entity as indispensable to the arbitrator’s job of arbitrating as are the courts to the judge’s job of judging, would frustrate the purpose and effectiveness of arbitral immunity.”].)
prosecutorial privilege did not apply. [CT 2779-2780] This appeal followed.
ARGUMENT
The purpose of providing immunity for prosecutors and judges is to provide a prompt procedural escape hatch, so that public servants are not exposed to time-consuming personal attacks based on their public service. Lawsuits against prosecutors or judges have the potential to chill the exercise of discretion meant to be exercised on the public’s behalf.
In this instance, the record is sufficiently well developed to allow a court to conclude that the four individual defendants [Appellants] are entitled to a dismissal of the action based on their immunity from civil suit. This Court has discretion to make that order or to remand the matter for further proceedings consistent with a declaration regarding the scope of prosecutorial immunity. In light of the time since this action was first filed, we encourage this Court to enter an order of dismissal.
I. PROSECUTORIAL IMMUNITY IS IMPORTANT TO
IMPARTIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT.
Our judicial system demands prosecutorial neutrality. (People ex rel. Clancy v. Superior Court (1985) 39 Cal.3d 740.) That neutrality must be shielded from any concern that a particular defendant is too rich, too powerful, too popular, or simply too litigious to call to account. Prosecutorial immunity has long been recognized at common law. It is based on the same considerations that underlie common-law immunities of judges and grand jurors (Imbler v. Pachtman (1976) 424 U.S. 409, 422-423), namely to prevent intimidation and foster “principled and fearless decision-making.” (Pierson v. Ray (1967) 386 U.S. 547, 554; see also Greene v. Zank (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 497, 507.) Such immunity is absolute, rather than merely qualified. (Imbler v. Pachtman, supra, at 422; Coverdell v. Department of Health and Social Services (9th Cir. 1987) 834 F.2d 758, 762.)
California courts have recognized immunity for prosecutors as quasi-judicial officers. (See, e.g, Pearson v. Reed, supra, 6 Cal.App.2d 277.) Explaining the policy underlying the doctrine of absolute immunity, the California Supreme Court borrowed from Judge Learned Hand’s ruling that a federal prosecutor’s immunity “is absolute and is grounded on principles of public policy.” (Gregoire v. Biddle (2d Cir. 1949) 177 F.2d 579, 580.)
‘It does indeed go without saying that an official, who is in fact guilty of using his powers to vent his spleen upon others, or for any other personal motive not connected with the public good, should not escape liability for the injuries he may so cause; and, if it were possible in practice to confine such complaints to the guilty, it would be monstrous to deny recovery. The justification for doing so is that it is impossible to know whether the claim is well founded until the case has been tried, and that to submit all officials, the innocent as well as the guilty, to the burden of a trial and to the inevitable danger of its outcome, would dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible, in the unflinching discharge of their duties. Again and again the public interest calls for action which may turn out to be founded on a mistake, in the face of which an official may later find himself hard put to it to satisfy a jury of his good faith. … In this instance it has been thought in the end better to leave unredressed the wrongs done by dishonest officers than to subject those who try to do their duty to the constant dread of retaliation.’
(Hardy v. Vial (1957) 48 Cal.2d 577, 582-583, quoting Gregoire v. Biddle, supra, 177 F.2d at 581.)
Since the enactment of a more specific prosecutorial immunity in 1963, most cases have centered on Government Code section 821.6.2/
2. In the absence of any meaningful distinction between the policies and operation of the immunities for judicial, prosecutorial, and discretionary functions, we do not separately analyze this case under alternative bases of immunity. We note that the more general “discretionary function” immunity provided by Government Code section 820.2 also applies in circumstances where section 821.6 applies. (Ingram v. Flippo (1998) 74 Cal.App.4th 1280, 1292-1293.) Moreover, as quasi-judicial officers, prosecutors also share in judicial immunity. (Pearson v. Reed, supra, 6 Cal.App.2d 277, 282-287.)
Government Code section 821.6, commonly referred to as the “Prosecutor’s Immunity,” provides:
A public employee is not liable for injury caused by his instituting or prosecuting any judicial or administrative proceeding within the scope of his employment, even if he acts maliciously and without probable cause.
The public is best served when public servants are free from fear. As the Court of Appeal has noted, exposure to civil litigation would result in timidity that would be hard to detect. (Howard v. Drapkin (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 843, 852 [discussing quasi-judicial immunity of a court-appointed psychologist].) That rationale applies with equal force in the case of prosecutors. In fact, prosecutorial timidity would be even harder to detect, because many prosecutorial decisions are made in private. In any event, someone wrongly accused by a criminal prosecutor is protected by a trial judge, a jury, and the appellate courts.
II. PROSECUTORIAL IMMUNITY IS BROADLY
INTERPRETED.
The strong underlying policies “favor a liberal application of immunity.” Achelman v. Pope (9th Cir. 1986) 793 F.2d 1072, 1078. The cases discussed below reflect the immunity’s breadth.
A. What conduct is immunized?
Immunity attaches to certain functions — investigating, accusing, prosecuting, and judging — regardless of a person’s title. To determine whether an action was in an arena sheltered by absolute immunity, courts look at “the nature of the function performed, not the identity of the actor who performed it.” (Forrester v. White (1988) 484 U.S. 219, 229.)
Moreover, section 821.6 comprehensively immunizes conduct incidental to all stages of the adjudicative process. (Citizens Capital Corp. v. Spohn (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 887, 889 [publicizing wrongdoing]; Kemmerer v. County of Fresno (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 1426, 1436-1437 [initial investigation]; Blackburn v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 42 Cal.App.3d 175,178 [investigation]; Baughman v. State of California (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 182, 191-192 [search]; Amylou R. v. County of Riverside (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 1205, 1209-1211 [acts “incidental to the investigation”]; Kayfetz v. State of California (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 491, 494 [publication of disciplinary action].)
Judicial immunity is similarly broad, barring “civil actions against judges for acts performed in the exercise of their judicial functions and it applies to all judicial determinations, including those rendered in excess of the judge’s jurisdiction, no matter how erroneous or even malicious or corrupt they may be.” (Howard v. Drapkin, supra, 222 Cal.App.3d at 851. See, e.g., Ashelman v. Pope, supra, 793 F.2d at 1078 [conspiracy between a judge and prosecutor to predetermine outcome did not vitiate immunity]. See also Thiele v. RML Realty Partners (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1526 [arbitral immunity broadly interpreted].)
B. Who Is Entitled to Immunity?
Prosecutorial immunity has been applied to a wide range of persons whose roles are “functionally comparable” to that of an investigator or prosecutor. It is the process which triggers the immunity; those involved in the process are immunized. See, e.g., Horwitz v. Bd. Of Medical Examiners (10th Cir. 1987) 822 F.2d 1508, 1515 [doctors serving on professional discipline board]. “The immunity conferred by section 821.6 is not limited to peace officers and prosecutors but has been extended to public schools officials . . ., heads of administrative departments . . ., social workers . . ., county coroners . . ., and
members of county boards of supervisors . . . .” (Tur v. City of Los Angeles (1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 897, 901 [internal citations omitted]. See also Coverdell v. Department of Health and Social Services, supra, 834 F.2d 758 [child services worker]; Kemmerer v. County of Fresno, supra, 200 Cal.App.3d at 1436 [immunity under section 821.6 not limited to legally trained personnel]. In similar sweeping fashion, judicial immunity also applies to court clerks and court reporters. (See Stewart v. Minnick (9th Cir. 1969) 409 F.2d 826.)
C. What claims Are Barred?
Although prosecutorial immunity has primarily been applied to defeat suits for malicious prosecution, it is not limited to such suits. The courts have held it also applicable to actions for libel, slander, negligence, and inflictions of emotional distress, among others. (Kemmerer, supra, 200 Cal.App.3d at 1436; Jenkins v. County of Orange (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 278.) The immunity provided by section 821.6 is not even limited to claims brought by targets of prosecution. (See, e.g., Amylou R. v. County of Riverside, supra, 28 Cal.App.4th at 1211-1213 [crime victim]; Jager v. County of Alameda (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 294 [mother dissatisfied with district attorney’s child support collection from father].)
III. IN THIS CASE, THE PROSECUTORS WERE
PERFORMING FUNCTIONS THAT ENTITLE
THEM TO IMMUNITY.
Appellants simply acted as prosecutors – presenting evidence to a grand jury and taking other steps to initiate the prosecution of the Respondents – and deserve the immunity that applies broadly to all who participate in the investigation and prosecution of suspected crime. The trial court’s focus on the details of the prosecutor’s technical standing ignored the core of immunity analysis: examining the function being performed rather than the status of the defendants. As the Court of Appeal stated in a judicial immunity case, “[i]n analyzing the immunity
issue in the instant case, we must first characterize the governmental activity involved, because the immunity granted depends not on the status of the defendant, but rather, on the specific work or function being performed.” (Greene v. Zank supra 158 Cal.App.3d at 508, citing Butz v. Economou (1978) 438 U.S. 478, 511-512.)
Respondents likewise ignores the Appellants’ role; Respondents’ position appears entirely based on a clerical oversight by the District Attorney’s office. The record – – that formal appointing papers were not filed – – does not support Respondent’s colorful descriptions of Appellants “impersonating” deputy district attorneys and “tak[ing] over the Sierra County District Attorney’s Office.”
The Attorney General is not aware of any case depriving a public servant of immunity on such hypertechnical grounds, and any such result would be surprising given the breadth and scope of circumstances in which courts have previously found immunity. To the contrary, at least one prior case has applied immunity despite a technicality similar to the one presented by this case. In Horwitz v. Bd. Of Medical Examiners, supra, 822 F.2d 1508, the Court of Appeals held that doctors serving on a board empowered to discipline physicians were entitled to absolute immunity. The fact that all but one of the defendant doctors had failed to sign a required oath of office was deemed insignificant, as the defendants were deemed at least de facto officers. (Id. at 1516.) California also recognizes the de facto officer doctrine. (County of Ventura v. Barry (1929) 207 Cal. 189, 190 [a line on tax assessor’s oath was left blank]; People v. Kempley (1928) 205 Cal. 441, 445-446 [special counsel appointed by Attorney General did not take the oath of office].)
IV. THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS POWER TO
CORRECT THE TRIAL COURT’S ERROR
REGARDING IMMUNITY.
The immunity provided by Government Code section 821.6 is jurisdictional and can be raised for the first time on appeal. (See Kemmerer v. County of Fresno, supra, 200 Cal.App.3d at 1435; Buford v. State of California (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 811, 826 [governmental immunity is jurisdictional].) In Buford, the court additionally noted that judicial economy favored expeditious resolution of the immunity question by the Court of Appeal, rather than remanding for a subsequent summary judgment. (Buford, supra, 104 Cal.App.3d at 826 n.9.)
CONCLUSION
The purpose of shielding prosecutors from civil suits arising from their work requires a prompt determination in this case that Appellants enjoy immunity. Any shortcoming in the prosecutors’ appointments as deputy district attorneys can best be characterized as a technicality that must yield to the robust public policy favoring prosecutorial immunity. Prosecutors must be free to fearlessly enforce the law on the public’s behalf.
Dated: October 11, 2006.
Respectfully Submitted,
BILL LOCKYER
Attorney General of the State of California
TOM GREENE
Chief Assistant Attorney General
MARY E. HACKENBRACHT
Senior Assistant Attorney General
WILLIAM N. BRIEGER
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Defendants and Appellants

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2707

Gold has recently been firming. The current last sale is $596.20

The following are a few comments made today by Mr. James Sinclair at jsmineset.com concerning gold’s recent weakness from about the $610 area to just above $560:

1- The battle has been won.

2- The lows are in.

3- Setbacks are an opportunity, not precipices from which more pain looms.

The Assosciated Press released for publication in our local paper yesterday, October 15, 06, an article entitled, Commodities Continue to Founder written by Ellen Simon.

Ms Simon mistakenly includes gold as being a commodity. Gold is a commodity when the world’s financial house is in order and it is a currency when that house, especially the U.S.’s house, is out of order.

Here is the slant in the article that forecasts a lower gold price.

“Commodities prices tend to have a domino effect – lower oil prices often drag down gold prices.”

“While emerging markets continue to be on a tear, if the commodity bears are right, there may be plenty of pain to spread around.”

Richard Bernstein says,”(commodity) prices are now 60% above what could be explained by fundamental supply and demand. These data suggest that September’s downfall in commodities might only be the beginning of a protacted bear market.”

Tobias Levkovich, Citigroup Inc.”s chief U.S. strategist says, While the argument for continued high prices for commodities is that demand will continue to grow, Levkovich points out that there’s some room for supply to grow, too, with a possible increase in Saudi oil production and a recent Chevron Corp. find in the Gulf of Mexico.

So here’s the thesis, gold is going lower because oil is going lower. Don’t bet your house on it.

The new field in the Gulf will probably take 10 years or so to bring into full production.

The rule in Saudi Arabia by the Royals should be considered temporary, at best. It is just a matter of time before the Muslim fundamentalists force them out. Prior to that happening, don’t be surprised if the oil producing infrastructure starts to get attacked. When that happens, oil and gold will rapidly advance.

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: Ideal Time for Facts #2706

I just looked at the amicus curiae brief filed by our public servants in the offices of the California attorney General. I agree with the conclusion. Fortunately the law and the facts of this case do not support consideration of the conclusion. I always believed that the highest lawyers in the California scene looked after Californians. This argument does not meet that threshold. So, can we now ask, “For whom does Bill Lockyer, Attorney General of the State of California, Tom Greene, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Hackenbracht, Senior Assistant Attorney General, and William N. Brieger, Deputy Attorney General work for and receive taxpayer money to represent?” Interestingly, the signature page also says, “Attorneys for Defendants and Appellants”. Please explain, someone.

If memory serves me right, Bill Lockyer was a writer of the Slapp stuff when he was a legislature. He above all other lawyers should recognize that the appeal before the California Appellate Court is for the mine and me taking away the constitutional rights of the bad guys. The amicus brief is not consistent with the intent of California LAW. If I am reading this friendly brief right, the signers support lawbreakers. Please explain, someone.

We will try to get this brief on our FORUM on Monday. There are glaring differences in the cases cited and ours. If the public lets this go, I would be shocked. Now is the time to expose the bunch for what they really are or what they really stand for. If they were standing in the street of law, they would barely reach the gutter. Californians expect more for the judicial branch of our free society. Please explain, someone

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2705

MSHA arrived for its quarterly inspection yesterday. Still inspecting today. More gold was sacked and brought to headquarters on Monday and Tuesday from the last round. After the blast, the vein material spread over an area about 600 square feet, so it takes time to locate and gather the high-grade gold. The other lower heading in the same ore zone showed some worthwhile color yesterday. Patience with this target is paying off. Two headings in gold always boost morale. As the physical size of promising vein diminishes, its future relevance as coughing up huge is shortened. Scoop believes that as rounds continue, the chances for a multi thousand ounce day diminishes; Ian and Mike may not see it that way, but no one ever knows until an area is abandoned.

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: EMPIRE STRIKES BACK #2702

The Empire Mine Adit Project is completed (small punch list to do). Mark October 5, 2006, as the date of the final inspection. I am very proud of the finished project. Congratulations to all the miners who worked at the site. Congratulations to my suppliers who knew mining in downtown Grass Valley was a unique undertaking.

The foundation (a steel supported tunnel) for the Department of Parks and Recreation to open for the public is rock solid. The adit will be accessible for a hundred years and more. For me, it was an exhausting project. It was a learning experience, one that I really did not need, or maybe I did.

It was refreshing to work with a stream of revenue, so I could do some financial planning and budgeting. Years ago, the Sixteen to One Board of Directors [as good a board as any gold mining company in the world: Dick Sorlien (the best Philadelphia lawyer and gold advocate around), Charlie Brown (read his bio on this web site), Lee Erdahl (practical and wise from serving as officers and directors on major public mining and investment companies), others as well] worked to teach me to become a better President. For some time they asked for a budget. We tried to give it to them; however, when you do not know what your gold production will be and you do not know how much it will sell for, it is hard to budget expenses. Finally, everyone conceded that a high-grade gold mine operation like ours is impossible to make long-term budgets. I liked knowing how much money I had to build a project…..think Red Star Shaft.

Two years of completing a contract for the State of California in such a precarious job as digging up the earth taught me the value of having a predictable source of cash to spend. Perhaps people with disposable cash and have an interest in what we want to accomplish in Alleghany, will believe that I can handle a budget and get the job done. Nothing will be as difficult as doing the Empire project. If this becomes one of the benefits of the Empire Mine, it will be frosting on a very good cake.

I just got off the phone from a friend, shareholder, believer and close follower of the chain of events from the first thought of bidding the job to the final inspection. We concluded it was worthwhile.

Yes, I learned a lot about things maybe I need not know: government bureaucracy, the California agency known as Department of Parks and Recreation, California agency known as Department of Toxic Waste, California agency known as Department of Water Resources and without a doubt human behavior. I met some very competent people. I worked with some people I really liked. I worked with some people who are taking public money and should be fired or terminated from continuing to drink at the public trough.

Let’s go get some gold.

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2701

Gold is in the midst of a bull market shakeout being engineered by the aforementioned miscreants along with amplification from the hedge funds with their computer trading models.

Wild swings are just part of the personality of this current bull market. The hedge funds with their great investor wealth will follow any spurts of strength or weakness.

Hedge funds are market gun slingers. They are usually run by young and inexperienced traders. Might does not make right. Recently, two hedge funds have declared bankruptcy.

The pendulum swings both ways.

[John Yuma]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2700

Bluejay:
What do you think of the gold price today????

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2699

“I’m unashamedly, utterly bullish on gold,” Newmont Mining president Pierre Lassonde said at an industry conference in Denver on September 27th.

“The current-account deficit in this country is going to reach a trillion dollars very shortly. The dollar has nowhere to go but down.”

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2698

Rick

There is a tutorial on some facets of charting tonight at the http://www.jsmineset.com.

This is an excellent lesson and puts you right in the classroom with an experienced instructor.

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2696

Zero citations from the recent OSHA inspection.

Most of the crew is in a first aid class this morning.

A little gold came up yesterday. Nothing to brag about but nobody is complaining either.

Mike and Ian are at the Empire Mine today. The job is almost done.

Cool nights and warm afternoons. Lovely fall weather. A little rain would be welcome to knock down the fire danger.

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2697

Rick

This section was started when gold entered a major bull market in November of 2002. Although some time has passed, the gold bull market is no where near completion.

You should have opportunities ahead or possibly, even now. Gold is currently up about $30 from its recent low. Gold should be bought each time that prices look like they are being pulled into the abyss. This is accomplished by buying lower and lower until the decline comes to a halt.

I have some silver along with other precious metal items. In 2004 silver got spanked for declines of 35% in March and 27% in December. I bought at $5.90 and $6.75, respectively. In this case, I didn’t buy on a scale down basis but bought when there was panic selling followed by a little wait.

The point is, your leverage for profit comes in buying down markets, not up markets within bull phases. In order to operate this way, you have to leave the safety of the flock and start acting independently and responsibly.

You can easily figure out for yourself a purchase plan that best suits you. You should spend some time going over the monthly gold chart for percentage price gyrations and become familiar with their extremes. You can view this chart by going to http://www.tradingcharts.com and hitting commodity charts and selecting metals.

In addition, you should check out a book from the library entitled Technical Analysis Of Stock Trends by Edwards and Mcgee. This will help you understand the probabilities of upcoming down moves so you can initiate your plan ahead of time by entering some orders.

Currently, the daily gold chart is forming a huge triangle. This recent decline could be it for awhile. Othwerwise, the probabilities for a strong rally into the $680 area seem to be on the increase. We’ll just have to wait and see. Good Luck

[Rick Montgomery]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2695

Bluejay…

Is this price a buy price or a wait price?

I prefer the concept of finding it and investing in the idea. But, I haven’t yet committed the dollars.

Why am I waiting?

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2694

The last on gold is $600.90.

In the early days of September gold was jolted lower from about $640 to about $570. The drop registered almost a 10% loss over the short period of a few days.

These drops are a common occurrence and should not be viewed as being anything different than business as usual within this current bull market.

The gold stocks suffered a more severe shock of about 18%. The gold stocks were susceptible as margin borrowing on them had reached high levels.

The upcoming November elections had a part to play in the metal’s weakness. A lower gold price would help people think of a lower inflation level and support a generally higher equities market. Along with declining interest rates over the interim the stock market is establishing some all time highs.

The appearence of a sound economy wins votes for the administration and their party.

We no longer live in a completely free market system in this country anymore. There are so many market deals being made behind the scenes just to get votes that it makes you wonder where all this abuse of power ends up.

The Exchange Stabilization Fund, the plunge protection team, was set up some years ago to prevent panic sell offs in the stock market. Now the Exchange Stabilization Fund is secretly controlling other markets. They even have their hand regularly in the gold market and who knows where else as a political tool of the administration.

Whether it be secret deals to get the price of gold lower between England, some large New York brokerage houses, the Exchange Stabilization Fund or just the FED presidents indiretly talking it down, gold will have its work cut out for itself during this bull market.

Somewhere along the road in time the actions of these miscreants will be silenced. Right now these entities are temporarily stealing upward energy from the gold bull.

The gold market is content to stockpile more and more ammunition as it watches this amateur drama unfold with indifference.

For long term gold investors, aside from the current market tinkering, your day will come.

BE PATIENT.

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: From the Sixteen to One Archives #2693

On June 22, 2005, the Company continued its long standing objective of consolidating the great gold mines of the Alleghany Mining District with the purchase of the Gold Crown Mine and its satellite claims. We recently found the following articles published in 1953.

California Mining Journal

Another Sierra County Gold Strike at the Gold Crown Mine Alleghany, California
$150,000 to $200,000 per ton

Gold Crown Mine Makes One of Alleghany’s Richest Strikes

Alleghany, Sierra County – Operators of the Gold Crown Mine have confirmed reports of a gold strike.
Fred and Dan Giles and their mother, Harriette Duke, said a highgrade ledge was struck at a depth of 400 feet. A tunnel had been driven from the north side of the Middle Yuba River Canyon.
Mrs. Duke descried it as one of the richest strikes in the Alleghany District in several years. The mine is located between the Original 16 to 1 Mine and the Oriental Mine, both active producers.
Both the Oriental and 16 to 1 have high grade areas in which they mine only when the mill run of ore gets a little low in values.
The Gold Crown has recently gone on two shifts following the installation of new equipment including a mucking machine, Miner’s Foundry side dump cars and battery locomotive. The company is a Nevada Corporation.
When the writer was on the property July 14th Mrs. Duke expressed the opinion that a noticeable change in the formation predicted an early strike.

California Mining Journal
September 1953

More Details of the Rich Strike

As news was released about the rich strike at the Gold Crown Mine it begins to look like one of California’s biggest. In an interview with a San Francisco Examiner reporter Dan Giles stated that the rich strike will run between $150,000 and $200,000 to the ton of ore. He further stated that the rich strike was made after the miners had run a lower tunnel into the mountain for a distance of 1,500 feet. He also stated that last winter they were about to give up the job when their foreman, Al Novak, urged them to “stick it out.” At that time the miners were following a gabbro and serpentine slate contact.
Hal Wright’s Sierra Booster gives further detail as follows:
“The round blasted on July 20 showed the footwall of a quartz vein for about a foot, from which a small amount of high-grade was taken. That was the tipoff. After the next three rounds all rock had to be hand-sorted and many powder boxes were filled with high-grade – much of it jewelry in quality. Judge Wilford Hart, engineer for the adjoining 16 to 1 mine, says the gold looks as good as anything he has ever seen taken from an Alleghany mine.
In one small collection of the rock, approximately 25 pounds, it was estimated to run 40% gold. It’s the type of gold that brings $100 per ounce with the New York jewelers.”
In describing the formation the Booster says:
“Where contacted, quartz in the ledge runs fairly solid up to a foot in width on the footwall. Bluejay talc, sericite and quartz stringers in a conglomerate mass on the hangingwall side broadens the ledge formation to about four feet. Free gold appears principally in the quartz but is also found in the bluejay and slightly into the country rock. Clusters of arsenical pyrites are sprinkled in the formation, after following the talc and Sericite lenses besides appearing in the quartz. The gold itself runs from crystallized shapes to jagged and may be characterized as heavy and clear.”
“Point of discovery is 1,510 feet from the portal. The vein pitches 70° to the west and is exactly in position according to a projection made from the ledge outcroppings by Bill Vance of the 16 to 1 mine. From the tunnel level the ledge has about 500 feet of backs.”
“Following the strike stock in the mine became unavailable. Mrs. Duke, mother of the two Giles boys, owns 51% of the stock. There are about 350 other stockholders. The corporation was organized Aug. 3, 1949.”

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2692

Water has been the big issue for the operation. We know the 58 hp pump grounded out, hauled it to the surface from the 1500 foot level and transported it to a repair shop for servicing ($5,550). Although a costly surprise, the major issue has been an ongoing loss of water to the underground. Miners use water in their drilling process to both clean out the holes and keep the drill dust at a minimum. Without water, they cannot drill and progress stops.

Parts of the complex water transfer system are over sixty years old. The rest is about twenty-three years old and has been repaired many many times. Water is flowing again but not without untimely delays in production. Instead of mining, the crew could be seen dragging hundreds of feet of poly pipe up and down the steep terrain and under the main roads of town. The Company owns the water rights of the “Ram Springs” since 1919. Water is an asset that does not show up on its balance sheet.

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: Ideal Time for Facts #2691

A puzzling communication was sent to Klaus (Sixteen to One attorney), who forwarded it to me yesterday. Maybe someone out there can shed some light of the following. Klaus questioned the actual form or process the author of the filing used. I am questioning several other points.
AMICUS BRIEF

Mr. William Brieger, Deputy Attorney General (bar # 121346) filed an Application For Extension Of Time To File Brief with the California Court of Appeal, Third District. He requests additional time to file an Amicus Brief, which he typed on the form, stating it was due on September 8,2006 and wants an extension to October 11, 2006. He did not receive a rule 17 notice and has not received a previous extension. His reason for not filing a stipulation, (which requires specificity), is: “Could not reach party in pro per”. The reason he cites why he needs additional time is, “The length of the record, and unusual issue (regarding prosecutorial immunity) requires more than fourteen days to adequately address in a meaningful fashion.”

Mr. Brieger’s first statement is disingenuous and misleading. You know how much I hate lawyers to misrepresent a position to the court. They can stretch truth or lie to each other, but everyone must protest when they mislead the court. Mr. Brieger likely has a good reason why he wrote that he could not find me. Maybe Brenda Wong, Kathleen Lewis or Rhonda (support staff for Mr. Brieger) were assigned the duty but did not try very hard. None were working today, but all three left a message on their answer machines at the AG’s office: none were in the office or plan to be in the office for a while. I was unable to find out why Mr. Brieger said he could not reach me. I am very easy to find, by the way.

An Amicus Brief results from a third party, unrelated to the case, with a serious interest in supporting one side against the other addressing the court. I tried to get some of the big mining companies to write an Amicus Brief to present to the US Court of Appeals in our appeal with the US Secretary of Labor and MSHA. None seemed interested, even though the issue of a lead miner defined as management would throw the entire domestic mining industry into a tizzy. Fortunately, the Court upheld our position and overturned the Secretary of Labor and those nasty little minds at MSHA without the support of big mining companies.

What do we have here? What is going on? How did Mr. Brieger discover this case? Do you think he is an advocate of the mine or CDAA? Is there a connection between Mr. Brieger, CDAA, Gale Filter or Lloyds of London? I do not know him and neither does anyone associated with the mine, so his interest did not come from me. Now that the AG’s office is aware of the case it could be an invitation to us cite all the laws that were broken by the defendants and others associated with the case. for a review.

[Dick Davis]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2688

I’m puzzled. 24 pounds, $7500? is that right?

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2690

The Company developed a method of accounting its production fourteen years ago. Gold (high-grade, which is sacked and sealed with custom numbered tags at the face) is in an ore form or in a quartz matrix. The sacks from the day’s rounds, sometimes numbering in the teens, are brought to the office, where they are weighed and inventoried as gross pounds. Usually, David or Mike will examine one or more of the sacks to “estimate” the ounces of gold at .999 fine, which is also part of the daily inventory. This takes some mental calculations, which has become routine. The first estimate grades the ounces per pound according to how it looks and feels. Doesn’t sound too scientific, but this crew is pretty sharp as further analysis develops. The next calculation takes that estimate and transforms it from the natural 83 to 86 percent “gold” found at the Sixteen to One mine to .999 fine, which is the fineness that is quoted daily as “spot”. Now a dollar figure can be reckoned.

The miners usually make an estimate at the face, as they bag the quartz and gold. Ian is particularly good at this (he always is optimistic but will understated the amount as a precaution). David has another sophisticated tool at his disposal, the old Archimedes discovery about specific gravity in his bath tub). Weigh it dry, weigh it wet and calculate the disparity of the specific gravity. Because there may be other metal in the ore that has a higher specific gravity than quartz but a lower specific gravity than gold (19.3) another estimate must be made to predict just how much .999 gold came from the mine that day. Aren’t you glad you asked, Dick?

It is not over yet. How did 24 pounds get to five or so ounces and eventually to $7500? Slab is sold per ounce at the gross weight of the quartz and gold. The ore changes as it proceeds through its evolution to become a gem stone in the rarest and most precious gem stone mined in the world. Some turns to saw dust and some will be melted to pour dore bars.

The quality of the quartz is more of a factor in establishing a market price than the gold. This subject of quality and determining its market price will wait for another day to explain. The ore that was mined this week is in the $1000 to $1400 per ounce range. Thus, the market value of the recent production is estimated at $7500 to $10, 000. Hope this answers your question.

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2689

Unfortunately the miners did not have gold in the face when they blasted and the material was blown up. We will get some small slabs out of it.
Gold content 5 ounces.

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2687

Gold. Yesterday’s production weighted in at 24 pounds gross. By orders the crew is drilling and blasting to recover large pieces of quartz. This high-grade came from the left rib of a wing raise. About fifteen feet of virgin quartz vein remains before work will break into an open level. Gold appears possible because a good gold showing exists at both sides of the small remaining target. The slab revenue estimate is $7500.

The 58-horse power pump died over the weekend. One leg went to ground. The pump was removed from the mine and transported to an electrical motor repair shop in Auburn. No word on the damages, but this same pump was rebuilt recently at a cost of $5,000.

The ATF inspection went well with no violations.

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2686

Already two weeks since the last “Clip”. A safety meeting was held at the mine site this morning. The crew is larger than its been in awhile numbering eleven.

The mine phones need constant attention as the harsh environment of the mine reeks havoc on anything electronic. The entire crew spends time assuring that thier phones do work. There is a phone at each heading and at various stations, the outside shops and even the Corporate Office. This is one of the most essential safety devices for the miners. Being able to communicate with each other and the outside world and visa versa is paramount to safety.

Gold from the rib on the 950 has been sparse. A little still remains and is being approached from below with a new heading. We have two active headings at this time. One was muckbound yesterday but should be ready for blasting tomorrow.

ATF is expected on Monday for an annual inspection of the powder magazines.

PG&E contractors require constant access to the minesite so they can inspect and re-inspect their poles. Seems putting the lines underground might save them a lot of money in the long run.

Missy the office cat looks pathetic. We never did find out what was wrong with her. The vet said it is most likely some form of cancer. WE are giving her food that she tolerates and keeping her comfy but that is about all we can do for her.

Yellow Dog had been keeping the other stray cats away which is a good thing for Missy.

The apples are getting ripe. Where did the summer go???

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: From the Sixteen to One Archives #2685

STATE OF CALIFORNIA – THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
Marshall Gold Discovery State Historical Park
P.O. Box 265 / 310 Back Street
Coloma, CA 95613
(916) 622-3470 FAX (916) 622-3472

October 24, 1995

Mike Miller, President
Sixteen To One Mine, Inc.
P.O. Box 1621
Alleghany, CA 95910

Dear Mike:

Thank you so much for coming to the U.S. National Gold Panning Championships this October 7th and 8th. It was so nice to have you here! We really appreciated your generous donation of the gold specimens and the medallions for the contest winners. It was fun to have you do the announcing when you gave these prizes out too. It’s always a pleasure to see you and I know that everyone enjoyed your coming.

I hope one day soon to get out to the mine and see your operation. Fred Olssen from Australia said that he really enjoyed the tour (I was jealous). You’ve quite a responsibility, managing a mine with such notoriety.

Thanks again Mike. You’re the greatest!

In Appreciation,
//s//
Rosanna McHenry

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: From the Sixteen to One Archives #2684

SIERRA COLLEGE
5000 Rocklin Road . Rocklin CA 95677 . Tel.916-624-3333

Johan Raadsma
Original 16:1 Mine
U.S. Post Office 1621
Alleghany, CA 95910

December 16, 1994

Dear Johan,

On behalf of all of us in the mining department I want to thank you for taking your time to show us around the mine. All of us felt the tour was exceptional, and we appreciated how leisurely you conducted it. A number of the students commented that they had never seen that much gold before. Many of them had never been underground or seen the workings of a mill either, so the tour was a treat for all concerned.
Our spring semester will begin the last week in January. At that time I will contact you about looking for a way to remove some of the impurities from your gold. If you’re still interested we can arrange to meet and discuss the details. We will be delighted to do this, and I already have one student interested in the project.
Again, thanks for the excellent tour, and have a very Merry Christmas.

Sincerely,
//s//
Don Juergenson
Mining Technology

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: From the Sixteen to One Archives #2683

SOCIETY FOR MINING, METALLURGY, AND EXPLORATION, INC.
San Francisco Section of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

MAILING ADDRESS: SF/AIME MEETING ADDRESS: Lakeview Club
P. O. Box 26645 Kaiser Building
San Francisco, CA 300 Lakeside Drive
94126-6645 28th Floor
Oakland

September 21, 1994

Original 16 to 1 Mine
ATTN: Mr. Mike Miller
PO Box 1621
Alleghany, CA 95910

Dear Mike:

I would like to thank you on behalf of the San Francisco Section of A.I.M.E. for your presentation last week. We have heard from several members who were in attendance and they wanted me to extend to you their appreciation.
The Original 16 to 1 Mine is historically known to many in the mining community but to hear first hand what you are doing currently was very interesting. The specimens you brought were also well received.
There was enough interest generated that I would like to follow up with you to arrange for a field trip to the mine this spring.
Thank you again for your time.

Very Truly Yours,
//s//
William A. Warfield

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OFFICERS

CHAIRMAN……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….Noel Kirshenbaum (415) 986-0740
PROGRAM CHAIRMAN………………………………………………………………………………………………Bill Warfield (415) 641-1994
COMMUNICATIONS……………………………………………………………………………………………………Peter Krag (415) 768-7261
SECRETARY-TREASURER…………………………………………………………………………………………..TJ Cox (415) 768-1234
GEM & STUDENT AFFAIRS…………………………………………………………………………………………Joe Hanzel (415) 604-3218
PAST CHAIRMEN……………………………………………………………………………………………………….Jim Woodfill
.……………………………………………………………………………………………………….Kevin Ashley

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: From the Sixteen to One Archives #2682

Nevada County Gem & Mineral Society
ROCK WRITINGS
November 1993
Page 8

IT’S 16 TO 1 THAT OUR OCTOBER SPEAKER WAS A WINNER!

MICHAEL MILLER, President and CEO of the 16 to 1 mine in Alleghany; CA. was our surprise guest speaker at our October meeting. Seldom has there ever been such a quiet and attentive audience as those lucky club members who attended.
The history of the 16 to 1 is a boom-and-bust gold country saga that appears to be having a happy ending. Founded in 1911, as a deep hard-rock mining company, it tunneled on with a fair amount of success until 1965. The cost of operations balances against the $32.00 per ounce price of gold eventually closed the mining operation in 1962.
There were always those who believed that the 16 to 1 could prove to be a good business investment. In 1975 the mine was re-opened and operated to a limited degree. Securing new backers and using new equipment in 1983 the mine swung back into full operations again. Now in 1993, the mine is successful enough to be listed on the Stock Exchange. It now owns it’s own land free and clear, and is currently debt free, thanks largely to the dynamic leadership of Miller and his dedicated crew of 17 employees.
On August 9th this year, a gold specimen weighing more than twenty pounds (141 ounces) of ‘butter gold’ ore was blasted out of a tunnel below the 1000-foot level. That white quartz vein was richer than anyone had guessed. On that one Monday, the miners recovered more than 500 ounces of gold from TWO different locations deep in the hard rock mine. New seams are now being explored as far down as the 2200-foot levels.
“It looks real hit-and-miss when you look at the paper figures”, said Miller, “But April, May and part of June was dedicated to dead work; de-watering, re-timbering and other maintenance. This is the pay-off for all that work”.
The one spectacular 14 inch long specimen, valued at over a quarter million dollars, was then displayed at the Nevada County Fair. The exhibit included demonstrations of mining techniques and equipment. This display was the hit of the 1993 Fair.
Miller is now exploring other ways and means to expand the financial base of the operation. As there are continual requests for tours of the mine, and requests for specimens of gold-bearing quartz, etc., he is giving serious thought to these marketing ideas.
At the close of his presentation, Miller answered members’ questions. Members asked about water pumping systems (over 80 gallons a minute), air circulation and compressors. How many miles of tunnels are being worked? (over 26 miles), are they still blasting? (yes). Do they use metal detectors? (yes, the best they can find.) and many other questions.
This was a really exciting program. Anyone who has ever dipped a pan in a stream, or pounded a quartz rock looking for color, shares in the 16 to 1 dream of “GOLD IN THEM THAR HILLS”.
Our thanks to Michael Miller for his fascinating program. We hope to hear from him again soon.

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: From the Sixteen to One Archives #2681

UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA – RENO
Department of Mining Engineering
Mail Stop 168
Mackay School of Mines
Reno, Nevada 89557-0139
(702) 784-6961
FAX (702) 784-1766

April 25, 1993

Mr. Michael M. Miller, President
Original Sixteen-to-One Mining Company
U.S. Post Office 1621
Alleghany, CA 95910

Dear Mr. Miller:

On March 22, 1993, eight students and one professor of the John Mackay Club from the Mackay School of Mines, University of Nevada, Reno, were provided a marvelous tour of the Original Sixteen-to-One mine in Alleghany, California. The attention received and thoroughness of the tour made for an extremely successful and memorable visit. The group was treated to a highly informative engineering discussion with Mr. Johan Raadsma, a superb underground tour led by Mr. Ian Haley, a complete overview of the milling process, and allowed to examine a portion of the fabulous Sixteen-to-One gold collection. From both the mining and purely engineering perspective, the day proved exceptionally educational.
I wish to thank you and all Sixteen-to-One personnel involved for your efforts in arranging this visit and for your willingness to support mining education. I realize the value of the time dedicated to our group during production hours and speak on behalf of the entire group by reemphasizing our appreciation. To express our gratitude we wish to offer you an honorary membership in the John Mackay Club, an organization compromised of future professionals in the minerals industry; please accept the membership card attached to this letter.
Enclosed with this letter as well is a summary report of our visit to the Sixteen-to-One as you originally requested. The report contains photographs chronicling our tour and remarks concerning the present mining operation from the engineer’s perspective.
Thank you once again for arranging this most enjoyable visit. Yours sincerely, //s//
Leo Gilbride John Mackay Club President

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2678

NOVAGOLD SUES BARRICK GOLD

The following was reported at 07:56 ET August 25, 2006 by CCN Matthews, “news distribution experts” in Canada.

Vancouver, British Columbia–NovaGold Resources. (TSX:NG)(AMEX:NG) announced today that it has filed a lawsuit against Barrick Gold Corporation (TSX:ABX)(NYSE:ABX) (“Barrick”) in the United States District Court for the District of Alaska.

The lawsuit alleges that Barrick has violated United States securities laws by making material misstatements with respect to Barrick’s interest in NovaGold’s Donlin Creek project in Alaska.

NovaGold currently holds a 70% interest in the venture through its subsidiary NovaGold Alaska; Barrick holds a 30% interest through its subsidiary Placer Dome U.S. Inc.

Barrick has repeatedly stated that it will earn a 70% interest (reducung NovaGold’s stake to 30%) by satisfying contractual back-in requirements on or before November 12, 2007.

The lawsuit alleges that these statements are false and that Barrick cannot satisfy those requirements.

The lawsuit seeks a temporary restraining order suspending Barrick’s unsolicited tender offer to acquire NovaGold pending an accelerated judgment by the court regarding what actions are necessary for Barrick to satisfy those requirements.

NovaGold is asking the court to order that the requirements include certain milestones (such as completion of an environmental impact statement, a bankable feasibility study and a construction decision by Placer Dome U.S.’s board) that NovaGold believes cannot be met by the contractual deadline of November 12, 2007.

It is the opinion of many that Barrick can not satisfy the requirements of their agreement with NovaGold to acquire a 70% interest in the Donlin Creek Project.

It has been said that Barrick’s expertise is not so much as mining people but more as political players. In understanding perspective, it is important to remember that Barrick was pounding gold lower near $250 an ounce some years back by selling 15 year out futures contracts.

The bottom line here was that Barrick was making quite a bit of money on shorting gold lower which thus forced excruciating pain on the gold producing companies that were doing their best to stay alive.

Do we forgive them for this? NO! We continue to watch them with a careful eye hoping that they don’t come dropping out of the the sky with their claws wide open in our direction.

NovaGold has the admiration of the gold community for standing up to this bird of prey and forked tongued gold consolidator.

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: Ideal Time for Facts #2680

Klaus J. Kolb filed our Brief of Respondent Original Sixteen to One Mine, Inc for the appeal of Tom Knox and his five customers yesterday. Words to tell you my thoughts are not readily forthcoming. Please spend time with the following brief yourself. I encourage you to print it and read it for its clarity, logical progression and above all how Klaus meets and addresses each and every claim raised in Tom Knox’s appeal to the Court. You will get the flavor of how Tom Knox presented his case to the appellate judges from how Klaus framed his argument.

It is an honor to be associated with a member of the California State Bar who has the background, education and personal ethics and integrity to practice law in our great state. Klaus was such a delight at the US Ninth Court of Appeals in San Francisco. If there are oral arguments in Sacramento for this anti-SLAPP motion, I will announce it.

With over 200,000 members of California’s State Bar, you and I know that the majority of these lawyers lack the professional characteristics we Californian should be demanding of them when they go before one of our Courts. Lawyers can lie to or mislead each other but, when they enter the courtroom, our statutes (those passed by the legislative branch) demand that they DO NOT MISLEAD THE COURT. I, along with you, anxiously wait for the day when we see some of these bar members brought before the Court and tried as lawbreakers. We may not have to wait much longer.

[Michael Miller]

in reply to: Ideal Time for Facts #2679

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2677

The miners are through with extending their headings past the gold along the ribs or the projected paths based on actual gold finds above and below their workplaces. In other words the block of vein is sufficiently exposed to attack the most probable areas of gold.

In the past the company would set about to stope favorable or suspected blocks. Labor was much cheaper and most of the quartz was sent to the mill. The mill had two different functions. It produced gold in a saleable form, and it was a tool for exploration. Many times the mill foreman was alerted to a pocket that the miners missed, ignored or hoped to steal later. Lloyd Smith was mill foreman in the 1930’s. He told how sometimes the mill would clog up because of unexpected high grade. The mill had to shut down to clean the equipment so normal recovery could take place. Lloyd would call Dick Bennett or whoever was in charge, so word would get back to the underground miners. The mill men hated when heavy gold would interrupt the flow (probably woke them up on the night shift). Lloyd would say, “Get them miners to sack that high grade stuff and keep it out of my mill rock!”

Since 1992, the Sixteen to One miners have wondered what the old timers would think if they saw the metal detectors. Metal detectors have dramatically changed the company’s approach to milling as well as exploration, development and production.

Sacks of high grade were inventoried the past two days. No signs of relief or big smiles so it is probably not significant. Nevertheless any sack is better than no sacks. Ian has enough information now to feel comfortable in attacking the gold. Mike told him to go get it. It was December 17, 1993 when the crew drilled, blasted and sacked 2500 ounces in one shift. With today’s demand for quartz and gold that amount could gross $3 million or more. Wish them luck and good fortune in this current mining target. If you are so inclined, offer up a prayer or two. The success of finding gold at the Sixteen spreads to many people as well as the local communities.

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2676

Since Barrick Gold’s cash offer for NovaGold shares in late July, Bob Moriarty president of 321Gold Inc. and the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee(GATA) have taken shots at Barrick’s offer. Today, Vince Borg Senior Vice President of Corporate Communications at Barrick fired back.

On August 7, 2006, Bob Moriarty wrote an article entitled, “Is Barrick trying to turn a Silk Purse into a Sow’s Ear.” Bob says that NovaGold holds a 70% interest in their Donlin Creek, Alaska property. Barrick owns the other 30% as the result of their merger with Placer Dome.

Barricks currently owns 30% with a 40% back-in clause right if certain conditions on the development of the property are met. They currently have not been met.

Barrick needs to do, according to Bob, hundreds of thousands of meters of drilling, detailed engineering to complete a bank feasibility study and getting construction permits so that their board of directors would approve the start of construction by early 2008. Bob goes on to say that there isn’t anyway in the world that Barrick will make their contractual timeline.

Bob says Barrick has done a good job of confusing the issue, they always count NovaGold’s ownership on their books as 30% of the Donlin Creek gold deposit. Currently there are 28 million ounces of gold blocked out. Barrick is now doing the drilling and isn’t sharing with anyone, including NovaGold, how many ounces of gold they know is in the ground so far.

NovaGold’s stock is now $17.20 a share far above the offered $14.50 per share by Barrick. Bob says that shareholders should be thinking $40 to $50 a share before giving away their stock. There is speculation around that there may be as many as 50 million ounces in the deposit.

GATA is taking the position that Barrick should cover their short obligations on about 12 million ounces of gold in the market as a condition before any price acceptance by NovaGold shareholders.

GATA feels that the outstanding short positions that orginally depressed gold prices should be covered in the market and the squaring off of those positions will return gold to a more realistic price. GATA says that Barrick’s shorting was a major suppressing force against the gold price and against the price of gold mining shares.

GATA notes that much of the increase in the price of gold in recent years has been attributed to the reduction of hedges, the closing of short positions, by gold producers.

Vince Borg of Barrick says GATA’s efforts to link the senior mining company’s unsolicited bid for NovaGold with Barrick’s hedgebook are “misleading” and based on an “errant set of suppositions.” Bill Murphy at GATA claimed that the major company “is desperate for the unhedged gold in the group at NovaGold, with which Barrick would extricate itself from a nightmare. Taking over NovaGold would help Barrick immensely.”

Borg said that Barrick Gold doesn’t need NovaGold to deal with its hedgebook.

Borg also said that Barrick has had a no hedge policy for the past three years. He also said that this year Barrick has been a net buyer of 7.5 million ounces to settle Placer Dome’s hedgebook.

Borg even said that some of GATA’s comments “are not based on any facts whatsoever” and strain GATA’s credibility with the investment community.

The vote goes to Bob Moriarty and Bill Murphy at GATA for supplying the public with the truth. The lap dogs from Barrick speak with fork tongues.

It’s not difficult to understand that Barrick is attempting to steal NovaGold at a deep discount with their current offer.

[Rick Montgomery]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2675

I been gone for some time, but Ill bet it still fun goin to the face. The reading says gold. Is it?

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2674

Gold is higher today at $623.90 and is up $12.00.

The media is reporting higher oil prices and growing inflation concerns as the main reasons for gold being higher. This is simply not true.

As mentioned previously, the commercial nickel short positions were being squeezed. Today, nickel is currently trading at $14.62 a pound vesus $13.90 on 8-17 and the shorts are having greater pain. Gold shorts take note!

In addition to liquidity problems growing for some members of the London Metal Market, currect available nickel supplies are running at an historical low. Current supplies in the LME warehouses are only good for one day of world demand.

In the media background, palladium is making an impressive move higher today from a price congestion area and with a last price of $342, up $12.00.

In the last few months it was copper and now it is nickel. It’s not the speculators causing higher prices as the media would like you to believe, it is industrial demand. China and India are the main driving forces of higher prices as their growing economies require more and more raw materials. Unfortunately for price stability, mine supply is lagging far behind demand.

It is just a matter of time before the next metal appears under the spotlight.

In the case of gold, there is a limit of how much metal can be borrowed and shorted. The day of destruction for the gold nay-sayers is closer than they think.

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2672

Gold is down $14.60 at $613.90 today.

The reason for this decline is more than likely a repeat scenario of the gold selling that indirectly originated from the Bank of England when copper broke above the $4 level and caused liquidity troubles for the commercial shorts on The London Metal Exchange.

This time around there is a brewing Exchange liquidity problem with nickel. The last sale on nickel is $13.90 a pound versus the low within the past year of $5.

On Monday the Wall Street Journal reported that POCSCO Co. Ltd. the world’s fifth largest steel marker is struggling to cover nickel short positions on the LME.

What this means for gold is that the gold shorts get extremely nervous when they see a short squeeze in another metal. Immediately they go into their master of illusion routine and sell the public some more of their deception by dumping borrowed gold or paper gold into the market.

The day is coming when all this orchestrated negative energy focused on gold will abruptly end with the gold shorts getting their heads handed to them. Mr. James Sinclair made the following comments today: “Today it is nickel but shortly it will be gold. You can take that to the bank by buying gold weakness.”

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2673

Three rounds yesterday. Two round today. Expecting three rounds tomorrow. Gold anytime or maybe never. But… the ground still looks like pay day country.

Alleghany Days scheduled for Saturday. New rocks have been hauled to Main Street for the drilling contest and muck has been dumped nearby. Tents are going up and the weed eaters have been humming.

Many of the miners have chosen to attend the celebration of life for Warren Johnson. If you know nothing about his sad death, check the NEWS section of the site.

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2671

The FED and its various intemediaries, including the Exchange Stabilization Fund, continue to be in the market trying to destabilize gold’s price. This is for a good reason as a rising gold price is the report card showing financial mismanagement.

The media can report anything they want as a reason why gold went up or down on a daily basis or why it should mainly trend lower overhaul. As gold continues to move higher in this generational bull market it reflects a debasement of
wealth in general corporate assets. This is the reason why corporate America despises higher gold prices.

It’s not a reach of imagination to grasp that corporate America runs the FED and the government. In corporate America’s push for profits, more and more money has to be created to grease its machiney to produce those profits.

As the result of severe foreign wage competition and the massive closure of production plants in the U.S. more and more money has been created in an effort to keep the economy on an even keel.

All this additional money is causing problems. Aside from one of the most oblvious, inflation, is a problem of growing government debt and the increasing obligation of paying higher and higher interest payments.

According to USA TODAY the total U.S. Governemnt debt is $49 trillion. USA TODAY reports, “Assuming this then it is very close to a time when interest on the U.S. debt will exceed domestic spending.”

All these financial promises equate to over half-million dollars for each and every household in the United States today.

There is no better time than than the present, if you have not already done so, to protect your wealth with the purchase of gold.

Your elected government officials will not, as a whole, convey the truth to you on certain matters.

As proof of this you are lied to about about inflation. The government figures concerning inflation are a widely known charade.

Another good example is the present administration claimed a $296 billion dollar federal deficit budget for 2005. The recent “audited” statement by the U.S. Treasury revealed a figure strikingly different, the deficit was actually $720 billion for that year.

Each time gold drops 10 or 15 or 20 dollars or whatever an ounce in a hurry you can be sure of one thing, the shell game is in play again. Don’t be a sucker and fall for their tricks but instead, understand how they work and use it to your advantage.

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2670

This is a very sad day for the entire crew. Last night on his way home one of our young miners, Warren Johnson veered into the opposite lane on a curve near North San Juan and hit a box truck. He was flown out in a helicopter but did not make it. We are mourning the death of a good man. He was only 19 years old. Warren had a sense of humor beyond his years. His work ethic was impeccable. He had a great enthusiasm for learning to be a miner.

The crew went home. Nobody can think straight.

Our deepest sympathy is with his family and best friend Matt who started work here the same day Warren did. Matt shares the same work ethic.

Warren you are greatly missed.

[SCOOP]

in reply to: Clips from Alleghany #2669

At this very moment there is a mock medical emergency-taking place underground at the Sixteen. The crew does not know it is not a real emergency. A miner has broken his leg near the Tightner Shaft. Mine phones are used to bring the information up the chain of command. Ian is acting as an invisible person and is monitoring the evacuation of the injured miner.

After stabilizing the victim, a call is placed to the surface. Kyle at the office (or whomever is there) directs the next call for help. It could be an ambulance or a helicopter. Right now she is waiting to learn the severity and nature of the miners condition.

How many blue collar companies or operations have regular drills such as the ones that are performed on a regular basis in all the mines in America? This is one reason why the mining profession, while dangerous has such an exemplary safety record compared with other dangerous occupations.

[Stephen Wilson]

in reply to: Gold Enters Major Bull Market #2668

Quote of the day by Mr. James Sinclair of http://www.jsmineset.com:

“The more the madness of “might makes right” in wars and markets continues, the greater the the disaster when it reveals the king has no brains.”

[Author]

Posts