Hailama Ani shared a post.

t7sSr hJanlpuaorynsortuo di20r2ecord0Sl 
Crooks

t6sSr hJanlpuaorynsortuo di20r2ecord0Sl 
https://www.ilind.net/…/intermediate-court-of-appeals-agai…/
Appeals Court again rules against claim that annexation was illegal
Posted on January 4, 2020 by Ian Lind
On the morning of December 11, 2019, three judges of the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals convened in the Supreme Court Courtroom in downtown Honolulu to hear oral arguments in an appeal in the case of State of Hawaii vs. Windyceslau D. Lorenzo, also known as Kamehameha VI.
Yes, you read that right.
Since at least the early 1990s, Lorenzo has claimed to be “His Majesty Kamehameha VI, King of the Hawaiian Islands, seventh Great Grandson of Kamehameha I, duly recognized and confirmed by the Alii Nui Konohiki Council of Chiefs under the Constitution of 1840, in the Kingdom of Hawaii.”
Of course, despite the pretensions, he’s only one of many claimants competing to speak for a kingdom that in hard reality ceased to exist with the overthrow in 1893.
In 2013, Lorenzo filed warranty deeds in the Bureau of Conveyances transferring title to three parcels of Waimanalo land, a total of approximately 335 acres, to his wife. The source of Lorenzo’s ownership of the property was identified as an earlier 1998 deed:
Deed of Rose P. Lukela, “Grantor”, to Windyceslau Donato Lorenzo, dated August 26, 1998 and recorded at the Bureau of Conveyances as Document No. 98-126382, conveying all claims of the grantor in and to the lands of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
Lukela was also known as Rose P. Lorenzo. The basis of Lukela’s claim of ownership in the Waimanalo properties was not identified.
The state later challenged the 1998 deed in court and succeeded in having declared frivolous. It was expunged from the state’s records.
The state then challenged Lorenzo’s 2013 deeds, which were based on the on the deed that had already been throw out. Following a June 2015 hearing before Judge Victoria Crandall, title was found to be properly vested in the State of Hawaii. The three deeds were found to be frivolous and ordered to be expunged from the state’s land title records. In addition, Lorenzo was fined $5,000, and was enjoined from filing any further related deeds without prior authorization from the court.
Lorenzo then filed an appeal to the Intermediate Court seeking to reverse Crandall’s ruling.
Lorenzo was represented in this appeal by Williamson Chang, a professor at the University of Hawaii’s William S Richardson School of Law, who has become a widely quoted advocate of the theory that Hawaii was never legally annexed by the United States, one result being that therefore post-Kingdom land titles granted under the authority of the territory and state are invalid.
Chang had touted his opening brief in the appeal for its presentation of evidence of “the failure of the United States to acquire Hawaii….”
The judges of the Intermediate Court initially said oral arguments would not be held in the case, but Chang strongly objected. In a legal motion filed on September 30, 2019, Chang pressed the court to reinstate oral arguments because there were, in his words, “numerous issues that had not been covered.” Chang said he was prepared to address the legislative intent of the 1959 Admissions Act by which Hawaii became a state, as well as details of the Congressional debate over annexation in 1898.
In response to Chang’s motion, the court reversed itself, and on November 14 issued a notice setting the oral arguments for 10 a.m. on December 11. The stage was set for Chang to expound his theories.
But when the case was called, neither Williamson Chang or his client, Windyceslau D. “Kamehameha VI” Lorenzo, responded. Neither was present for the hearing that had been scheduled specifically at Chang’s request.
Less than two weeks later, the three-judge panel issued a summary disposition order rejecting each of the arguments raised by Chang and dismissing Lorenzo’s appeal.
The court found that the idea “that the 1898 Joint Resolution did not actually convey the islands of Hawaii to the United States, has been considered and rejected by the Hawaii Supreme Court,” citing the recent decision In re Conservation Dist. Use Application HA-3568.
https://law.justia.com/…/supreme-…/2018/scot-17-0000777.html
In that case, the Hawaii Supreme Court explicitly rejected Williamson Chang’s position that annexation was faulty because it was not accomplished through a treaty of annexation.
Citing relevant cases, the court held: “The United States Supreme Court has thus indicated that the process by which Hawaii was incorporated into the United States was lawful and binding, and we are bound by this determination.”
And as to the ownership of the Waimanalo parcels that were the subject of Lorenzo’s deeds, the court noted the history of the properties prepared by E. Mahoe Collins, the state’s abstractor, which traced the title back to the Great Mahele. The court noted that the history had not been challenged.
“Collins did not find any transfers or conveyances made by the State or its predecessors to Lorenzo or Rose P. Lukela (aka Rose P. Lorenzo), from whom Lorenzo claims he received transfer of the Parcels,” the court wrote in its decision. “Other than Lorenzo’s argument that the 1898 Joint Resolution failed to transfer the lands of Hawaii to the United States, which has been rejected by the Hawaii Supreme Court…he does not assert any challenge to Collins’s affidavit.”
Williamson Chang was ordered to pay $100 for his failure to appear for the December 11, 2019 oral arguments without good cause.
NEW HAWAIIAN - Kamehameha Lost!
FACEBOOK.ANYIMAGE.TOP
NEW HAWAIIAN - Kamehameha Lost!
Supreme Court rules the annexation of Hawaii was legal.
47 comments
5 shares
Like
Comment
Share

47 comments

  • Jazzmin Cabanilla
    That's so disrespectful why would they post something like this? Even if they want to be recognized as Hawaiian Americans why would they create something so ignorant and dismiss their own mo'i so sad this kine
    8
    Hailama Ani replied
     
    6 replies
  • Maka O Kalani Minihan
    Losers without a purpose. I feel sorry for them, honestly.
    1
  • Hau'oli Yockeman
    Looks like Iges look alike wants to be “bounded” just saying
    3
  • Cy K Mullen Sr.
    We Need The International Law and Rulings..Not Judged By False Representation Of Illegal Occupiers..Of Course They Gonna Rule Against Our Kingdom..AutoMatic!!! HEWA!!!!
    3
  • Les Enriquez Rosehill
    Ryan Thompson (who runs Disruptarian Radio where he breeds hate for Hawaiians, and has announced running for county council 🙄) he lives in Puna for the last 3 years from America and is an affiliate with Ken Kudo and Lisa Malakaua.
    5
    Kehaulani La'a replied
     
    3 replies
  • Duane N Row
    Our lahui is better then these Hawaiians who chose too still listen too the haole and believe they are American brainwashed.
    But that's ok because they will all see when tbe mighty wave rises....
    7
    Frank Park replied
     
    2 replies
  • Kristal Klear
    As the rest of the world leaders that already acknowledge that it was in fact illegal and is war crimes... this is irrelevant why would anyone further appeal or persue judicial process within the corrupt system that is admittedly and illegally responsi… 
    See more
    3
  • E Kaahui
    They didnt come against Kamehameha because Kamehameha would have died fighting and killing as many foreigners as possible.They came against our queen and extorted her into signing documents beyond her will.So they need to get that through their f@#kin … 
    See more
    9
  • E Kaahui
    Pro Hawaii means pro Hawaiian no middle ground either you are for us in liberation and freedom of oppression or you are against us and chosen to be an enemy.
    9
  • Frank Silva
    Wrong court
    6
  • Alexander Kalauokalani Pea
    Who would win in a man to man fight? 7 foot tall Kamehameha... Who fought along side his own warriors and one his civil war on the battle field... who rumored to lift the 2 ton Naha stone... Or 6'3 243 Donald Trump who avoided the draft. Kamehameha would turn the Donald into Donald's Thumped.
    Id love to see these two in a UFC cage
    Ken Kudo you're such an antagonist. You better not hope Hawaii is never deoccupied because I have a feeling you're going to get voted off the island.
    The US won huh? Intresting because you know supporting the US in Hawaii is no different than supporting the US in Iraq. There were no lives being threatened when the USS Boston Landed... In Hawaii... And there were no weapons of mass distraction... When the US invaded Iraq...
    3
    E Kaahui replied
     
    1 reply
  • Ric Parish
    In America Slavery was legal. Until it wasn't. Banning women from voting was legal. Jailing interracial couples was legal. America and their cronies have had legal atrocities since its beginning. Fkk Amelika.
    3
    • Share
    • 1 y
    • Edited
  • Elizabeth Sand Amen
    I love how they make a claim and say to click but you cannot actually see what it says without joining a private private group. Cowards to make a claim and not allow for rebuttal.
    1
  • Tane Inciong
    A primary case of the fox guarding the henhouse syndrome. Wrong court. USA court will not rule against itself.
    This should be in a neutral court and under international laws and jurisdiction.
    3
    E Kaahui replied
     
    1 reply
  • Amelia Gora
    the entity State does Not have the court of "original jurisdiction".... The Hawaiian Kingdom Supreme Court has the original jurisdiction still…. https://iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com/.../hawaiian...
    Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii Legal Documents: Court of Original Jurisdiction - Researched Evidence by Amelia Gora (2019)
    IOLANI-THEROYALHAWK.BLOGSPOT.COM
    Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii Legal Documents: Court of Original Jurisdiction - Researched Evidence by Amelia Gora (2019)
    Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii Legal Documents: Court of Original Jurisdiction - Researched Evidence by Amelia Gora (2019)
    3
  • Amelia Gora
    U.S. Supreme Court justices documented there was no annexation...
    No photo description available.
    3
  • Amelia Gora
    Joyclynn Costa documented that the Doctrine of Political Question shows that two (2) nations - U.S. and the Hawaiian Kingdom were part of her case...the judge released 15+ of kanaka maoli.. see: IOLANI - The Royal Hawk: Updated: "The Doctrine of ...
    Amelia Gora Mahalo..."Doctrine of Political Question" ... Joyclynn Costa Yes when you look at, especially developments they claim to own portions of LCA/RP according to the Doctrine it may appear to be with in the courts jurisdiction but it is not, It is of a political matter. 1.
    Updated: "The Doctrine of Political Question" Applies to All Land Cases.....Important, Mahalo Joyclynn Costa!
    IOLANI-THEROYALHAWK.BLOGSPOT.COM
    Updated: "The Doctrine of Political Question" Applies to All Land Cases.....Important, Mahalo Joyclynn Costa!
    Updated: "The Doctrine of Political Question" Applies to All Land Cases.....Important, Mahalo Joyclynn Costa!
    3
    • Joyclynn Costa
      Yes courts have jurisdiction over particular subject matter but one must first establish standing. I would not challenge a judge of court whether or not he/she has jurisdiction over land case because they do. What I would inquire is which lands. Like everything else there are limits even in a court of law. Therefore I found the "Doctrine of Political Question" very interesting because I wasn't the one telling the court they did not have jurisdiction their "oath" was. Therefore I made sure they were proceeding under oath. That compact would limit them to what they swore to uphold. But really it was all ke Akua that steered the entire case. Believe it or not I never knew what to do until I pule and obeyed. Even if others would tell me it would not work or it was no good. I was not going to say that to ke Akua. Aloha
      1
    • Amelia Gora
      Mahealani Asing Kahau found that all judges and entity State have signed a FAR/ Foreign Agent Registration and she calls the judges on it.... Foreign Agents Registration Act
      United State
      The Foreign Agents Registration Act is a United States law passed in 1938 requiring that agents representing the interests of foreign powers in a "political or quasi-political capacity" disclose their relationship with the foreign government and information about related activities and finances. The purpose is to facilitate "evaluation by the government and the American people of the statements and activities of such persons." The law is administered by the FARA Registration Unit of the Counterespionage Section in the National Security Division of the United States Department of Justice. As of 2007 the Justice Department reported there were approximately 1,700 lobbyists representing more than 100 countries before Congress, the White House and the federal government.
      Wikipedia
      Data from: Wikipedia
      I posted this on the IOLANI - the Royal Hawk : IOLANI - The Royal Hawk: Foreign Agent Registration ...
      Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 Law and Legal Definition. The Foreign Agents Registration Act codified at 22 USCS § 611-§ 621 requires every agent of a foreign principal to file a registration statement with the Attorney General of the United States, that copies of informational materials for or in the interests of such principal … Mahealani's relative posted this: Adam Asing
      June 6 at 8:17 AM
      How to shut down the sheriffs, DHHL, HPD, National Guard, BLNR, DLNR, or just about any asshole that comes up the Mauna or ANYWHERE ELSE FOR WHATEVER REASON.
      Oh and win every court case right out the gate.
      No need to oli, haka, sing songs, or hand cuff yourselves with pvc pipes anymore. This will be easier. Very easy.
      Simply demand to see their
      Foreign Agent Registration Statement
      & Anti-Bribery Statement in accordance to the Foreign Agent Registration Act of 1938.
      Send them home to mama real fast.
      Garanz Ball Baranz. 😎
      Foreign Agent Registration Statement & Anti-Bribery Statement - FAR Act of 1938 - Keep With your ID's, Passport, etc.
      IOLANI-THEROYALHAWK.BLOGSPOT.COM
      Foreign Agent Registration Statement & Anti-Bribery Statement - FAR Act of 1938 - Keep With your ID's, Passport, etc.
      Foreign Agent Registration Statement & Anti-Bribery Statement - FAR Act of 1938 - Keep With your ID's, Passport, etc.
      1
    • Amelia Gora
      So, contributions from every kanaka maoli at the forefront should be utilized..... as with what Mahealani's relative says "....How to shut down the sheriffs, DHHL, HPD, National Guard, BLNR, DLNR.... ..Simply demand to see their Foreign Agent Registration Sttement & Anti-Bribery Statement in accordance to the Foreign Agent Registration Act of 1938..." from what I heard the Judges are appalled and rush out of the courtroom and ask the persons to meet him in his chambers......etc. ….so what this means is that the entity operatives are operating illegally in the Hawaiian Islands and are truly Identity Thieves which is what is documented in the PA PELEKANE case of 1912, see HAWAIIAN REPORTS, Supreme Court Law Library/Archives/Main Library - obtain the case law, even get it certified, ...what we also did was provide info on the IOLANI - the Royal Hawk called PROTECTED PERSONS HANDBOOK which can be printed see this link: https://iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com/.../protected... ......thank you Joyclynn Costa for posting additional information as well...….aloha.
      PROTECTED PERSONS HANDBOOK - for all kanaka maoli, families, and friends
      IOLANI-THEROYALHAWK.BLOGSPOT.COM
      PROTECTED PERSONS HANDBOOK - for all kanaka maoli, families, and friends
      PROTECTED PERSONS HANDBOOK - for all kanaka maoli, families, and friends
      1
    • Joyclynn Costa
      Mahalo for being the vessel in which information flows. Peace to you