LIHUE — A motion to strike a document charging District Court Judge Michael Soong on several counts and calling for his arrest was granted during a hearing Friday.
The document, stamped and filed by the Hawaiian Judiciary Court of the Sovereign in late January, charges Soong with four counts of contempt of court and non-compliance and on one count of obstructing and perverting the course of justice.
Soong presided over the recently completed civil trial involving the Coco Palms Resort property in Wailua.
The ejectment complaint was filed by development company Coco Palms Hui against Noa Mau-Espirito and Kamu “Charles” Hepa, who had been residing on the land.
In preparing for Friday’s hearing, District Court Judge Edmund Acoba said he went through the entire case file of the proceedings and wasn’t sure what the document they filed was about.
“Was this a motion? Was this asking for some kind of relief?” he said.
Nonetheless, he said, documents were filed Jan. 26. The state attorney general’s motion was to strike parts of that document.
The part of the document to be stricken, he said, was the order to arrest, grand jury indictment and the default judgment and notice of entry default judgment.
Representing Soong, Deputy Attorney General Robin Chun said Soong asked that the court strike the document on grounds they are impertinent, an abuse of the judicial process and disrespectful.
“They are not material to the ejectment action and can only be intended to harass or disparage the judge. Judge Soong therefore asks the court strike the document,” Chun said.
“Your honor, we have received no opposition to our motion,” Chun said.
The court, Acoba said also hadn’t received any written response to the motion.
“I was supposed to file one yesterday but we were invaded by KPD and the state sheriffs so I managed to file it this morning, so I believe you should have it, notice to appeal,” Mau-Espirito said.
Acoba told Mau-Espirito that if it was an appeal to the ejectment action, that can be filed separately.
“I’m talking about the motion to strike these documents,” Acoba said. “Which is the subject of this hearing today.”
The court, Acoba said, had not seen any response to that.
Mau-Espirito told the judge that he was supposed to file their response yesterday, but he was dealing with the enforcement of Soong’s orders. He asked for Soong to be present at the hearing.
“That is denied,” Acoba said.
Citing several pending court cases involving the issue of Coco Palms and stating a high level of harassment received over the last two months, Mau-Espirito asked the judge for more time to file a response for the motion to strike.
In light of Mau-Espirito’s request, Acoba asked Chun what the state’s position was on granting the request.
“Your honor, we would object to a further continuance of this matter,” Chun said. “There has been ample time to respond to our motion and really it is separate in part from the ejectment action or anything that took place yesterday.”
Addressing Mau-Espirito, Acoba asked what the relevance of the document is.
“The relevance is Judge Soong made a ruling that was not justified,” Mau-Espirito said. “It broke the Constitution.”
Those issues, Acoba said, would be addressed during an appeal of Soong’s decision.
“I couldn’t find any relevance to the ejectment action and there’s nothing stated in your documents as to the relevance of this document to the ejectment action,” Acoba said.
The relevance, Mau-Espirito said, is so that there’s a paper trail showing the court that they put them on notice of breaking laws.
Their defense during the case, Acoba said is already on record and though Soong ruled against them, they have the right to appeal.
“The record would reflect the defenses you raised and that would be take up on appeal, so as far as paper trail, there is one. There’s a record,” Acoba said.
Mau-Espirito argued the court doesn’t have jurisdiction in the matter and is still committing a crime, stating the court needs to uphold the Hawaiian Kingdom law.
These miscreants are an embarrassment to honest hardworking Hawaiians everywhere. They represent no one other than other freeloading free-stuff takers and are supported by similar people.
What a wast of taxpayer dollars. It’s extremely irritating that the Courts have to deal with this crap and spend valuable resources on total nonsense. Get a lawyer and do things the correct way if you want to be taken seriously. Everyone is bending over backwards because they don’t want to be seen as “anti-Hawaiian” but enough is enough. Every citizen who lives here and uses the infrastructure and services paid for by all of our tax dollars should be given the same treatment. There should be no leniency or favoritism because of race or genetic ancestry.
Hawaiian Kingdom law came before any State or Federal laws since it was illegally overthrown without consent from the US Congress or the War Powers Act that requires such measures in the use of US Marines at the request of racist white sugar plantation owners. It is the same as saying only English and not Hawaiian can be utilized in court because the Hawaiian language contains many references to natural human rights laws often missing in English.
Mau-Espirito argued the court “needs to uphold the Hawaiian Kingdom law.”
OK.
Let’s start by upholding the 1883 Hawaiian Kingdom Supreme Court ruling which holds that Mau-Espirito’s claimed ancestors did indeed sell the Coco Palms land. (See link)
Or would Mau-Espirito now like to overthrow the Hawaiian Kingdom (again)?
http://www.thegardenisland.com/2018/01/09/hawaii-news/report-occupants-have-no-claim/