CORRUPT COURTS OF COLLIN COUNTY SMELLS A RAT : SKETCHY AMBER ALERT ISSUED BY MCKINNEY P.D.


Brooke Muncie and son.Corrupt Collin County

MOTHER, Brooke Leigh Muncie, PICTURED WITH  son

 

RE-BLOGGING FROM a blog I just found,

COLLIN COUNTY CORRUPTION  (TX)

http://exposecollincounty.blogspot.com/2011/05/fishy-amber-alert-issued-by-mckinney-pd.html

“Power is the great evil with which we are contending. We have divided power between three branches of government and erected checks and balances to prevent abuse of power. However, where is the check on the power of the judiciary? If we fail to check the power of the judiciary, I predict that we will eventually live under judicial tyranny.” – Patrick Henry

” ‘Fishy’ Amber Alert Issued By McKinney Police Department”

posted by

 Corrupt Courts of Collin County 

UPDATE ON MISSING CHILDREN, CLICK HERE TO READ MORE, http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2012/05/mckinney-police-search-for-missing-10-year-old-girl-suspect.html/

09 May 2011

I generally do not watch the local news broadcasts, but as I flipped through channels yesterday evening, I caught the tail end of a story about an Amber Alert that had been issued by the McKinney Police.  The fragment of the story that I heard said that a woman had “kidnapped” her son during a supervised visit at a McKinney park earlier that day.  The police spokesman said the woman was considered dangerous and that they feared the child was in “grave or immediate danger.”  I started watching too late in the story to get the full name of the mother and her son, but at the end of the story the reporter described the car that “Muncie” was thought to be driving.

Normally, I would have filed the information away in my mind and kept turning the channels; however, something bothered me about what I had heard.  Why was this woman having a “supervised” visit on a Sunday afternoon at a park?  Who was supervising the visit and how did they let her “kidnap” her son? 

I have become familiar enough with various CPS cases in Collin County to know that if this were a CPS case, the visitation would have been scheduled to occur at the Children’s Advocacy Center (AKA The Temple of Doom).  Even in a divorce/custody dispute case, I would expect to hear that the visit was scheduled to occur at a place such as Hannah’s House (one of the many “non-profit” parasite entities sucking the life out of families here in Collin County).

I will admit right now that I was feeling lazy yesterday evening.   By the time I heard this story on the news, I had already resigned myself to sitting on the couch for pretty much the rest of the night.  But the details of the story kept bothering me.  Unwilling to expend too much effort, I came to a compromise with myself…I reached for my iPad (thank you Apple!) and searched for the lat name of “Muncie” and “Amber Alert”, which yielded the following story from the KHOU (Houston) website:

Hunt on for 2-year-old missing in North Texas

http://www.khou.com/news/texas-news/Hunt-on-for-2-year-old-missing-in-North-Texas-121471004.html

by Associated Press

khou.com

Posted on May 8, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Updated yesterday at 4:55 PM

McKINNEY, Texas — An alert has been issued to law enforcement in North Texas and the Ark-La-Tex to be on the lookout for a 2-year-old McKinney boy and a 28-year-old woman he is thought to be with.

A McKinney Police Department statement describes 2-year-old William Jacob Weltzer as a 3-foot-2 white boy weighing 31 pounds with blonde hair, blue eyes and last seen wearing a white polo shirt and royal blue-and-white checkered shorts. Also sought is 28-year-old Brooke Leigh Muncie, a 5-foot-3-inch, 126-pound white woman with brown hair and blue eyes.

The police statement doesn’t say if the two are related, but it says the boy is thought “to be in grave or immediate danger.”

Muncie was last heard from in McKinney driving a blue 2003 Chrysler with a Kentucky plate number 029KRR.

Now my curiosity was piqued enough to make the long walk to the computer in my home office.  I was curious if Brooke Muncie was involved in litigation here in Collin County.

A quick search of the court dockets on the Collin County website confirmed my intuition…Brooke Muncie has an open divorce/custody case in the 416th District Court (The Honorable Chris Oldner [cough] presiding).  The docket sheet showed the following:

IN THE MATTER OF § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
THE MARRIAGE OF §  
  §  
BROOKE MUNCIE-WELTZER §  
VS § 199TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
WILLIAM BRENT WELTZER §  
  §  
AND IN THE INTEREST OF §  
WILLIAM BRENT WELTZER § COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS
Petitioner Muncie-Weltzer, Brooke     Michael R PuhlRetained

972-569-3166(W)

Respondent Weltzer, William Brent     Linda RisingerRetained

972-377-0096(W)

Events & Orders of the Court

      OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS
07/21/2010     Original Petition for Divorce (OCA)
07/23/2010     Original Answer
07/23/2010     Counter PetitionOriginal CounterPetition For Divorce
08/05/2010     Order Requiring Completiton of For Kid’s Sake Seminar
03/10/2011     Temporary Orders Hearing  (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Oldner, Chris)
03/10/2011     General Docket EntryAgreement approved and Order signed
03/10/2011     Temporary Order
04/13/2011     Request for Copies
04/18/2011     Appearance of CounselEntry of Appearance
04/18/2011     Original AnswerPetitioner’s Answer to Respondent’s Original Counterpetition for Divorce

 

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer

(PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

Author of this blog, Dedicated to the Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America, and our Children Who Want to Come Home, and Especially to My Little Julian, is not a lawyer, attorney, or legal practitioner, therefore, no information contained herein this post and/or blog could be (mis)construed as “legal advice.”  Anyone who exercises he/r rights, and private property sometimes called “child” for deceptive, possibly malicious or retaliatory, and profiteering/privateering and in the “best interests” . . . of the “state” Texas General and other Funds at one’s own peril, risk, and/ or self-fulfillment.  The choice is yours.

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN America, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the uS Constitution and  Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, uS Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement/demand, then contact Author of this blog immediately as fair notice and due diligence requires so that Author shall act lawfully and reasonably with expedience pursuant to any supplemental knowledge.

 

Ed Truncellito’s R.I.C.O. Case Against State Bar






Uncovering the Hidden

EXCERPTS FROM RICO COMPLAINT
AGAINST BAR FOR ORGANIZED CRIME!!!

Ed Truncellito, a Texas Lawyer, is bringing a RICO claim for 7.5 BILLION dollars to expose the ORGANIZED CRIME of the Bar Association. Read these excerpts and then forward this to EVERY NEWSGROUP, E-GROUP, and EVERYONE YOU KNOW!!

EXPOSE THE ORGANIZED CRIMINAL BAR ASSOCIATION.

THIS IS CLEAR EVIDENCE THAT STATE BARS AND FAMILY LAWYERS AROUND THE COUNTRY ARE CONSCIOUSLY, VICIOUSLY, AND WILLINGLY DESTROYING THIS COUNTRY AND UNDERMINING ITS SOCIAL FABRIC AS WELL AS ERODING THE CONSTITUTION…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Plaintiff, CASUALTIES OF NO-FAULT DIVORCE FRAUD (ASSUMED NAME FOR EDWARD TRUNCELLITO), an individual who is a resident of Texas, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, brings this class action suit for $7,500,000,000.00 against the State Bar of Texas, for violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 USC §1962, for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and extortion.

(Note: Plaintiff is publicizing this action at web site http://www.no-one-is-married.com.)

SBOT No-Fault Divorce Fraud is a cover-up, like Big Tobacco

7/16/00, Houston Chronicle, p. 17A, “Punitive Damages is memo to industry,” quoting Leighton Finegan, jury foreman of the $145,000,000,000.00 tobacco punitive damages verdict:

a.. “I hope it sends a strong message for all companies in America that they can’t fraudulently represent anything to the public,” he said. “This case was not about choosing to smoke,” Chwast said. “It’s about if you know you’re making a defective product, and these companies knew that.”

Lawyer insider exposes SBOT [State Bar of Texas] No-Fault Divorce Fraud

b.. As an insider to Texas law, Truncellito now blows the whistle on an immense criminal Family Law racket being concealed by the State Bar of Texas, “SBOT.”

c.. Truncellito has discovered, and explains in allegations below-at the peril of fortune and possibly life-that SBOT’s Family Law System was deliberately designed to destroy helpless Texas families for the profit of its own lawyers.

d.. In his 11/24/99 letter, Truncellito informed SBOT that he uncovered massive SBOT corruption causing a family holocaust. An excerpt: “At my own expense I have spent over 1,000 hours researching the law . And my personal investment has not been in vain.

I have uncovered scandalous corruption in Texas family law and in the Texas Family Bar. Texas marriages are being systematically and recklessly destroyed through unlawful adversarial practices of the Texas Family Bar.

But further, in this huge research effort, I have not just uncovered problems. I also have developed reasonable and realistic – though far-reaching – judicial solutions that will substantially remedy those problems at their root.

However, at the same time that marriages are saved, divorces will decline dramatically. Consequently, the revenues of the Family Bar, as the practice exists today, will be dramatically reduced.

The Family Bar lawyers stand to lose a fortune .”

1.. The day after receiving the letter, SBOT, through their agents, Joseph Indelicato and Stephen Statham, began “disability” proceedings to suspend Truncellito’s license to practice law. Mr. Statham explained that Mr. Truncellito’s letter showed “a lot of passion.”

2.. Mr. Truncellito, a teetotaler since 1988, is an honors graduate in computer science who worked eight years as a programmer for the law firm of Baker & Botts. Mr. Truncellito scored in the top one percent on the Law School Admission Test, went to law school at night, at the University of Houston, and graduated in 1995.

3.. On 6/12/00, Mr. Truncellito presented his 220 page “Motion for Rehearing En Banc” to the First Court of Appeals, accusing the First Court’s staff of criminal misconduct in their refusal to interpret the Texas no-fault divorce law (see section below about their “4/20/00 Opinion.”)

1.. The First Court of Appeals denied Mr. Truncellito a fifteen minute hearing on appeal after they knew he invested (by then) fifteen hundred hours in Texas Family Law research.

1.. SBOT Corruption Cover-up Agency-“The Commission” 1.. Only by Divine Providence has Truncellito avoided-thus far-being silenced by the “The Commission” (“Commission for Lawyer Discipline”), SBOT’s secret police, whose rules are designed to conceal SBOT crime and corruption from the public.

2.. “The Commission” (and BODA, the Board of Disciplinary Appeals), is heart of SBOT’s organized crime.

3.. “The Commission” keeps “the profession” from falling into disrepute, much as “The Godfather” keeps “The Family” from falling into disrepute.

4.. SBOT legal corruption is carefully disguised to appear reasonable to untrained eyes, and “The Commission” uses totally secret procedures to silence insider lawyers who have training to recognize the criminal scams when they stumble into them. The Commission even has power to imprison lawyers who reveal that they have been subpoenaed to appear at some of “The Commission’s” secret hearings.

5.. “The Commission” silences whistle-blowers with secret proceedings, using their “disability” rule, which is like a blank check, which reads: “a mental or emotional condition that results in the inability to practice law.”

6.. A license suspension itself results in the “inability to practice law,” and then “The Commission” can name any emotion to fulfill the condition of their rule. The net result: for any or no reason, “The Commission” can suspend a lawyer’s license-and all the lawyer’s earnings.

7.. “The Commission” can have anyone be the initial accuser of “disability.” Then, they appoint their own psychiatrist, prosecutor, witnesses, judge, and jury, to “further consider the issue of ‘disability.'”

8.. Their tribunals have absolute discretion-“The Commission’s” term for absolute power-and absolute secrecy. The Commission knows that absolute tyranny is necessary to enforce absolute silence from whistle-blowers. 1.. All of SBOT is in disorder, but Family Law especially Go To Table of Contents

By the time lawyers graduate from law school and begin to suspect criminal realities in SBOT, they are dependent on their incomes from lawyering, and they cannot afford to make waves.

1.. Some lawyers are in areas of law less prone to the criminal frauds, and their naïveté, and freedom from those schemes, helps protect the image of “the profession.”

2.. Other lawyers either join up with the corruption-or they look the other way and keep silent, because otherwise, dissenters are quickly taught their lesson by “The Commission.”

3.. By the time a lawyer has substantial influence with any breadth, the lawyer knows what must not be inquired into-for wisdom’s sake.

Law schools, by their complex curriculums, assist SBOT’s criminal designs by increasing the cost of entry into “the profession.”

1.. U. of Houston Professor David Crump points out the absurdity of the law school teaching approach, comparing it to learning about baseball by watching a game through a knothole in the fence.

2.. Yet these brilliant doctors of law leave such an antiquated teaching system in place knowing that the barrier to entry helps protect the image-and monopoly-of “the profession.”

1.. 1.. When it comes to disciplining outsiders for “unauthorized practice of law,” any lawyer whatsoever can prosecute a lawsuit against the outsider,” for swift and effective enforcement.

2.. However, for disciplining insiders, for ethical misconduct, the only way a lawyer can be disciplined, is by “The Commission.”

3.. “The Commission’s” disciplinary system requires secrecy unless “The Commission” decides to publish. So any of “The Commission’s” enemies, or lawyers whose misdeeds cannot be concealed, can be exposed for misconduct, while at the same time, criminal rackets can be protected.

2.. The justice system’s present corruption, in Family Law, however, is extraordinary in the scope of its social destructiveness.

3.. Family Law corruption affects the entire population and has destroyed, not only the sacredness of marriage, but the very right to “marry” itself, as marriage has always been known, where spouses must try to stay together peaceably, at least reasonably try to keep their vows, before a divorce can be granted.

4.. Family Law corruption is the focus of this lawsuit. No-Fault Divorce Fraud: Family Hospital deteriorated into a Family Morgue

e.. Letting SBOT’s Divorce Lawyers implement No-Fault divorce laws was like letting morticians implement hospital emergency room procedures. They engineered an assembly line straight to the family morgue.

f.. Divorce Lawyers implemented no-fault divorce only partially with legislation, but then added loopholes primarily within the procedures, ethics, and evidence rules, which are controlled exclusively by SBOT.

1.. The regulatory control for these aspects of the legal machinery is given to the Texas Supreme Court, and nothing gets through to the Supreme Court for consideration unless it passes committees standing guard to protect SBOT self-interests.

2.. No legislation is enforceable except through courts controlled by SBOT-developed rules of procedure, ethics, and evidence. 1.. 1.. 2.. Medicine, in contrast to law, has advanced by great strides, because they have lawyers looking over their shoulders, to compel real accountability with consequences for successes-and failures.

1.. This is one reason why law is so little taught in the grade schools, because the unfairness of legal methods quickly becomes evident even to grade school children; 1.. So by the time young adults become married, they owe fiduciary loyalty to their spouses, but they cannot even pronounce it. g.. Marriage law is an emotionally-charged subject. It is easy for lawyers in legislative committees to play on special interests but for a pretense, and hide self-protection and profit motives.

h.. The fraudulent no-fault implementation channeled money from troubled families to divorce lawyers, now at hourly rates in three digits, in exchange for dividing children and property. Moneys were not directed into reconciliation systems. The court’s officers were hired and paid to terminate marriages, not to save them.

i.. The fraudulent no-fault implementation abolished the fundamental right to true marriage. Fraudulent no-fault took away the legal protection for the once-irrevocable trust established by marriage vows. Instead, SBOT lawyers protect the solemn vows that lawyers make between themselves and an SBOT judge.

j.. The fraudulent no-fault implementation did not train spouses to discover or solve any of the disputes at the heart of marital discord. The fraudulent implementation simply–and grievously–empowered SBOT lawyers to settle all marital disputes for spouses, in one grand sweep, by divorce, no matter how whimsical or trivial the disagreement.

k.. The driving purpose of divorce reform in the 1960’s was women’s equality. But the fraudulent no-fault implementation did not elevate the status of wives as co-equal family managers. It subjected both spouses to overreaching legal domination by SBOT lawyers who became the family managers with the first spouse’s visit and thereafter managed the spouses through their children with custody battles and orders.

l.. More often than not, spouses go to a divorce lawyer, not because they want a divorce but for relief from spouses who are not trained as good husbands and wives. However, pressured by SBOT, in these traumatic personal circumstances, in the unfamiliar legal setting, spouses acquiesce to the lawyers’ lead, and the spouses are unduly influenced to rise up against their own beloved families and children, unknowingly spurred by the ignorance, pride, and greed of unaccountable SBOT lawyers who learn how to inflame even minor irritations into deadly animosities.

But when one-sided, incontestable “divorce on demand,” was opened up by court misinterpretation, suddenly every faithless partner got control of the family, always holding the threat of divorce over the faithful partner’s head. That doubled the divorce rate in about ten years, by about 1980, because beforehand, that other half of the population’s marriages were dominated by the faithful partner-and those marriages weathered the storms.

m.. Fraudulent no-fault divorce implementation was led by Joseph McKnight, who was appointed director of SBOT’s Family Code Project in 1966 and stayed in the role at least until 1974.

n.. McKnight’s 1970 Texas Bar Journal article showed he understood that Texas no-fault divorce was intended for divorces where there was no contest. o.. p.. Then, in 1973, to further the fraud, McKnight perjured himself before the House Committee on the Judiciary, by omission, while representing the State Bar of Texas, in his official capacity as Director of the Family Code Project, 1.. McKnight’s perjury is found on tapes from Hearings on Tex. H.B. 103 Before the House Committee on the Judiciary, 63rd Legislature, R.S., Meeting 11, (March 13, 1973) (from Cassette Audio Tape 3 available from House Committee Services, Legislative Reference Library, Austin, TX 78711; (512) 463-0920).

1.. Testimony shows Rep. Hale’s alerted suspicion of the McKnight’s major overhaul of the entire multiple-subject Family Code Title I, and he was misled by McKnight about the technical significance of the imbedded divorce evidence requirement in §3.64, and it’s unmentioned connection to the change in §3.52 pleadings, though Hale finally acquiesced to then-SMU Professor McKnight’s assurance about sponsorship by the trustee, SBOT.

2.. McKnight carefully worded a half-truth, intending to mislead-while under oath to tell the whole truth-that there were persons (unnamed divorce-at-will advocates) who thought that §3.64 “full and satisfactory evidence” requirement for divorce was “superfluous” and “it didn’t serve any useful purpose,” failing to mention that the change would render the “no-fault insupportability” statute, which was already ambiguous, into incontestable “divorce at will.”

2.. McKnight, as Director of the Family Code Project was well aware, at the time he testified in 1973, of the pertinent case law which showed the “full and satisfactory evidence” provision and the pleading requirements were the mainstays of Texas government’s protection of marriage. q.. No one in the legislature had any idea that the legal protection of marriage was losing a fundamental attribute, and that the fraud of divorce on demand, already begun, would thereafter be unstoppable to implement. McKnight further covered up, in his 1974 Texas Tech. Law Review article, where he said there was “no defense” to a no-fault divorce, although he knew fully well that Texas no-fault divorce was never meant to be defended, but it was only to be used where there was no contest over the divorce.

1.. McKnight, Commentary on Sec. 3.64, 5 Tex.Tech L.Rev. 281, 342 (1974) contains misrepresentations that the burden of proof had not changed, by going from full and satisfactory evidence to ordinary preponderance standard. The article further misleads by complaining of misuse of the evidence standard, an isolated case, while failing to mention its proper use and rationale as had been established for over 100 years by renowned Texas jurists, including Supreme Court Justices.

2.. McKnight, Commentary on Sec. 3.52, 5 Tex.Tech L.Rev. 281, 328 (1974) misleads by assuring everyone that marriages could still be defended by getting facts through discovery, though after 25 years of CLE, discovery is now totally denied at trial, as illustrated in 1999 Amarillo Richards case and now the 2000 Houston First Court Truncellito case, with grounds of divorce ruled irrelevant for discovery, by trial courts, while the courts of appeal uphold these unlawfully-granted divorces. McKnight’s article further misleads by failing to mention the true role of fact pleadings and evidence in strengthening the defenses against contested divorce, defenses which discourage divorce and encourage reconciliations. Removing the right to demand pleadings of fact hindered the ability to defend at trial and on appeal, but McKnight omitted any such comment.

The practicing lawyers deceive marriage partners, and the marriage partners and their children are thereby injured.

1999 No-defense, no Jury: In re Marriage of Richards, 991 S.W.2d 32 (Tex. App.-Amarillo 1999, pet. dism’d w.o.j.). Richards case absurd but true meaning: “A contested no-fault divorce shall be affirmed on procedural technicalities, through misapplication of the Szczepanik case, where the Collora case applies, even if there is no discovery, even if a properly requested jury is denied, and even if the judge announced the verdict before hearing any evidence, declaring “there is no defense to no fault divorce.”

1.. High Court Fraud: First Court of Appeals 4/20/00 Truncellito case opinion 1.. Having sanctioned the Truncellito appeal as frivolous, $4,500, after the First Court denied 1,500 hours of preparation a 15-minute oral argument, there must have been some ulterior motive. The 4/20/00 opinion cannot be explained by reason of honorable judging.

2.. The 4/20/00 opinion does not address the contentions in Appellant’s brief, repeats the opponents misconstructions, and capriciously disregards the facts and the law of this case. Intent to defraud, to decide the case apart from its merits, is evidenced in that the 4/20/00 opinion:

3.. The 4/20/00 opinion is a fraud to prevent a fair presentation of the case on the merits, and to prevent rendering a considered opinion of the Court on the substantive law and facts of this case.

In this fraudulent 4/20/00 opinion:

1.. The Court knew it was effectively denying the constitutional right to a fair review.

1.. It knew of the hurdles to overcome the Court’s discretion to deny rehearing, which could be exercised as easily as its first denial of a hearing.

2.. It knew of the difficulty of bringing a no-fault divorce challenge to the Supreme Court of Texas for discretionary review.

2.. The Court knew the 4/20/00 opinion’s deceit would be virtually impossible to rebut because its vagueness leaves so many escape routes.

3.. The Court knew that it owed explicit rationales, so a rebuttal does not have to analyze exhaustively all the various legal paths the Court might have traveled to arrive at its conclusion.

The Court knew that, with undisclosed reasoning, any formal, written rebuttal would face yet one more clever misconstruction to evade again, by adding a few more words of legal ambiguity, again to overwhelm and wear down the beneficiary-challenger with the same endless and futile task-of trying to defeat a prejudiced tribunal with a reasoned argument on the merits.

1.. It knew that a dishonorable, but experienced, legal authority can easily place an impossible burden on its petitioners, through an unending variety of evasive ambiguities, with just one more twist on the kaleidoscope of legal fraud.

It knew that petitioners, the beneficiaries of the public’s Judicial Trust, are helpless to defend themselves against prejudiced tribunals; and, The 4/20/00 opinion avoids consideration of no-fault divorce reform that the case earnestly proposed to the Court to end the family holocaust, and as a result, the SBOT agents within the First Court of Appeals attempted to protect SBOT’s criminal racketeering interests and its systematic destruction of families.

It is absurd to suggest that anyone bright enough to ascend to a professional post at an appellate court, even a new briefing attorney, could seat themselves in an ivory tower, face a 1,000 page record and 1,500 hours research, lower a dome of silence, waive issues by overlooking their validity in the record, dispose of the case on the disingenuous presumption of the meaning of a single-word quasi-admission, and meanwhile profess that justice was being served.

r.. A preliminary survey of the Texas Penal Code suggests that the 4/20/00 opinion, with the record of this case, which it distorts, furnishes prima facie evidence to warrant investigation of Tina Snelling, Peter Steinmann, Joseph Indelicato, Stephen Statham, the First Court of Appeals staff and Justices, and other members of SBOT who have become involved, for perpetrating and/or conspiring to perpetrate the following offenses, some classified as felonies:

1.. Ch. 15: Preparatory Offenses.

1.. §15.02 Criminal Conspiracy

2.. Ch. 36: Bribery & Corrupt Influence

1.. §36.02 Bribery

2.. §36.04 Improper Influence

3.. §36.06 Obstruction Or Retaliation

3.. Ch. 37: Perjury & Other falsification

1.. §37.10 Tampering With Governmental Record

Ch. 39: Abuse of Office

1.. §39.02 Abuse Of Official Capacity

2.. §39.03 Official Oppression

1.. Other SBOT abuses of Families 1.. “The Commission” routinely refuses to respond or to investigate complaints, at least from fathers, for two supposed reasons. First, they characterize complaints as unreasonable dissatisfaction with a fair result. Second, there are too many to keep up with.

1.. The Bar refused to return the telephone calls to Rep Holzhouser’s office for over three months with the Rep’s office calling and writing regularly, on this subject.

Because of three-digit hourly rates of the lawyers, granting interim fees during divorce prosecution is marriage quicksand: the harder the Respondent tries to save the marriage, in a contest, the faster they sink.

1.. either the Respondent will be forced to pay the expenses, thereby crushing Respondent’s will to resist, and crippling Respondent’s ability to defend; or,

2.. Petitioner will be required to pay the expenses, further inciting Petitioner to unwarranted hatred against Respondent, framed by the adversarial gamesmanship of Petitioner’s attorney, contrary to ADR law.

3.. Either way, the family is attacked by Petitioner’s attorney who confidently expects enormous personal profit at the family’s expense.

SBOT knows that divorce clients are easy to exploit, and so lawyers instruct the clients to follow the lawyer’s own purposes, but then they claim that the clients are directing them, for example, into adversarial maneuvers. James R. Elkins, “A Counseling Model for Lawyering in Divorce Cases,” 53 Notre Dame Lawyer 229, at P. 237, footnote 39, comments about the well-known phenomenon: ” . One extremely manipulative attorney has explained how the dependent victim in the rescue game is managed by the attorney. . The same often happens in matrimonial cases. Merely by indicating there is going to be rejection, a lawyer can get a client to do anything he wants him to.” R. Felder, Divorce 69 (1971).

s.. SBOT makes money by divorce, because that is what divorce lawyers have been trained to do, via CLE. Therefore, destroy marriages is what they do.

t.. SBOT has adamantly refused to discipline its lawyers, finding every way to cloud the issues, so it can indulge their lawyers rather than re-train them. SBOT even indulges their criminal exploitation of helpless spouses, via cover-ups in “The Commission,” where it should and could place positive controls on divorce lawyers, to prevent them from instigating strife between couples. Thereby, SBOT hinders implementation of ADR and no-fault divorce.

SBOT in this way conspires to restrain trade unreasonably, to restrict competition in marriage reconciliation & restoration market, choosing their methods of family destruction to make money.

u.. SBOT’s system cultivates hatred, to justify destroying victims’ lives, and it perpetuates itself through greed, by allowing the plunder of the victims’ fortunes.

v.. SBOT lawyers cultivate gender hatred against spouses. Then the two lawyers cross-fire that hatred back on the helpless and emotionally confused opposite spouses, who then wrongly blame their spouse for the attack-or they blame the judge-and then the lawyers play golf together on Friday afternoons.

Each state has similar enterprises which are affiliated through the American Bar Association.

Subject: RICO Suit Against Bar Results In Disbarment Proceedings 
Date:Sat, 19 Aug 2000 15:06:31
From: "jail4judges"
<jail4judges@mindspring.com>

 JAIL News Journal Los Angeles - August 19, 2000

Listen to HotSeat4Judges daily on Internet Radio M - F, 6-7 pm P.T.

   (On or about 6/30/00 a Mr. Ed Truncellito called JAIL and talked
with Mr. Branson. Branson noted him to be a very positive upbeat person
that sounded like a radio announcer. However, Ed unhesitantly responded
that he had absolutely no radio experience. Mr. Branson responded with
the words, "All you need is a microphone, that's all." Well, there was
one little factor that Ed omitted from his conversation with Mr.
Branson, and that was that he was an attorney, a fact of which he just
found out through an email sent to JAIL. He is now in the media
lime-light as a whistle-blower of the Texas State Bar. The TSB is now
attempting to disbar Ed from the practice of law because he had the
gall to expose TSB fraud involvement. Does anyone smell a conflict of
interest somewhere in this? Maybe Mr. Ed would like a little radio time
on HotSeat4Judges to talk about this.)    For Immediate Release:
Contact: Ed Truncellito, Atty.  no_one_is_married@juno.com  August 17,
2000. (281) 354-5869

TEXAS STATE BAR ATTEMPTS TO SILENCE WHISTLEBLOWER TO COVER UP NO-FAULT DIVORCE FRAUD

http://houstonfamilylawcorruption.com/blog/2011/02/15/welcome-to-my-blog/ 

 Houston attorney, Ed Truncellito, was called before the Disciplinary Committee of the State Bar of Texas today, in order to undergo examination about his competency to practice law. Yesterday, Truncellito filed a $7.5 billion lawsuit against the State Bar of Texas on behalf of families harmed by Texas' no-fault divorce law fraud. One of the claims in the lawsuit,
 entitled Casualties of No- Fault Divorce Fraud vs. State Bar of Texas, is that the wording of the 1969 law caused it to be implemented contrary to legislative intent. It also claims that the State Bar was well-aware of the problem but covered up, just like Big Tobacco covered up awareness of the harmfulness of its product. When a Texas' spouse hires an attorney, a divorce has been all-but-assured for the past 30 years. Such 'unilateral divorce' or 'divorce-on-demand' is not what the Texas legislature had in mind when the original no-fault law was enacted. In Texas, the law was meant for 'uncontested-only' cases - those divorces where both spouses agreed to the divorce. Enactment of the no-fault law was meant to eliminate the false charges and angry allegations that too-often erupted in courtroom proceedings. When both spouses agreed to the divorce, there was no reason to make allegations. But in cases where only one of the spouses wished to divorce, and the other spouse did not, Texas law still allowed the partner dissenting the divorce to request reasons or 'grounds' for the divorce, along with 'clear and convincing evidence.' Truncellito maintains that, by reducing acrimony, Texas no-fault was enacted to also allow greater likelihood of reconciliation. But common attorney-practice includes the destruction of any remaining vestiges of marital good-will through hostile language in the legal paperwork and in the courtroom, eliminating any resistance from the objecting spouse. Turning divorce attorneys into 'marriage terminators' is not what Texas legislators had in mind when the original no-fault law was implemented, 30 years ago. But then again, attorneys are paid for divorce work, not peacemaking or reconciliation. And the result of greater hostilities results not only in attorney-assurance of a divorce but also further lucrative litigation after the divorce, in ongoing child custody battles and other fights. Truncellito's RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) lawsuit makes claims of systematic influencing and outright corruption in the State Bar, resulting in undue harm to families in court proceedings. Today, the State Bar examined Truncellito in closed session, in what is known as a 'disability hearing.' These confidential examinations are the way the State Bar deals with sticky problems, like alcohol or drug abuse. But because the sessions are not open to outside scrutiny, they can also be used to deal with other thorny issues, like criticism of State Bar practices. Truncellito will be called back in 90 days to hear the committee's ruling on whether he is fit to practice law, after he has been examined by an appointed psychiatrist. 
The RICO lawsuit can be viewed on his web site - www.no-one-is-married.com - which also includes a copy of his Texas Supreme Court 'Petition for Review' of the no-fault divorce law, filed August 7th. J.A.I.L. is an acronym for (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) JAIL's very informative website is found at www.jail4judges.org JAIL proposes a unique new addition to our form of government. JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope! JAIL's is spreading across America like a fast moving wildfire! 
JAIL is making headroads into Congress for federal accountability! 
JAIL may be supported at
 P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603 

Use header to subscribe or to remove: jail4judges@mindspring.com 
All E-Groups are encouraged to sign on at jail4judges@egroups.com "
..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <>< ___________________________________________________ 
http://www.no-one-is-married.com/theme.html Why No One Is Married View Related Articles and Documents Marriage today is no more than "registered cohabitation" because no-fault divorce was misinterpreted as "no cause & no proof" divorce. If you can divorce without true cause--then you were not truly married in the first place. You were merely cohabiting, as in ages past, regardless what name it's called. You could always walk away from a disagreeable cohabitation, but marriage was defined in its protection by law. 

You couldn't get out of a marriage just because you wanted out. You had to have true cause: abuse, adultery, abandonment, or the like. And not only cause, but genuine proof of it. 
When the well-meaning no-faulters tried to take adversarialism out of the divorce process, to make it friendly, it failed. The door swung wide open to "no cause & no proof" divorce. Meanwhile, adversarialism went right back into the property and custody battles. 

The old "fault" laws needed overhaul to bring spousal equality, and to make the system friendlier, but no-fault's "no cause & no proof" divorce, administered by warring lawyers, was the wrong implementation. The law should have required that spouses be taught how, and helped, to settle differences as co-equals, to deliberate justly and fairly, with self-control, while honoring their partner and the vows they made for a permanent union. Beforehand, almost any man could rule his wife and settle disputes by physical force.

 But spousal equality demands at least a little education, a working knowledge of civilized diplomacy and reasoned compromise--for both genders. The no-fault laws did not train the partners to solve any problems. The laws simply--and grievously--empowered the courts to settle all their disputes for them, in one grand sweep, by divorce, no matter how whimsical or trivial the disagreement.

 No-fault did not elevate the status of wives as co-equal family managers. It lowered the status of both spouses, while it elevated the courts as the new, and not-so-charitable, family managers. The no-fault divorce system, as implemented, funded divorce. It channeled money from troubled families to divorce lawyers, now at hourly rates in three digits, in exchange for dividing children and property. The court's officers were hired and paid to terminate marriages, not to save them. The no-fault legal system, as envisioned, was to be a family hospital, to comfort the hurting spouses and bandage the wounded marriages. 

Instead, it became a family morgue. It promised to give relief from the former hostilities of the "fault" legal system, but it became more hostile than ever. Reconciliation dollars, facilities, and assistance were promised, but they never materialized. A generation and a half later, we know that the experiment did not work as planned. In truth, our no-fault laws, as implemented, abolished true marriage. After many years of no-fault, we no longer even respect the solemn covenants that partners make between themselves and God. 

Instead, we respect the solemn covenants that lawyers make between themselves and a judge. Although cohabitation is handicapped in many ways, it unfortunately has one important advantage: ordinary cohabitation keeps government out of the home. In contrast, the registered cohabitation that we still call marriage invokes the jurisdiction of government officers. They receive authority to manage the lives of both spouses and their children with legal force. No wonder people cohabit. 

No wonder we have so many broken homes. Partners can walk away from the slightest inconvenience, at any time, with court assistance. They don't ever have to conciliate, or swallow their pride and say they are sorry, or try to please anyone but themselves. When divorce was made into a guaranteed certainty, it became an easy way out of hard times. Partners knew they would no longer be pressed by embarrassing questions about covenants and faithfulness, as they moved on to their next cohabitation. Nor could they be stopped. The fundamental attribute, the unique defining characteristic, the earmark, that always distinguished true marriage from cohabitation, is legal security--protection by law--protection by divorce law. Today, that protection is gone. 


Genuine proof of true cause was always required for divorce, and anything else--but that--should have changed in an overhaul of divorce law. It is one thing to let spouses decide, without intrusion, for their own private reasons, whether to live together, or to live apart indefinitely. But it is another thing altogether, for government not to question the cause, when government has already intervened, when government is asked to destroy a marriage, totally and permanently. The legal security of true marriage cannot be a chain. But neither can it be a thread. It must be a sturdy fabric, a flexible but tough canvas, to weather the gales of life. That's why true marriage is so secure and stable for mates. 


When spouses cannot easily shake off their yoke, they soften it by mutual accommodation. In other words: spouses don't stay together because they get along; they get along because they stay together. And that's why true marriage is so secure and stable for children. True marriage is underwritten by law. Children can rest assured that no passing storm will carry either of their parents away. They know that the whole force of government stands as a benevolent guard to protect their homes and both of their providers. We are not in the midst of a divorce crisis. It is a marriage crisis. 

No one is married, and no one can marry. The right to marry was taken away. The happy voices of the bride and the bridegroom are gone from our land. 

Article By Ed Truncellito, JD, April, 2000; revised 8/4/00. 
Ed Truncellito 
4582-E Kingwood Dr. #214 
Kingwood, TX 77345 
Phone: 281-354-5869;
 fax: 281-354-4829 Contact Ed Truncellit
o by e-mail (note Juno e-mail uses underscores not dashes...) http://www.no-debts.com/anti-federalist/files/noone.txt

02.15.11

Welcome to my Blog!

Posted in Uncategorized at 7:41 pm by Administrator

Feel free to post any comments related to my Website and the Houston Family Law Community…

50 Comments »

  1. scott clemens said,

    March 22, 2011 at 7:28 am

    Sounds like I have a similar case, in Dallas County Court, 303rd and been a victim of the corruption since January ’05. Let me read more before I comment further, I am presently case organizing fro U.S. Attorney Generals’ Office…found deaf ears at Texas Attorney General, Texas State Bar, etc have all IGNORED my pleas and requests as “lawyers” and “judges”, both associate and other continue their abuse.

  2. Aaron said,

    June 8, 2011 at 12:59 am

    Dear Steven,

    I am an attorney in the Houston area and would like to talk to you. There are a lot of attorneys who share your same viewpoints about the judges. It hurts the justice system as a whole when there are rogues running amuck. I have some ideas as to fight back against the system.

    Ironically this systematic injustice that exists downtown is a repeat of this book

    http://www.amazon.com/Women-CourtWatch-Reforming-Corrupt-Family/dp/0292709587

    Please email me at your earliest convience!

  3. Stan Rains said,

    September 5, 2011 at 7:53 pm

    Look up the efforts of former Houston attny Edward Truncellito. If it will open, here is an archived article,http://familyrightsassociation.com/bin/why_no_one_is_married.htm

    Ed was disbarred for standing up to the bar.

    A friend and attorney who stood up for me has been a repeated target of a small group of family law attorneys in Corpus Christi.

    I have more than a few stories to tell on these battles.

  4. www.dangawlikowski.com said,

    September 11, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    http://www.janettgawlikowski.com

  5. Kate said,

    September 11, 2011 at 3:45 pm

    http://Www.dangawlikowski.com

  6. GG said,

    September 11, 2011 at 3:46 pm

    http://Www.dangawlikowski.net

  7. Garrett said,

    September 11, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    http://Www.dangawlikowski.org

  8. Garrett said,

    September 11, 2011 at 3:57 pm

    http://Www.dangawlikowski.net

  9. Jgirl said,

    September 11, 2011 at 4:20 pm

    http://www.dangawlikowski.com

  10. KGG said,

    September 11, 2011 at 4:32 pm

    http://Www.dangawlikowski.com
    Www,dangawlikowski.net

    Info@dangawlikowski.com

  11. Csaba said,

    September 11, 2011 at 9:24 pm

    http://www.dangawlikowski.com

  12. Csaba said,

    September 12, 2011 at 7:52 pm

    dangawlikowski.com

  13. bethune said,

    September 12, 2011 at 7:56 pm

    dangawlikowski.net

  14. Sonia said,

    September 20, 2011 at 7:14 pm

    hi Aaron,

    I would like to contact you as well. What is the best way to do so.

    S

  15. Sonia said,

    September 20, 2011 at 7:15 pm

    Steven,

    I am waiting for your blog entries. I lost faith in common sense within family court system. Hope to find motivation and inspiration through your posts.

    Sincerely,

    S

  16. Janet said,

    September 26, 2011 at 10:44 pm

    http://www.dangawlikowski.com

  17. Montparnasse said,

    September 26, 2011 at 11:11 pm

    http://www.dangawlikowski.com

  18. Gerette said,

    September 28, 2011 at 7:00 pm

    http://www.dangawlikowski.com

  19. Tony said,

    October 11, 2011 at 12:39 am

    Currently, I am proceeding pro se in a Fort Bend County District Court (family court) and have been subjected to malicious prosecution and prolonged economic duress both intrinsic and extrinsic to the proceedings and lack the economic resources to hire an attorney. I do not meet the legal threshold for Indigency. (thank goodness) However, I live paycheck to paycheck and most of my time and resources are exhausted in an attempt to maintaining a loving relationship with my children. This is no trivial task, when faced with an ex that has a pathological need to destroy such relations.
    I firmly believe that after reasonable inquiry into the facts and circumstances of my case a reasonable and prudent person would conclude that the trial court has without good cause aligned itself against me, and has actively engaged in a course of conduct constituting a pervasive pattern of artful manipulation, baiting and bullying me and my prior attorneys, selective or inconsistent application and enforcement of the law, the rules of evidence, and the rules civil procedure; and such conduct is designed and intended to achieve the trial court’s self-serving goals or desired outcome.
    Additionally, the trial judge has maliciously altered portions of active legal instruments that has substantially deprived me of due possess of law and is clearly in violation of Sec. 37.10.of the Texas Penal Code, (TAMPERING WITH GOVERNMENTAL RECORD) and may constitute violations under Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law and Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 Conspiracy Against Rights. Moreover, there are many less flagrant violations that collectively show a pervasive pattern of intentional deprivation of rights that couldn’t have occurred by chance or without intelligent design and purpose. Its not just Houston/Harris County family courts.
    One of these days they are going to get tired of kicking my butt. Maybe then I will find some justice. Stay strong and never give up.

  20. Amanda said,

    November 2, 2011 at 7:46 pm

    I am in the middle of a custody case in the 247 court and have never seen such corruption in my life!!! My Ex filed for custody because I got remarried. His sleezy $500 and hour Lawyers were in the associate Judges back pocket. I could not afford that kind of lawyer so I got the best I could, to no avail. My ex had a case built on lies, the same lies he used during my divorce and he lost everything in the divorce. Why is it now, he gets this big expensive attorney who is padding the judges pockets, she rules in his favor, with absolutely -0- proof!!!! This judge treated me like a mother who is on drugs and abuses and neglects my children. In fact, she stated in the temporary orders that “the court has found proof” there was no proof!! Ive never done a drug in my life, I am a hard working stand up citizen. In fact she ordered me to do several costly test and evaluations. I passed them all with flying colors, in fact the results state the I have no issue with any substances and furthermore, was diagnosed with PTSD, from my abusive ex husband. My lawyer and everyone else was floored at her decision!! She took my kids away. I am still fighting this battle, I dont know where to begin I could use some good advice on what steps I should take to overturn this ruling.

  21. SAM CINO said,

    December 13, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    visit my web site one pg and watch video of nancy schaefer.
    http://www.samcino.ca

    also utube 8sam66

  22. Miguel Pappolla said,

    December 29, 2011 at 3:35 am

    The curruption in family courts is rampant in Texas. If have have an Y chromosome (meaning you are a male) you have no constitutional rights in Texas Family Law Courts. I went through a divorce in which I was falsely acused of abusing alcohol (shown to be false after forensic testing), then of abusing drugs (shown to be bogus after extensive and sophisticated forensic testing). I had to spend about $300.000 in legal fees in order to see my child. The attorney for my spouse, Lindsey Short, Jr. extinguished my then 6 year old child’s educational account (which before the divorce was approximately $90,000 to a current value of $ 0.00) in legal fees, in a case supposedly being “in the interest of the child”. All of this while I was not the bad character of the story. No history of abuse of any kind in my household or anything improper. My child and myself (the father) were punished for no reason. Family Law in Texas is a circus mounted for the financial gain of the attorneys and corrupt culture of the judges. THIS IS THE PATTERN IN TEXAS. SHAME ON YOU, Texas Family Courts.

  23. Red Gown said,

    January 30, 2012 at 4:00 pm

    I read your blog on Bonnie Hellums yesterday. I was not surprised in the least and I absolutely know there are hundreds more who have witnessed their children suffer because of this poisonous woman.

    I also dealt with her and personally witnessed her violating every one of the canons that define judicial misconduct. She is completely unethical, thoroughly dishonest, and lacking in intelligence and humanity. To say that her court is run based on personal relationships is a vast understatement. Attempting to get her superior, Judge Olen Underwood, to address the issue is completely futile. He has literally received scores of complaints and valid requests for her recusal and turns a blind eye and deaf ear… and he is a football buddy (Houston Oilers teammates 1967-9) of Hellums’ husband, Carel Stith. Her husband, Stith, by the way, attempted to silence a displeased client (yes, he is now a family law amicus attorney) by warning him that his wife was a family law judge and would “get him.”

    I, too, read Courtwatch and was appalled to read Hellums touted as a reformer in the book. Her behavior as a judge is not just immoral, it is illegal. I have heard lawyers and other judges alike refer to her as “crazy” and am horrified and amazed that she still holds a seat. Something is terribly broken in the Harris County Family Court system. The FBI investigated it once and I believe it should be brought it again.

    Those who read this blog in order to protect Hellums have chosen personal gain over the interests of the children they have sworn to protect and I hope to see them all experience justice….real justice. We should work toward that end.

  24. Red Gown said,

    February 1, 2012 at 4:03 am

    I read your blog on Bonnie Hellums yesterday.  I was not surprised in the least and I absolutely know there are hundreds more who have witnessed their children suffer because of this poisonous woman.

    I also dealt with her and personally witnessed her violating every one of the canons that define judicial misconduct. She is completely unethical, thoroughly dishonest, and lacking in intelligence and humanity. To say that her court is run based on personal relationships is a vast understatement.   Attempting to get her superior, Judge Olen Underwood, to address the issue is completely futile.  He has literally received scores of complaints and valid requests for her recusal and turns a blind eye and deaf ear… and he is a football buddy (Houston Oilers teammates 1967-9) of Hellums’ husband, Carel Stith.  Her husband, Stith, by the way, attempted to silence a displeased client (yes, he is now a family law amicus attorney) by warning him that his wife was a family law judge and would “get him.”

    I, too, read Courtwatch and was appalled to read Hellums touted as a reformer in the book. Her behavior as a judge is not just immoral, it is illegal.  I have heard lawyers and other judges alike refer to her as “crazy” and am horrified and amazed that she still holds a seat. Something is terribly broken in the Harris County Family Court system. The FBI investigated it once and I believe it should be brought it again.

    Those who read this blog in order to protect Hellums have chosen personal gain over the interests of the children they have sworn to protect and I hope to see them all experience justice….real justice.  We should work toward that end.

  25. Rosalie said,

    March 8, 2012 at 7:44 pm

    The 247th Familly Court – Judge Bonnie Hellums – ruined my faith in the legal system. She repreatedly ignored the evidence across two and half years of hearings, violated my parental rights to my son’s records, discriminated against me because I had the mistfortune to lose my job and get cancer, and conducted herself in the most unprofessional manner from the bench, sarcastic, belittling and threatening. As an example of the many , she sneered “cancer comes back and did I want my son to go through all that.”

    I wished I had had a video-camera everytime I was in her court. (I always order transcripts.) If my attorney and I were not being the brunt of her venom, then I would see before my hearing all the parents that were not represented by Hellums’ favorite attorneys. My mother followed a mom out of the courtroom to console her one time because Hellums had given the three toddlers to the father who did not want them, because the mom’s attorney failed to tell her about the parenting class. When the mom cried, Hellums shouted “crying won’t get you anywhere” as if the mom had thought it would.

    In my case, my son’s father literally marked through the right to determine residency, and wrote in that the “father had the right to determine residency” in our divorce decree in 2002, after Judge Hellums had approved the decree, but before it was filed with the Clerk. In 2009 when my son wanted to live with me, I appeard before Judege Hellums. In the court records, there uninitialed by my attorney and my initials were written in by my ex-husband, was a clear evidence of fraud. However, Judge Hellums rewarded the fraud, she ignored it. Then, Hellums claimed that had no bearing on the case before her.

    In more recent hearings, she denies my right for my son’s records (I have joint custody and conservatorship) even though his father’s team has them and relies on them for expert evidence. There is not case law presented by my Ex, his initimate friend the therapist, and their attorneys. Hellums just denies it because she can. She answers to no one.

    I finally asked for a jury trial, but then I settled in mediation but the Hellums court has left a cruel mark on my son.

  26. Administrator said,

    March 9, 2012 at 5:14 pm

    Rosalie – I’m very sorry for injustice and harm that Judge Hellums has caused you through her actions during your case. I have experienced many more instances in the 5 years that my case was pending other than what is provided on my website in which Judge Hellums based her deciisons, not on the law, but on who her favorite attorney was for that day or who had the better smile… Whatever the case, her and her court court is not interested in the slighted in doing what is in the best interests of our very young children. Instead, she and her flock of favorite attorneys cover for each other’s wrongdoings. I know for a fact that attorneys will illegally communicate (unilaterally) with Judge Hellums regarding a pending case in her court. These are called ex parte communications and are strongly prohibited because they can unfairly influence the judge. Instead of refusng to rerspond to these communications and providing a copy to all other attorneys on the case in accordance with the rules and Judicial Ethics Opinions, Judge Hellums deletes the commnunciations so that there is no evdience of her or the attorney’s wrongdoing and denies ever receiving the communications in open court. Just unbelievable. I have a civil lawsuit pending against a very big name attorney here in Houston, Wendy Burgower, for her malicious actions based in part on the improper influence of her ex parte communciations with Judge Hellums and the resulting order that was signed by Judge Hellums due to the improper influence. What is sad is that no one in the court system will do anything to stop it, even after evidence of wrongdoing is presented.

    Again, I’m sorry for your experience with Judge Hellums and I wish you much luck and happiness with your son… God bless….

  27. Marina said,

    April 1, 2012 at 2:00 am

    Dan,

    You have got a good thing going on here on this page. If we do not speak out somewhere, nobody is interested in hearing our individual stories unless they are repeated cases of corruption, and prejudiced judicial system.

    Judge Carolyn Marks Johnson who gets paid by me with my tax dollars told me to go and spend more of my hard earned money and come to court with an attorney.

    She enforced the fudged MSA bc she cannot stand an independent and intelligent woman in front of her.
    http://houstondwidefender.com/2010/02/what-is-wrong-with-montgomery-county/

    As for Wendy Burgower, beware if you come across as more intelligent than her. She is a diva in her mind and told me off with the following words: ” who do you think you are to go to court on your own? What? You think you are smarter than me? Because I know you are just bitter because your husband left you.”

    No class, classless, an old crow with peacock up her culo.

  28. Sam said,

    August 13, 2012 at 3:32 am

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/93542774/Reply-to-Response-to-Motion-for-Sanctions

    What is it with 309th? Same lawyers Mary olga Lovett, Robert Kuehm, and Judge Dean. Weird. Too weird to be coincidence.

  29. Administrator said,

    August 14, 2012 at 2:43 am

    Sam,

    Wow – no surprise though. Robert Kuehm and Mary Olga Lovett were masters of deceit and corruption evidenced by their many violations of the Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct when they were a team on my case. Mary Olga said at my trial that she would never work a family law case again – yeah right. I guess there is just too much opportunity to break the rules in the family law courts…

    Thanks for sharing…

  30. Lynn said,

    September 11, 2012 at 9:45 pm

    Judge Hellums worked in the best interest of my ex husband and his family of lawyers and in the worst interest of my children twelve years ago when she presided over my divorce and chose the custodial parent of my children to be a man who left the house at 5 am and left three children, ages 12, 10 and 8 to fend for themselves to wake, ready, and get to school on their own or with an evil woman who started their day by speaking badly of their mother on their way to school. He had nothing but negativeTwo of the three were able to get through challenging years with therapy and God and staying positive through the negative lifestyle they had to endure. The third is now a victim of Bonnie Hellums and her “interest of the child” ruling, back in the court system due to alcohol and drug abuse, in an effort to “escape” the life Bonnie Hellums chose for him. Her words in the courtroom, after checking her watch over and over and seeming bored with character witnesses for myself (at least 10), but listening quite attentively to the one character witness for my ex, his sister, who happens to be a lawyer, “I’ve made my decision….the children will stay in the home with the father and the mother has between 6 and 8pm to remove her belongings”. That was certainly not in the best interest of my children, but no one was listening, especially not the Judge. We owned two homes and I walked out of the courtroom with no home. Shameful that our court system has the power to ruin young lives to favor lawyers–WRONG.

  31. Sam said,

    September 22, 2012 at 6:58 pm

    http://www.facebook.com/events/228667450589061/?ref=nf

    International protest for the love of children
    Here in Houston on september 27th.

  32. ENRIQUE said,

    October 10, 2012 at 8:49 pm

    A judge in the 247th district court would not even listen to my side of the story even though I have documented video, audio, text messages, paper work that proves the facts of my case. The apposing lawyer postponed the case so long that the amicus representing the case went on his side to slander me and make me seem like all I wanted was child support money when that wasn’t the case at all. My ex spouse kept my son out of school for 2 1/2 months and would not take him to get medical help when he needed it and all I wanted was temporary custody to get him back in school and get him medical attention. They made it into an all out custody battle which was never intended.

  33. Jo said,

    November 13, 2012 at 9:45 pm

    How did you find an atty to file a civil suit? Who is the atty, and would this person be willing to file class action suit?

  34. Dorothea Laster said,

    February 10, 2013 at 3:23 am

    Corruption exists in the world. However, a lot of times what appears to be corruption to a lay person is just a lack of information about how the judicial system works–usually a lack of knowledge about procedural rules. That’s what attorneys know that you don’t when you represent yourself–and the process is not geared toward slowing down and explaining it to you. That said–there are implied findings in a Judge’s ruling from the bench. Clearly a Judge cannot recite 40 pages of text that a divorce decree or other order will end up being. Guidance about short cut phrases about what rights a Joint Managing Conservator will have, for example, is in the Family Code in detail. If you don’t know that, the order you get may be a surprise. Also, attorneys or pro se parties draft orders in Texas State Courts–the Judges typically don’t.

    Judges do not have time to read each proposed decree word for word–if at all. If you have an issue with a proposed order because you don’t think it reflects the Court’s ruling the burden is upon you to come up with your own judgment within the time frame, and file a motion to enter your order/judgment and set it for hearing. If the other side’s inaccurate order got entered without being provided to you first, you can file a timely motion to set aside or correct that order (or call it a motion for new trial), and again submit what you think is the correct judgment language and have a hearing on it. Time limits do matter. You can be right as rain–but if you didn’t file your motion to correct the judgment in a timely manner a Judge lacks the power to correct it. I dislike lawyer and judge slamming. Lawyers studied long and hard and representation of a party to a lawsuit is not as easy as it looks. It makes me mad sometimes–I don’t go to your job an assume I can do what you do without training–why do you assume you can do mine? If you have to represent yourself–assume that there are things (especially deadlines) that you don’t know and try to familiarize yourself with procedural deadlines. If you get an adverse ruling promptly get a cpoy of the transcript of what the Judge said and/or take detailed notes of what the Judge said. That can help any subsequent lawyer trying to help to tell you where you went wrong, and what to do next, or if this really is a rare case of improper judicial conduct. Look in your phone book for low income legal services like legal aid. I hope that helps. This is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice–just an observation.

  35. Sam cino said,

    February 23, 2013 at 8:06 pm

    Politicians have made it legal for Nazi jugdes , lawyers and the children aid socities to kidnapped our children so that they can be bruttally raped and pillaged by them.. with no accountablity !!!! … isn;t democracy beautiful!!!!!

    policticians , jugdes, lawyers , family phsycologist and children aid societies cannot raise their own children but our going to tell me and yuou how to raise ours???????

    my believe ;; if judges are above the law
    therefore they must be God
    i suggest they get nailed to the cross
    and see if they can rise again from the dead.

  36. Stop the Corruption said,

    April 5, 2013 at 4:21 pm

    I am interested in writing a story about corruption in Harris County Family Court. Please contact me by email at stopthecorruptioninharris@gmail.comso that you can share your part of the story. Thank you. I hope to hear from you soon.

  37. jacket said,

    May 25, 2013 at 2:53 am

    Please call me asap. I have a girlfriend going
    Through HELL. This could be a big lawsuit. For anyone who’s been ruined.
    Please. 2103283283
    Jackie

  38. Andrea said,

    July 1, 2013 at 8:01 am

    If you want to write about the Harris County Family Court then you need to hear my entire story that is STILL going on after 15 years and over half a million in attorneys fees. What I can say is that I was lucky to find Wally Mahoney in 1999 because in Harris County every attorney you know will be happy to ask for at least $5,000 to “help you” and if they suck, then they will also be happy to put a lein against your assets to get paid. Wally won for me as long as I followed his rules. And he is a big part of that group of attorneys, and it’s not Wally, it’s just how you have to operate to win in Harris County. I do not advocate Robert Keuhm and would rather see him shipped to practice in Mexico since he was instrumental in removing my children from me after my ex-husband attempted to kidnap my children out of the country. He got mad about my not being able to pay his bills and that’s the way it works.

    Wally isn’t like that, but you have to pay. After years of fighting, and winning and losing and rehiring and firing attorneys – Wally the most (and that takes character to get fired and be re-hired by the same person) I will tell you. Get a prenup. There were great judges when I started my case in 1999, but my Judge is now on the Texas State Supreme Court and the same old groups are running the show. And the judges make you hire Dr. Silverman, and Dr. Silverman or their shrink of choise, and the Judge will put you at risk and ensure you live with your soon to be ex unless you get beat up and gain a protective order. Then you have to leave the home with no property or money until you can get the judge to have you very FAIR ex husband to allow a FRIEND OR NEIGHBOR to come get the THINGS HE chooses to disclose that he has – despite all this father’s rights crap – there are no winners in this situation and the father’s rights advocates have ruined the system.

    There should be no bias on gender per our constitution. Right? Please avoid that father’s rights crap – for those women whom have lost their rights but don’t have a Political Action Committee backing them. Let’s call it even. I know the Harris County Family Court Judges tried to right a long-time wrong of father’s not gaining custody but it was OVERKILL. And it literally did kill. I know more than one mtoher that has been stalked and killed. I know children that have committed suicide. And I know one father that gained custody from a dedicated mother that had a wonderful job and gave her two children wonderful lives, but I had a brain aneurysm. When I got out of hte hospital alive, I had lost my kids and was ordered to pay child support. I’ve never recovered from that, nor has Wally I am sure. But there was an Ad Litem name Robert Keuhm that could have made a difference.

    There were many others involved in my case which listen PEOPLE involves a Mexcian National that flies for Continenatl Airlines, dresses like a woman most of the time, and is holding my children hostage – he frightens me, threatens to hurt them and I just wait for them to turn 18. That is all I can do after all the money, and the sincere threat of their disappearance to Mexico or Germany. Count your blessings Dads, and remember there are women tat have suffered the same injustices. If I could, and I will. I will write my book when I am sure my children will not be hurt any more than they do now, since if I even attempt to visit them, he serves me for any unnecessary thing. And his attorney is a woman. How about that? Don’t hesitate to call me and I can refer you all over town tot the right attorneys, do not ask your neighbor, your boss, your friend. Ask someone that knows and has spent hours upon hours in the 409,

  39. jo said,

    July 13, 2013 at 4:09 pm

    Aaron, you are an atty. You had some ideas. I would like to talk to you. How can you be reached? My grandson would like to take action, and I would like to help him if possible. Oh,Truncellito is dirty, He was part of the corruption. His office address is non existant, and he is now working for the federal Govt. He is and was involved in this crud. Not only was there an FBI investigation(stopped by Don Clark who went to work for the O’Quinn law firm), there was a US Justice dept investigation. The women and men who protested this coruption almost got them, but they killed several of them including Donna Ringoringo, and another man. These were good people. They also fired the US investigator. The dirty people won. These people are organized criminals. they need to be stopped.

  40. Darla said,

    November 18, 2013 at 8:59 pm

    If you google The Enos Law Firm Newsletter there is an article that reads Judge Bonnie Hellums must change her illegal policies. This judge Bonnie Hellums in court 247th must enjoy taking kids away from their mothers. This judge gave my son’s father custody after he failed 2 drug tests that were court ordered and he is a convicted felon. All because he had a better lawyer that knows the judge. The decision was made before I even went to court. I did not get a fair trial and I lost my son just because I had moved out of state and had to move back. My son’s father denied me of many visitations but I still have to pay him child support. I have lost my son all thanks to this judge. Please vote someone else in before more children are taken from their mothers for no good reason.

  41. Victor rojas said,

    January 13, 2014 at 8:12 pm

    My name is victor rojas , me and my daughter are victims of this evil women Bonnie hellums . On 2002 I went to court just for a costedy arrangement . My ex had a really good lawyer mine not so good . My ex lied her eyes out I out me that I was a drunk , I did drugs , I beat her , I tryed to kill my daughter which was two years old at the time . And judge Bonnie hellums belived everything she said , and my ex had abselutly no proof or records of these thing she said happend . But I belive because I’m of Mexican descend and my ex is white the judge belived her . So after all that the Judge sent me to a drug and alchole assesment center and nothing negative came out . Then I did a year at safe program they gave me good reviews , a hair drug test came back negative for drugs . Sent me to her clinical sycoligist he said I had no anger issues and there was nothing wrong with me . I was thrown in jail because I was like three months late on child support . But I did pay my ex every late payment when she took me to court . The story gose on and on . I fought her for about 8 years and I still have not seen my child . I don’t understand how some horrible person can sit there and deside to ruin someone’s life and nothing can be done about it . At least I know when she dies she will be judged for everything she did to us .

  42. Attorney CS said,

    January 18, 2014 at 9:00 am

    I am an attorney and uncovered wide spread corruption. It is not just in the family law courts, it is in all of the courts. It involves the clerks, the lawyers, the DA’s, and more. It is not a friendship deal, it is all financial (payoffs). It is a system of criminal lawyers and judges, who have a criminal system to defraud unsuspecting persons. They love when the unsuspecting party does not know what is going on. They all put on a show. And even the lawyer for the unsuspecting victim, determined at the start of the case, knows what us going on. The only one who does not know is the litigant with the bad label. It is sick and evil. But it is not only family law. They will target a business to take over, a person with money to steal from and they come from all sides. They use the same scams over and over and the same tricks over and over. I have been fighting the corruption for years and I think I will publish a book with the top 100 tricks they all use to cheat. Then, they use the state bar of Texas to attack the lawyers who speak out, which is what I am going through. It is a constant fight. The system is very sick and almost, if not, hopeless. A lot of arrests and a lot of changes need to take place to change this corrupt system before we fall like Rome. It is just as bad here as any third world country, and if you do not believe it, that is because you do not see it.

  43. Attorney CS said,

    January 18, 2014 at 9:06 am

    This in on the FBI’s website and this is what is going on all over the place. If you want to know what is happening, read this.

    “Public Corruption: Courtroom for Sale Judge Gets Jail Time in Racketeering Case”

     

  44. Frank Bustoz said,

    February 17, 2014 at 8:08 pm

    In Austin….dealing with my ex’s unethical dirty scoundral of a lawyer…he and her are hell bent on minimizing my time with my son. Anyone with any advice or recommendations ….I appreciate any help!!?? I currently have a SAPCR final Order…she violated it for six months under the advice and urging of her attorney….I need to know how to file sanctions on opposing counsel…MOtion to Disqualify…as well a a civil suit if this is possible ….

  45. Frank Bustoz said,

    February 17, 2014 at 8:10 pm

    Hello, In Austin….dealing with my ex’s unethical dirty scoundral of a lawyer…he and her are hell bent on minimizing my time with my son. Anyone with any advice or recommendations ….I appreciate any help!!?? I currently have a SAPCR final Order…she violated it for six months under the advice and urging of her attorney….I need to know how to file sanctions on opposing counsel…MOtion to Disqualify…as well a a civil suit if this is possible ….

  46. Richard Letty said,

    September 18, 2014 at 4:08 pm

    Bonnie Crane Hellums has breached her judiciary responsibilities as judge in the 247th District Court by engaging in such practices as tampering with transcripts, engaging in exparte communications with opposing counsel, and extending legally inconsistent rulings for the benefit of favored attorneys. We, the citizens of Texas, petition the State of Texas to deny Judge Hellums any and all benefits that may accrue to her from the State of Texas and Harris County.

    Without you, the citizens of Harris County, justice cannot be served for the children and families who have suffered because of Judge Hellums’ alleged bias and violations of law. Until now, the stories and voices of those affected have not been heard. Today, a chance for change is possible and we all have a voice that can be heard across the world-wide web. Sign the petition at http://www.nomorehellums.org for “No More HELLums” and justice for our children.

  47. Priscella said,

    December 30, 2014 at 12:50 pm

    I am also a victim of court 247. my kids were forced to live with their dad one year ago. It broke me emotionally and my children too. I’m beginning to feel strong again and would like to tell my story and I’m seeking people who will be willing to help me. My children are 10 and 7. They were 7 and 5 when our world’s were thrown into a tornado. They cry and wish so much to have their old lives back. I’m not even sure if that is possible. But I am willing to at least try. I love my children and I would never give up on them.

  48. Sara said,

    February 2, 2015 at 6:23 am

    can a RIGHTEOUS attorney within a state AS BIG AS TEXAS simply STEP UP ?

    this is UNREAL that no one can get a word in edgewise inside these kangaroo courts and OUR FAMILIES ARE DESTROYED.

    and folks ? this ALSO APPLIES to the subhumans within the probate /guardianship AND THEY ARE CPS ON STEROIDS.
    Instead of your under age 18 children disappeared, our adult aged DISABLED and elderly ARE DISAPPEARED.
    SOME GET LUCKY and PAY THOUSANDS to make their own disabled adults WARD OF THESE COURTS as that’s ALL A GUARDIANSHIP DOES, it makes THEM WARDS OF THE COURT and goolygeeeez,THEY THEN ALLOW YOU TO POSSESS THE WARD….bbbbut as THEIR WARD and you all are on a lifetime of PROBATION reporting to the COURT.
    plus in MOST CASES there are no charges or crimes or even APS involved….just THEIR SACRED WORD against YOUR FACTUAL TRUTHS.
    sound familiar ? same script different stage and actors.

    why is there NO ONE to take authentic, VERIFIED CASES regarding JUDICIAL ABUSE = constitutional violations ?

    WE need to UNITE AND FIGHT NONSTOP and sue them out of business.

  49. Camilla said,

    February 7, 2015 at 6:45 am

    Corpus Christi – is there any accountability in family law court for arrogant spouses who break all temporary orders or for attorneys who seem to turn a blind eye to the needs of their own client? While I won’t claim to have been the best spouse, I entered into the legal process of divorce with respect and intention to allow the law to settle our differences but I am the only party involved who is. What recourse do I have if my spouse closed over 200 thousand dollars worth of accounts, made criminal accusations to an employer, gave my dog away, changed the locks on our home, refused to give me the paycheck my employer mailed to said home and refused to show at mediation? My paid in full attorney hasn’t answered my questions and because of the in access to my own money, I can’t hire another!
    Suggestions? (thank you)

  50. Michael said,

    February 18, 2015 at 4:47 pm

    It was just brought to my attention that an attorney that is appointed as an amicus out of this court is married to a convicted child sex offender with a long history for drugs. The attorney is Shannon Boudreaux and she is married to a guy names Richard David Crow. I can’t believe these judges would appoint someone as an amicus for the children who is married to a person convicted of a sexual offense against a child.

    http://houstonfamilylawcorruption.com/blog/2011/02/15/welcome-to-my-blog/

http://lists101.his.com/pipermail/smartmarriages/2000-September/000327.html


https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/jail4judges/search/messages?advance=true&am=CONTAINS&at=email:jail4judges@&dm=IS_ANY&fs=false&count=10
  • ——– Original Message ——– Subject: Richard Fine Radio Interview 5/1/2015 7:00 pm PDT Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 19:09:14 -0700 From: Richard Fine
    To: VICTORYUSA@^$1
    CC: Richard Fine
    Dear Ron: Would you please be so kind as to distribute this. It is the start of our Campaign to end judicial corruption and accomplish judicial reform with the 2016 elections.
    Regards, Richard The…
    Victory USA Apr 30
  • Matthew 24:9 “Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake.” ‘Killing Jews Is Worship’ Posters Will Soon Appear on NYC Subways and Buses 23 Apr 2015 NYC by Michael E. Miller in Share New Yorkers are used to aggressive advertising. Banners for breast implants. Billboards for condoms. But a federal…
    Victory USA Apr 23
  • ——– Original Message ——– Subject: ENGENEERED drought catastrophe, watch… Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 00:21:09 -0400 From: Lea2319@^$1 DROUGHT IS ALL MAN MADE FOLKS… WATCH AND LEARN THE TRUTH … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsYG5emdZp8&feature=youtu.be Government playing God with the weather! Engineered Drought Catastrophe, Target California Dane Wigington
    Victory USA Apr 13
  • ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject: Fwd: HOW MOSES GOT THE 10 COMMANDMENTS …………..
    Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 21:43:26 -0500
    From: emeliebird@^$1
    To: renzur@^$2 , VictoryUSA@^$3 , tigres6971@^$4
    —–Original Message—–
    From: Danielle Avidan
    To: sylfree ; Julianne Nameth ; PIERRE BOUCHARA ; Brenda Green
    Sent: Mon, Feb 9, 2015 3:26 pm
    Subject: Fw: Fwd: HOW MOSES GOT…
    Victory USA Feb 15
  • ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject: Deception and Corruption — The Wake-up Herald
    Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 16:36:18 -0500
    From: Herbap@^$1
    To: herbap@^$2 The Wake-up Herald And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off…
    Victory USA Nov 29, 2014
  • Interesting. The people’s votes are being declared unconstitutional by Federal Judges. We have now judges who are taking over the voting process against the people. Ron Branson
    ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject: Google Alert – judge
    Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 07:14:23 +0000
    From: Google Alerts
    To: victoryusa@^$1 judge As-it-happens update ⋅
    November 27, 2014 NEWS ABC News…
    Victory USA Nov 28, 2014
  • ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject:
    FW: This will leave you feeling grateful for these kinds of folksTHE CANDY BOMBER……. THIS IS WONDERFUL. A must see.
    Resent-
    Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2014 19:26:45 -0800 Resent-From: beholdtheman@^$1 Resent-To: VictoryUSA@^$2
    Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2014 19:26:36 -0800
    From: Harold Ervin
    To: Harold Ervin Subject: This will leave you feeling…
    Victory USA Nov 26, 2014
  • ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject: Another judicial corruption fighter is facing the hand of the corrupt
    Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 22:44:17 +0000 (UTC)
    From: cruz gomez
    Reply-To: cruz gomez
    To: Victory USA Greetings Ron, I am sharing this information with you and your participants which I received a while ago. Two days ago I received a message from an unverifiable source…
    Victory USA Nov 20, 2014
  • What the ‘Gay Marriage’ Debate is Really About Written by J. Matt Barber on Monday, 17 November 2014. Posted in Opinion , J. Matt Barber The common law, natural law and reality itself preclude any man, any court, any government, even state governments, from presuming to redefine the institution of marriage to exclude the necessary element of binary male-female complementarity. It…
    Victory USA Nov 18, 2014
  • …Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 18:53:30 +0100
    From: Jim Krage
    To: Victory USA
    Hi Ron:
    I’ve been unable to view your website
    http://www.jail4judges.org/ Is it down? If not, the response times are so slow that I can’t see it.
    Jim Krage
    Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 at 3:19…
    Victory USA Nov 5, 2014
  • ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject: Lesbian Mayor–Turn In Sermons Or JAIL!
    Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:05:23 -0400
    From: Pastor D. A. Waite
    Reply-To: bft@^$1 To: victoryusa@^$2 SENDING #1 Houston’s Homosexual Mayor Demanding Pastors Submit Sermons For Review After a widely opposed ‘non-discrimination ordinance’, Houston’s first openly homosexual mayor Annise Parker…
    Victory USA 15 Oct, 2014
  • ISIS to Attack US with Ebola. Jihadists ‘to Send Infected Militants’ to America to Spread Disease Oct 05, 2014 04:26 am By Gopi Chandra Kharel If latest reports are to be believed, the Islamic State militants might be conspiring to deliberately infect jihadists with the deadly Ebola virus and send them to America in order to spread the disease in the US. ISIS to Attack US with…
    Victory USA 05 Oct, 2014
  • Thank you, Elaine. From time to time I find myself breaking up in tears. At the funeral in Riverside, I got up and spoke, and I could hardly talk due to the overflow of tears. But I know Barbie is in heaven and no loner suffering the pain of the cancer. He two daughters today left for their homes in Colorado and Virginia. I took them each to their respective airports. Thank you so…
    Victory USA 27 Sep, 2014
  • Attached hereto is photos of Barbie Branson’s grave site. Her tombstone will be placed in place approximately four weeks from now. Her grave is located in Riverside National Cemetery where, should the Lord terry, my remains shall also be placed. I am now going through a time of grieving, not because I sorrow with no hope, but because I miss Barbie so much after 38 years with her…
    Victory USA 26 Sep, 2014
  • ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject: Death in the reform family
    Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 19:50:34 -0700 Resent-From: beholdtheman@^$1
    Resent-To: VictoryUSA@^$2
    Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 19:50:33 -0700
    From: Gary Zerman
    To: lawsters@^$3 It is with a heavy heart and my condolences that I inform you that Ron Branson called me earlier this evening and informed me that his…
    Victory USA 19 Sep, 2014
  • Judicial Reform ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject: Judicial reform
    Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 16:41:52 -0600
    From: Clean Up the Courts
    To: VictoryUSA@^$1 Ron, I’m a lawyer who has practiced for 20 years in Colorado. I have drafted a couple of initiatives that I am trying to get on the Colorado ballot. One of the initiatives is crafted to remove the conflict of interest in the…
    Victory USA 24 Aug, 2014
  • ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject: Check out Will the IRS Monitor Sermons?
    Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 13:14:17 -0400 (EDT)
    From: Herbap@^$1
    To: herbap@^$2 Will the IRS Monitor Sermons?
    Written by Gary North on August 18, 2014
    This report appeared on the WND site. Imagine uttering the words “pro-life” in your church and finding yourself targeted by an investigation from…
    Victory USA 21 Aug, 2014
  • ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject: From Don Bird – The Ninth Circuit Reply from Don Bird
    Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 15:06:25 -0700
    From:
    To: Ron Branson copy FILED jUN 11 2014 Molly c. dwyer clerk u.s. court of appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DONALD M. BIRD No. 14-15449 Plaintiff – Appellant, D.C. No. 2:13-cv-02549-MCE-CKD v. Eastern District of…
    Victory USA 10 Aug, 2014
  • …judges are totally free to do whatever they wish with complete immunity, and they cannot be held liable to anyone. This is what JAIL4Judges is all about, that is, exposing the truth about judges. Unfortunately, this a hard pill for the public to swallow as few understand…
    Victory USA 02 Aug, 2014
  • Epidemic of California Judge$ On The Take! ——– Original Message ——– Subject: Stop County Bribes to California Judges Now: Here’s How! Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 23:06:26 +0000 From: richardfine@^$1 To: VictoryUSA@^$2 , richardfine@^$3 Dear Ron: We have just a few days to stop the county supervisors from “bribing” California judges for another year through payments in the…
    Victory USA 01 Jul, 2014
  • ——– Original Message ——– Subject: Vote to End Judical Corruption on June 3 Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 19:22:41 +0000 From: richardfine@^$1 To: VictoryUSA@^$2 , richardfine@^$3 Dear Ron: Please distribute the following press release from the Campaign for Judicial Integrity. This the voters’ opportunity to put candidates into the November 4, election who signed the CFJI Pledge…
    Victory USA 02 Jun, 2014
  • …this nation with the goal of creating a big screen movie to be displayed in the theaters for all to see. Yes, even I, the National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief, am a part of this movie. But everyone has been asking, “Whatever happened to Bill Windsor and the forthcoming…
    Victory USA 20 May, 2014
  • …overthrow governments, but we dare not use “Spam,” so called, to overthrow governments. That is unethical, and is not nice. Hence, the JAIL4judges website was brought down from promoting the People’s absolute inherent right within the Initiative Process. This is why the People…
    Victory USA 09 May, 2014
  • …term future of same-sex marriage in Tennessee. — It’s time People hold Judges accountable to Special Grand Juries, http://www.jail4judges.org . This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active…
    Victory USA 17 Mar, 2014
  • HAVE AN EXIT PLAN By Chuck Baldwin February 13, 2014 NewsWithViews.com Matt Drudge, owner and publisher of the “Drudge Report,” recently tweeted a cryptic warning to his readers, “Have an exit plan.” Here is how Susan Duclos reported the story in BeforeItsNews.com: “The economic indicators are bad, markets, the weakening dollar, banks preventing large withdrawals, news…
    Victory USA 06 Mar, 2014
  • snowden-bombshell-seems-he-downloaded-entire-roster-of-u-s-government-all-names-home-addresses-and-other-personal-info-of-all-officials-and-govt-employees-including-law-enforcement-pl/ Snowden Bombshell:
    Seems he downloaded entire roster of U.S. government – all names, home addresses and other personal info of **all** officials and gov…
    Victory USA 25 Feb, 2014
  • …his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall … be tormented with fire and brimstone…” Rev. 14:9, 10. KJV Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1
    This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus…
    Victory USA 20 Jan, 2014
  • Federal Judge Forces All Boys School Wrestling Team To Permit Girl To Join School argues that there are psychological, physical and moral risks for girls wrestling boys, however, Federal Judge Mathew Brann found that the school failed to present expert testimony or give any examples that support their claim that girls are fundamentally different from boys. This case makes us…
    Victory USA 13 Jan, 2014
  • Defining Crimes – Well, Sort Of! From Robert Striffler – bob_striffler@^$1 Currently, the prevailing case law is that an infraction is not a “crime” (well, sort of, and some rulings are now making that fuzzy), so, of course there would be a need for reasonable suspicion to detain for investigative purposes for an infraction. Reasonable Suspicion has been defined as articulable and…
    Victory USA 10 Jan, 2014
  • Common Law Grand Juries – Is There Such An Animal? By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief January 6, 2014 Yesterday I was contacted by an acquaintance whom I…fable, which is “JUDGES CAN DO NO WRONG!” Out of this background has arisen the concept of JAIL4Judges, which means Judicial Accountability Initiative Law for Judges by the proposal of the…
    Victory USA 06 Jan, 2014
  • …corrupt system. For those not familiar with my presentations on the judicial system, and with my being the author and founder of the JAIL4Judges organization, I direct you to http://www.jail4judges.org/State_Chapters/ca/CA_Initiative.html . As soon as I hear someone contacting…
    Victory USA 30 Dec, 2013
  • The U.S. Constitution vs. The Federal Judiciary By Ron Branson, National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief 12/29/2013 The U.S. Constitution claims to be the supreme law of the land, and all officials thereunder shall…
    Victory USA 29 Dec, 2013
  • …records about the program this year. Read Pauley’s full ruling here . Search And Seizure And The NSA By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief 12/24/2013 One of the more controversial issues of the day is that regarding the National Security Agency (N…
    Victory USA 27 Dec, 2013
  • …discuss with me. Allow me to introduce myself. I am Ron Branson, the Commander-In-Chief of JAIL4Judgesin America. We are not a business, but seeking to recover this country to the U.S. Constitution…Ronald Branson, Member, California 38th Assembly District Republican Central Committee. www.jail4judges.org This email is free from viruses and malware because avast…
    Victory USA 27 Dec, 2013
  • Search And Seizure And The NSA By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief 12/24/2013 One of the more controversial issues of the day is that regarding the National Security Agency (N…
    Victory USA 24 Dec, 2013
  • …Deputies being arrested and charged with corruption. Year after year, we find these very same taking place. Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12/09/21835238-nearly-20-la-sheriffs-deputies-charged-in-corruption&#8230;
    Victory USA 11 Dec, 2013
  • http://www.conservativeinfidel.com/obama/obama-administration-admits-126000-enrollments-obamacare-real/ Obama Administration Admits Over 126,000 Enrollments In Obamacare Not Real! December 6th, 2013 The Free Patriot by Brandon Walker The Obama Administration is now having to admit that over 126,000 enrollments into the Obamacare system are not real. From fake friends on Twitter…
    Victory USA 07 Dec, 2013
  • Judge Sues Police For Excessive Force By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1 It is no secret that wrongful police action is generally covered up by judges. But what makes…
    Victory USA 25 Nov, 2013
  • ——– Original Message ——– Subject: Re: Never trust cops …… Advise, please Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2013 14:07:00 -0800 (PST) From: Abra Summers Reply-To: Abra Summers To: Victory USA Ron, This message you sent that relates your experience with the courts and judges is a living nightmare. I know it is true, because I know you, and as one of your many friends who admire and…
    Victory USA 09 Nov, 2013
  • AdChoices

    This no-fee card is now offering a $200 signup bonus for spending just $500 in 3 months. Pocket an easy $200 before this offer is gone.

    NextAdvisor.com Sponsored

  • America Enraging Its Allies By NSA Snooping In On Leader’s Private Conversations It has come to the light of the leaders of our allies that NSA is spying on their private conversations, which has expressed outraged in our curren news. Now, the NSA is experiencing a shut down of their site. NSA calims it is not under attack, but just updating their software. Such outrage is…
    Victory USA 26 Oct, 2013
  • Judges Behind Expediting A Sodomite America By Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 As we know, that God judged Sodom and Gomorrah for their sins against God in practicing homosexuality during the days of Abraham. Such incident was God’s example of the coming judgment upon America, and all other nations who forget God! Psalms 9:17 clearly states, “The wicked shall be turned into hell, and…
    Victory USA 20 Oct, 2013
  • http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/default.aspx?pageid=438&n=insurance-firms-us-treasury-facing-charges-from-diaspora-armenians-2011-03-20 US Federal Reserve Bank facing charges from diaspora Armenians ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News | 3/20/2011 12:00:00 AM | VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU Jewelry and gold confiscated from Armenian houses during the turmoil in the Ottoman Empire in 1915…
    Ron Branson 19 Sep, 2013
  • Alert: California poised to ban lead ammo with help from the Humane Society of the United States http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/11/alert-california-poised-to-ban-lead-ammo-with-help-from-the-humane-society-of-the-united-states/#ixzz2ehrOKzOy The Daily Caller 09/11/2013 By Larry Keane, National Shooting Sports Foundation The recent opinion piece in the San Diego Union Tribune…
    Ron Branson 15 Sep, 2013
  • …least places the cross-hairs toward the right Branch of government. You are suggesting that JAIL4Judgesjump in behind the New York Time’s effort to “reverse surveillance” public officers, their…for committing such unpardonable sin. So what I propose, Dr. Cordero, is that rather than JAIL4Judges getting behind the New York Times, we should get the New York Times behind JAIL4Judges in…
    Ron Branson 07 Sep, 2013
  • …Criminals area. Its all laid out for us. Now comes the hard part. No, it is not the available of a remedy as set forth in http://www.jail4judges.org/State_Chapters/ca/CA_Initiative.html , but our love for Federal Reserve Notes. No one wants to depart with those worthless…
    Ron Branson 29 Aug, 2013
  • Why Work For a Living When You Can Receive More From Welfare? Michael Bastasch of The Daily Caller brings to our attention the above question regarding the state of the American economy. He points out that in 35 of our 50 states, welfare will pay you more than your minimum wage job. Thus, the best economic advice is you can get is to quite your job and go on welfare! Let the fools…
    Ron Branson 22 Aug, 2013
  • America NoLonger Has a Functioning Judicial System July 22, 2013
    The Separation of Powers Which Define Our Democracy Have Been Destroyed The Department of Justice told a federal court this week that the NSA’s spying “cannot be challenged in a court of law” . (This is especially…
    Ron Branson
    20 Aug, 2013
    Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government.
    When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed.
    The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition…
    Ron Branson
    04 Aug, 2013
  • Imagine a World With No Privacy By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief
    There are two types of privacy in this world – i.e., “Close the bathroom door, please, I need privacy!” and…
    Ron Branson
    02 Aug, 2013
  • Cash For Congressional Votes! By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief Its official. Congress has now authorized Fourth Amendment violations of your right to privacy by voting by…
    Ron Branson 30 Jul, 2013
  • Cops Ordered to Meet Quotas On Arrests and Tickets * * * http://reason.com/reasontv/2013/07/24/how-quotas-pervert-police-priorities-fir Cop Fired for Speaking Out Against Ticket and Arrest Quotas Tracy Oppenheimer | July 24, 2013 Auburn, Alabama is home to sprawling plains, Auburn University, and a troubling police force. After the arrival of a new police chief in 2010, the…
    Ron Branson 25 Jul, 2013
  • http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/coming-soon-americas-own-islamic-no-go-zones/ WND EXCLUSIVE Coming soon: America’s own Islamic ‘no-go’ zones Expert on terror training camps says expansion plans in works By Bob Unruh Wednesday, July 24, 2013 Coming soon to dozens of locations across the United States: America’s own “no-go” zones where Muslims install their own courts, government…
    Ron Branson 25 Jul, 2013
  • Top Government Officials Flea U.S. As News Develops of U.S. Spying On Its Own Citizens High government officials are being declared “Enemies Of The State” because they dared to expose insider information as to what was taking place within the NSA to the Congressional House Judiciary Committee who is investigating this issue. This act has caused the Obama Administration to charge…
    Ron Branson 20 Jul, 2013
  • AdChoices

    See What Leading Beverly Hills Plastic Surgeon Dr. John Layke Recommends to Lift And Firm Skin Without Surgery.

    Beverly Hills MD Sponsored

  • …democrat.com/articles/court-126493-supreme-california.html#ixzz2ZVInmnfP Re: Resolving The Court’s Conflict By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief It has been pointed out that the decision of the Supreme Court cannot possible stand neither according to law…
    Ron Branson 19 Jul, 2013
  • Big Brother’s (NSA) Espionage Of All Decision-Makers Big Brother’s (NSA) espionage into the private lives of Military Generals, Congressmen, Senators, and U.S. Supreme Court Justices, as well as all private and personal conversations via telephone, emails and text messages, allows them to master U.S.A. Through its accumulation of knowledge, it can now totally control America in…
    Ron Branson 18 Jul, 2013
  • Texas Judge Commits Suicide By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief There are many cases of government officials committing suicide of which neither government nor the news media…
    Ron Branson 17 Jul, 2013
  • Cops Fear Bounty On Their Heads * * *
    New Indiana Law Allows Citizens to Shoot Police Officers
    By Michael Allen , Tue, June 12, 2012
    In Indiana, police officers are upset over a new law allowing residents to use deadly force against public servants, including law enforcement officers…
    Ron Branson
    10 Jul, 2013
  • * * * Vudo Economics * * * By Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 July 1, 2013
    We are in a stage where governments think they can alter and revise natural laws. Natural laws are those laws which exist whether we like them or not. These laws are instituted by God Himself. They are unalterable by kings, potentates, magistrates and legislatures. Such inalienable laws are recognized in our…
    Ron Branson 01 Jul, 2013
  • Michele Bachmann:
    DOMA, Propositon 8 Rulings Attacked Our Constitution The Huffington Post | By Mollie Reilly
    Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., joins House Republicans to speak during a news conference in opposition to the Supreme Court’s Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) decision on Wednesday, June 26, 2013.
    (Photo By Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call) Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) railed…
    Ron Branson
    29 Jun, 2013
  • Taking the Snowden Prosecution A Step Further By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief Snowden has exposed the fact that the government is snooping into the personal communications of all Americans…
    Ron Branson
    25 Jun, 2013
  • “They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. ” – Benjamin Franklin, 1775
    Obama contends that eavesdropping upon every American’s emails and telephone communications, is a worthy price to pay in the loss of liberty in order to keep us safe.
    But the Constitutional premise is that it is not the job of government to keep…
    Ron Branson
    23 Jun, 2013
  • We Don’t Need No Stinking Warrant To Spy On You!
    By Ron Branson
    National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief
    Either we have a Constitution, or we do not. Either the Constitution…then that may be used to control your life. This is precisely the reason why we must have JAIL4judges, institution within this Land per http://www.jail4judges.org/State_Chapters/dc/DC_initiative...
    Ron Branson 17 Jun, 2013
  • …Affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1 * * * http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/obama-administration-nsa-verizon-records
    The…
    Ron Branson 13 Jun, 2013
  • …not in any forum of government. It is in the People’s Grand Jury, but I cannot get this through the People’s heads. I wrote the JAIL4judges provision in April of 1995, http://www.jail4judges.org/State_Chapters/ca/CA_Initiative.html but the People just do not understand…
    Ron Branson
    08 Jun, 2013
  • Law? Law? What Is The Law?
    By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief
    Ron, I just saw the news on CNN’s bottom-line news strip that cops CAN now take your DNA if you are arrested…
    Ron Branson
    04 Jun, 2013
  • …should be a constitutionally protected right that must be adopted universally by the Boy Scouts of America. Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1 * * * http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/05/23/boy-scouts-approve-plan-to-accept-openly-gay-members&#8230;
    Ron Branson 24 May, 2013
  • …report gives new meaning to the words of the song, “And we’ll all be gay when Johnnie comes marching home.” Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1 * * * http://watchdogwire.com/florida/2013/05/15/shock-report-10700-men-raped-in-the-us-military&#8230;
    Ron Branson 20 May, 2013
  • Judge Covers For Police, Throws Out Grand Jury Indictment By Ron Branson National JAIL4JudgesCommander-In-Chief Herein is a fatal flaw by omission within our Constitution, and…restore the power of the Grand Juries which our Founding Fathers originally intended by JAIL4Judges, and is found at http://www.jail4judges.org/State_Chapters/ca/CA_Initiative.html…
    Ron Branson 16 May, 2013
  • …the Google Inc. legal department has already done. To this day, I never have seen a better attempt at an answer for the US, than Jail4Judges, its attempt to restore an institution of accusation where common citizens themselves are in charge. You have a worthy discussion…
    Ron Branson 10 May, 2013
  • Re: Judge’s Parking and Traffic Tickets By Ron Branson Nat’l JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief There is but one profession in which we theoretically arise at the sound…comes to being pulled over? As those reading my words should know, I am the author of the JAIL4Judges Initiative which is sought to become part of various State’s Constitutions. Should JAIL4Judge…
    Ron Branson 09 May, 2013
  • Dr. Cordero’s Critique of JAIL4Judges Critiqued By Dr. Les Sachs ——– Original Message ——– Subject: Why ICIJ – Cordero media strategy…lockdown and refuse to cover the story as Googl. Inc. gets convicted here in Europe. And you know how Jail4Judges itself has been greatly harmed by internet sabotage and attacks, in the efforts to prevent its message…
    Ron Branson 07 May, 2013
  • …Yes, I said, “YOU!” It is by the “David v. Goliath” method. “YOU” are the “David.” Little ole you, through the establishment of JAIL4Judges, can take on, for instance, the mega media in court seeking redress of grievances in court against “X”. (“X” herein shall be Viacom…
    Ron Branson 30 Apr, 2013
  • Message from Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Founder VictoryUSA@^$1 The below link is a very important link that everyone should execute when they have the…to the creation of Independent Citizen Special Grand Juries throughout this country as presented at: http://jail4judges.org/State_Chapters/ca/CA_Initiative.html http://vimeo.com/63749370 Enjoy t he movie
    Ron Branson 29 Apr, 2013
  • If This Is Not Domestic Terrorism, W hat Is? Volumes of tanks and numerous men arrive armed with assault weapons wearing military regalia, carrying out forbidden military action in the streets of Watertown, Massachusetts, going house to house without a search warrant, and in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, “The right of the people to be secure in their…
    Ron Branson 25 Apr, 2013
  • …jobs, and thus we will reduce homelessness, and thus we will start the recovery of freedom, and thus ……! Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1 http://news.yahoo.com/los-angeles-settles-women-fired-manhunt-201857475.html Los Angeles settles…
    Ron Branson 24 Apr, 2013
  • The Federal Judicial Accountability and Integrity Legislation (a) Preamble. The House of Representatives and Senate Assembled find that an inordinate and ever-growing number of complaints of willful misconduct have been lodged with Congress involving federal judges across this nation; that the current Title 28 U.S.C. §372(c) (Judicial Misconduct and Disability Act) is in many…
    Ron Branson 20 Apr, 2013
  • …specially declared.” (Georgia Code, Section 45-3-10) This is just one example why we must passJAIL4Judges. http://ga.jail4judges.org/GA_initiative.html Enforcing The Law, But Violating The Constitution…the United States. ” The full provisions of J.A.I.L. are provided for you here, http://www.jail4judges.org . Under the J.A.I.L. Provisions who determines if any judge has deliberately violated…
    Ron Branson 10 Apr, 2013
  • AdChoices

    This new site makes it easy for anyone to search through someone’s Past online. Simply type in a name and select a state to start learning the Truth!

    InstantCheckmate Sponsored

  • …what is the point? My point is that the People will regain the plan wording of the Second Amendment when they decide to adopt the JAIL4Judges provision enforcing the pure words of the Constitution. Paragraph 2 of the California Judicial Accountability Initiative Law specifies…
    Ron Branson 08 Apr, 2013
  • …question is, when are the People going to wake up to the fact that they are running their heads into a brick wall without instituting JAIL4Judges through this available remedy. Even the U.S. Crimi nal Statutes of Title 18, Sec. 241 and 242 are us eless and impotent to the…
    Ron Branson 06 Apr, 2013
  • Do You Have An Answer? How do I expose Judicial Corruption in a current California case (Independant Action in Equity to secure relief from a Void Judgment of conviction on grounds of fraud upon the court amounting to “Extrinsic Fraud”). The conviction is a misdemeanor DUI case in which the California Dept. Of Motor Vehicles issued an Order of Set Aside. The Alameda County…
    Ron Branson 05 Apr, 2013
  • …to go after attorneys as our target. Early on within the J.A.I.L. Initiative, I contacted Congressman Ron Paul about sponsoring JAIL4Judges. I was contacted by a staff member expressing it is better that we focus more on attorneys. If we exercise discernment, we will…
    Ron Branson 03 Apr, 2013
  • …n to put an initiative on the ballot creating a special citizen friendly remedy to the now rampant judicial corruption, the “ Jail4Judges ” movement is now spreading like a fire in dry brush. In a campaign using e-mail and the internet, Jail4Judges is promoting a…
    Ron Branson 31 Mar, 2013
  • …ignore this ultimate power reserved only to us, and seek expensive inferior time-consuming political remedies. Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$3
    Ron Branson 28 Mar, 2013
  • Preparing for a Different Type of War Homeland Security Refuses to Answer! Marine Corp Four Star General James Amos tells his Marines to save ammo and prepare for a different kind of battle. As a Naval Aviator, Amos commanded the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003 and 2004. He served as the 31st Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps from July 3…
    Ron Branson 27 Mar, 2013
  • …power is inherent in the People….They have the right to alter or reform it when the public good my require.” Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1 http://www.jail4judges.org ——– Original Message ——– Mister Branson, I must add a personal…
    Ron Branson 27 Mar, 2013
  • To The Constitution Club: Federal Judicial Accountability & Integrity Legislation (a) Preamble. The House of Representatives and Senate Assembled find that an inordinate and ever-growing number of complaints of willful misconduct have been lodged with Congress involving federal judges across this nation; that the current Title 28 U.S.C. §372(c) (Judicial Misconduct and Disability…
    Ron Branson 26 Mar, 2013
  • EXCELLENT MESSAGE FROM A VIRTUAL PRESIDENT ——– Original Message ——– Subject: MESSAGE FROM A VIRTUAL PRESIDENT Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 22:59:55 -0800 From: Jack Peach Excellent message from a Virtual President that needs to get out about the value of the Constitution of the United States (particularly as it applies to the Second Amendment) A 9 min. clip. http://www.youtube&#8230;
    Ron Branson 02 Mar, 2013
  • …been my joy to respond to your very valid concern respecting our borders around America from the Word of God. Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$2 * * * ——– Original Message ——– Excellent, Ron. But I’m left with a question: How SHOULD…
    Ron Branson 28 Feb, 2013
  • …Constitution Give Em’ The Truth Anyway! By Ron Branson National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief On February 21st, I sent out a message…argument made by Henry Morgan of Florida that I should give upJAIL4Judges until after justice is obtained within the voting system…of the passage of judicial accountability as proposed by JAIL4Judges, and our opposition will spend unlimited funds to ditch the…
    Ron Branson 24 Feb, 2013
  • AdChoices

    Credit card companies are now offering 0% APR for 21 months for all purchases and balance transfers or 40k bonus miles ($400 bonus) and double miles.

    CompareCards.com Sponsored

  • …to explain, or make sense of; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EwIvy1GXRU J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org Declaration of Independence “…with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other…
    Ron Branson 10 Feb, 2013
  • …than two cops on the way. Ron Branson National J.A.I.L. 4 Judges Commander-In-Chief P.O. Box 207 North Hollywood, CA. 91603 www.jail4judges.org
    Ron Branson 07 Feb, 2013
  • Where Are We Now, And Where Are We Headed? Watch 8 min. video http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ywzYmWqMvTk#!
    Ron Branson 01 Feb, 2013
  • …www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kzT6X3_Bg9o#! – Ron Branson J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org Declaration of Independence “…with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other…
    Ron Branson 25 Jan, 2013
  • …new Guards for their future security. ” Declaration of Independence * * * J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org Declaration of Independence “…with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other…
    Ron Branson 16 Jan, 2013
  • Our Founding Fathers On Gun Control It was Thomas Jefferson who said, “Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not.” We are told that the People in L.A. are standing in line to give up their guns to the government. However, let it be known that it is documented that the government has staged fake Drug Busts before for media consumption. In other…
    Ron Branson 28 Dec, 2012
  • …2011/04/she-survived-hitler-and-wants-to-warn-america.html#ixzz2Fzr5YTU1 J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org Declaration of Independence “…with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other…
    Ron Branson 26 Dec, 2012
  • …This whole thing is getting kind of comical.” David Chanen • 612-673-4465 J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org Declaration of Independence “…with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other…
    Ron Branson 24 Dec, 2012
  • http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/12/sc-bill-takes-aim-to-arm-public-school-employees-with-guns/ December 21, 2012 by Tim Brown SC Bill Takes Aim To Arm Public School Employees With Guns Years ago Texas began arming its teachers. Now more states are seeing it as a viable, and I might add, rational and logical option to letting kids and teachers simply be herded up and made victims of…
    Ron Branson 23 Dec, 2012
  • Hypocrisy of Gun Control Advocate Dianne Feinstein By Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 According to the testimony of U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, out of fear for her life, she carries a concealed weapon, and expresses a willingness to take down anyone who threatens her. Thus, relative to the Newtown, Ct. shooting scene, had Dianne been present within that school at the time, she would…
    Ron Branson 21 Dec, 2012
  • …kind and loving, and reason with armed criminals while they are blowing away innocent citizens. Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org
    Ron Branson 16 Dec, 2012
  • The Gold In Them Thare Hills Turned Out To Be Fool’s Gold As we all know, Governor Brown and the State of California was seeing dollar signs as a result of convincing the People to vote a tax increase in Prop 30. The California Teachers’ Association (CTA) trumpeted: “California students and working families won a clear victory today as voters clearly demonstrated their…
    Ron Branson 09 Dec, 2012
  • Approaching The Fiscal Cliff As we all know, Congress is wrestling with the oncoming January 1, 2013 fiscal cliff. The question, supposedly, on their table is whether they should raise the income tax level on the rich. While we all watch the debate between two sides is that the real financial debt we face is not even on the table. Even should Congress resolve the January 1, 2013…
    Ron Branson 28 Nov, 2012
  • Debt Without Consequences What happens when society no longer considers that debt has any meaning? After all, debt is only figure with a number of zeros behind it. Right? Does it really matter whether American’s owe a figure with fifteen zeros behind it, or twenty-one zeros? U.S. Treasurer Secretary Timothy Geithner thinks not. He said that Congress should just stop placing legal…
    Ron Branson 24 Nov, 2012
  • And You Thought You Had Seen It All Regarding Government Corruption You thought you had seen all the documentation, films, and had heard a total exhaustive presentation on September 11, 2001. That is what I thought too, but I was wrong. Below is the presentation of Susan Lindauer who worked as an insider for the CIA. Most everything you have heard has been post 911, (after the…
    Ron Branson 19 Nov, 2012
  • Counting The Cost To Stand For Freedom By Ron Branson Dear Brian Cregger: I wish to thank you for delving into an important issue within J.A.I.L., i.e., its enforcement. You suggest that an enforcement order should come from the Special Grand Jury itself. If you mean an official enforcement body such as the Special Grand Jury has their own Special Prosecutors, and their own Legal…
    Ron Branson 17 Nov, 2012
  • …Party, or and effort to reform the existing one. I wish to discuss matter. As the author of JAIL4judges, I am known for coming up with unique suggestions and answers. Obviously, I am here bias…what I am proposing? Ron Branson National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1 www.JAIL4Judges.Org P.O. Box 207 North Hollywood, CA. 91603 PS – Should you need a reference, please contact…
    Ron Branson 16 Nov, 2012
  • …government guaranteed to us by Article IV, Sec. 4 of the United States Constitution. There can be no short cuts! Perhaps should JAIL4judges successfully becomes an Amendment to one of our state’s Constitutions, a challenge can be leveled by the People to reverse every…
    Ron Branson 15 Nov, 2012
  • …Time When We Must Just Shoot The Bastards by Ron Branson John Kotmair, than you for writing me about enforcement. Early on within JAIL4Judges I sought out knowledgeable souls familiar with law to act as “devil’s advocates.” I did not want these People to praise the work…
    Ron Branson 14 Nov, 2012
  • Five Thousand Years Ago Five thousand years ago, Moses said to the children of Israel, “Pick up your shovels, mount your asses and camels, and I will lead You to the Promised Land.” Nearly 75 years ago, (when Welfare was introduced) Roosevelt said, “Lay down your shovels, sit on your asses, and light up a Camel, this is the Promised Land.” Today, Congress has stolen our shovels…
    Ron Branson 14 Nov, 2012
  • Strike Zero – You’re Out! By Ron Branson Scott Huminski, it appears that the 9th Cir. is now adopting the very same Modus Op erendi as is employed by the U.S. Supreme Court, i.e. denying review without opinion. A I received was first a form letter from the Clerk of the Court stating intent to affirm the judgement below based upon the conclusion that the issues presented were…
    Ron Branson 13 Nov, 2012
  • …financially, and very soon. I am Ron Branson, author and founder of J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law), aka, www.jail4judges.org . I am a man called of God as a Watchman on the Wall. My spiritual gift in the Body of Christ is that of discernment of spirits…
    Ron Branson 10 Nov, 2012
  • …accountable without interfering with their independence. This is why the premise of a People’s Special Grand Jury, as established by JAIL4Judges, is absolutely necessary to a future other than that of a Third World Nation. There is no other way than People-Control of the…
    Ron Branson 06 Nov, 2012
  • …accountable without interfering with their independence. This is why the premise of the the People’s Special Grand Jury as established by JAIL4Judges is absolutely necessary if America is to have a future other than that of a Third World Nation. There is no other way than People…
    Ron Branson 05 Nov, 2012
  • …independence of the Jury as intended by our Founding Fathers. Ironically, when we accomplished gettingJAIL4Judges on the ballot in South Dakota in 2006 for the People to vote upon, I was assailed by the enemy, which…courtroom trial, there is only one impartial participant. That is the jury — Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$2 www.JAIL4Judges.org http://www.SD-JAIL4Judges.org
    Ron Branson 01 Nov, 2012
  • …and wrote the Taking Liberties section and Other People’s Money column for CBS News’ Web site. — Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.JAIL4Judges.org http://www.SD-JAIL4Judges.org
    Ron Branson 28 Oct, 2012
  • …them for their crimes, and put them away in our determined places of detention. Thus, the conclusion goes, there is no need for JAIL4Judges, nor to we need Special Grand Juries, or the Initiative Process. All these measure for justice are unnecessary! But, of course…
    Ron Branson 19 Oct, 2012
  • …u_oz6kSnEZc&feature=relmfu Part 7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ze7Bx_xQq4Y&feature=relmfu — Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.JAIL4Judges.org http://www.SD-JAIL4Judges.org
    Ron Branson 15 Oct, 2012
  • …from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states.” — Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.JAIL4Judges.org http://www.SD-JAIL4Judges.org
    Ron Branson 11 Oct, 2012
  • …give me death!” But today, we shout, “Give me Librium, or give me Meth!” I have been informed a number of times that the title “JAIL4Judges” was offensive, and that I should change it so as not to offend the judges in this country. Years ago I sought not to “offend…
    Ron Branson 10 Oct, 2012
  • …here in California.” I recommend, Patrick, you check-out what caused a national shake-up among the judiciary as a result of the JAIL4Judges work in the State of South Dakota, http://www.sd-jail4judges.org . If you had said “The judges within this nation find Ron Branson…
    Ron Branson 09 Oct, 2012
  • …and out of work, and we would love to receive only one-tenth of the salaries of these judges. — Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.JAIL4Judges.org http://www.SD-JAIL4Judges.org
    Ron Branson 06 Oct, 2012
  • …anyone who, in their judgment, should be indicted and held for trial for corrupt acts. What JAIL4Judges seeks to do is make these powers openly recognized by all. However, there is one power we…except by US. This is precisely why we must install JAIL4Judges within all governments. The JAIL4Judges Initiative creates a Special Independent People’s Grand Jury of US. Access to this Special…
    Ron Branson 28 Sep, 2012
  • …the result can be rather negative. The court system is so dysfunctional right now, unless jail4judges is enacted immediately, it too will be disregarded as a “formality,” just as the law in general…No man can come to felony prosecution except by US. This is precisely why we must install JAIL4Judges within all governments. The JAIL4Judges Initiative creates a Special Independent People’s…
    Ron Branson 27 Sep, 2012
  • …unreviewable independent Grand Jury system. It is the Grand Jury power that must be restored to us at any cost! This is precisely what JAIL4Judges will accomplish, nothing more, and nothing less. The problem is, the People are too ignorant to recognize what they have done…
    Ron Branson 25 Sep, 2012
  • …People vs. government, it is the will of the People that must prevails This is precisely what JAIL4judgesassures when the People decide they want to take actually charge over their future affairs…we are now, searching for a remedy that does not involve the principles set forth within JAIL4Judges. So we now have this guy, Ron Branson, sitting by watching People get frustrated in looking…
    Ron Branson 22 Sep, 2012
  • Re: Hostile Take Over of the Name of JAIL4Judges Ron Branson ><> National JAIL4judges Commander-In-Chief…the State of South Dakota. We have held positions within JAIL4Judges all fifty states, Washington, DC, Australia, and Canada…absolutely no other operation on par with the objective of JAIL4judges. We are not a marketing business, but purely one of enforcing…
    Ron Branson 21 Sep, 2012
  • Computer Programmer Testimony He Was Requested to Write Code to Rig U.S. Elections Clinton Eugene Curtis, a computer programmer from Florida, testified before a congressional panel that there are computer programs that can be used to secretly fix elections. He explains how he created a prototype for Florida Congressman Tom Feeny that would flip the vote 51%-49% in favor of a…
    Ron Branson 18 Sep, 2012
  • …I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.” It is for the above reason God moved upon my heart to write the words found in JAIL4Judges. It is not to overthrow our Constitution, but rather to establish it. In Article I we have the Who, What, When, Where, and the…
    Ron Branson 17 Sep, 2012
  • …bonds and making them hundreds of millions of dollars at taxpayer’s expense. In my promotion under the First Amendment of cause JAIL4Judges in Van Nuys, CA. on “Courthouse Property,” I was run off by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office because I was told that I was…
    Ron Branson 13 Sep, 2012
  • …your money safe, grab your money and run. Find one who is going to charge you for his services. Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org
    Ron Branson 04 Sep, 2012
  • …next 2 or 3 weeks. Very interesting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhntjZm4VT8&feature=youtu.be Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org
    Ron Branson 31 Aug, 2012
  • http://www.economicnoise.com/2012/08/17/the-tide-is-going-out-on-the-collapsing-corrupt-us-government/ The Tide Is Going Out On the Collapsing, Corrupt US Government When the tide goes out, it reveals a lot of ugliness that was hidden under water. In times of prosperity (or apparent prosperity), weakness, duplicity, and corruption is hidden from view or is deliberately overlooked…
    Ron Branson 23 Aug, 2012
  • The Satanic Planning of The Social Security System In the words of Colonel Edward Mandell House, in creating the Federal Reserve in 1913. “Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people…
    Ron Branson 23 Aug, 2012
  • …we be satisfied? Absolutely not! This is why I contend that we shall continue on our downward course until we the People enforce JAIL4Judges. There are thousands of unconstitutional laws on the books. Must we fight each and everyone piecemeal? And would not such wicked…
    Ron Branson 16 Aug, 2012
  • ” [T]he prosperity of fools shall destroy them. ” Proverbs 1:32 As we know that cities, counties, and states all around the U.S. are facing financial bankruptcy. They are crying out for funds. Nowhere is this situation more acute than in the Golden State of California. No justice or judge in this country is “earning” more than those sitting on the bench in California, who are…
    Ron Branson 15 Aug, 2012
  • …you free.” John 8:32. A couple years ago, as a result of the many truthful articles published, an attempt was made to eradicate JAIL4Judges‘ from the internet word. J.A.I.L’s computer was hacked into through some very high-tech work, and years of work was eradicated…
    Ron Branson 10 Aug, 2012
  • …ears to their plight by working within prescribed channels. Ron Zena Crenshaw wrote: Ron, I don’t say this to be critical, but Jail4Judges reflects such an exclusion of institutional support from government that it seems only anarchists or near anarchists could consider…
    Ron Branson 09 Aug, 2012
  • …people cursing all the way. The people are still looking for an answer that free shall never come. Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org Steven Pattison wrote: Mr. Branson, I believe I should explain our only solution to what I wrote to you below. We have to believe…
    Ron Branson 31 Jul, 2012
  • …reliance on the honesty and integrity of our judicial system. Hence, your question is within the subject of the establishment of JAIL4Judges. When things get bad enough, maybe the People will pay attention to what I am saying. Until then, everyone is going to have to…
    Ron Branson 30 Jul, 2012
  • CNN iReport http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-818918 Is the Largest Judiciary in the Western World Crumbling? By althepal55 | Posted July 23, 2012 | Shasta County, California 7/25/12 – Update Alan Ernesto Phillips By all accounts the state of California has the largest judiciary in the Western world. Just the thought brings about visions of a colossal, well-oiled machine churning…
    Ron Branson 26 Jul, 2012
  • …the South Dakota Argus Leader. Those unfamiliar with the back ground of South Dakota and JAIL4Judgesmay be curious as to why I am particularly interested in this article, and why I am furthering…Whether it be classified as a nightmare, or not, it was definite truth that came to pass. Had JAIL4Judges passed in South Dakota, I can assure you that things would certainly be different today in…
    Ron Branson 20 Jul, 2012
  • http://www.callawyer.com/clstory.cfm?eid=923320 Judging the Judges by Victoria Schlesinger | July 2012 This year as in past years, the state’s Commission on Judicial Performance published a report chronicling the bad behavior of California’s judges. And like previous surveys, what this year’s report shows most dramatically is how rarely judges are disciplined. As of 2011, there…
    Ron Branson 15 Jul, 2012
  • ABC Local http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/east_bay&id=8703413 Judge accused of stealing $1.6 million arraigned Alameda Co. judge accused of stealing $1.6M by Nick Smith BERKELEY, Calif. (KGO) — An Alameda County Superior Court judge has found himself on the wrong side of the law and is facing criminal charges. Judge Paul Seeman was arrested Thursday and…
    Ron Branson 17 Jun, 2012
  • Sweet Lies and Bitter Truth! Arnie, your questions and comments below take a number of twists and turns, but if I am understanding you correctly, you are right on point. The People are too dumb to know the lie from the truth. So as not to complicate matters, just accept the lies being fed to them. The is a book, the title of which correctly states the situation, “Sweet Lies and…
    Ron Branson 15 Jun, 2012
  • Fear of Police Presence May Be Cause For Reasonable Suspicion “[C]onduct designed to evade contact with police may itself establish reasonable suspicion.” State v. Starkey (S.D. Supreme Ct.) Have you ever realized that police were present, and you took evasive steps to avoid contact with them? In light of the current finding by the South Dakota Supreme Court that fearing police…
    Ron Branson 12 Jun, 2012
  • …Cedar St. San Diego, CA. 92101 (619) 515-1530 Judicial Insanity At Play! Gentlemen: I am Ron Branson ofJAIL4Judges.org [Judicial Accountability Initiative Law]. Attorney Gary L. Zerman, my associate, has suggested that…Cert. attached. Thank you very much. I look forward to hearing from you. Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org http://www.sd-jail4judges.org
    Ron Branson 09 Jun, 2012
  • Justice, Who Always Supported Police Action, Attacked By Police “I’ve always had profound respect for what they do,” Justice Raffaele said of the police, noting that he was “always very supportive” of the department during the more than 20 years he served …” http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/nyregion/justice-thomas-d-raffaele-says-police-officer-struck-him.html Judge…
    Ron Branson 06 Jun, 2012
  • …Handbook Attached is the California Judges Contempt Handbook describing when contempt is appropriate or inappropriate. Gary L. Zerman, JAIL4Judges attorney, deems it appropriate that information be posted on the internet in light of how “Contempt of Court” is being thrown around…
    Ron Branson 02 Jun, 2012
  • California Fish & Game Challenged in Court When is the Law not the Law? This is the challenge asserted by Mr. Don Bird of Tehama County, California, in which he is cited for fishing in California. The California Constitution, Article I, Section 25 states as follows; “The People shall have the right to fish upon and from the public lands of the State and in the waters thereof…
    Ron Branson 01 Jun, 2012
  • Which Judges Should I Vote For? By Ron Branson Every election cycle I am approached as a supposed authority on judges to state a list of the judges for whom I recommend the electorate vote for. Just this past Saturday, April 26, 20012 I was approached by an attendee prior to my speech at a seminar of the judiciary to “Please state for us a short list of the judges they should vote…
    Ron Branson 29 May, 2012
  • The Soon Coming Economic World Collapse Audio Presentation by Pastor Lindsey Williams Back in the early 80’s when I pastored North Hollywood Bible Church, I invited Pastor Lindsey Williams in as a guest speaker. This was shortly after he had published his new book, “The Energy Non-Crisis.” We found him to be very sincere and an educated man of God, in which he testified that he…
    Ron Branson 28 May, 2012
  • Columbine Victims Cry Out for Exposure of the Truth! by Ron Branson – JAIL4Judges Yesterday, (Sunday afternoon) I traveled down from Los Angeles to Orange County to meet…the insurance industry. This warfare is documented blow by blow on the website of http://www.sd-jail4judges.org . I travel back to L.A. and after a night’s rest, I woke up and checked my emails…
    Ron Branson 28 May, 2012
  • Shawn Mooney wrote: Judges Say Bench Watchdog Should Be on Shorter Leash By Cheryl Miller Contact All Articles The Recorder May 4, 2012 Victoria Henley, Commission on Judicial Performance director Image: Jason Doiy/The Recorder SACRAMENTO — Tension between California’s jurists and the Commission on Judicial Performance? That’s nothing new. Fits of judicial pique against the…
    Ron Branson 21 May, 2012
  • Question Posed to Ron Branson “Do you have a suitable response for this? Arnie Rosner wrote: Mr. Branson, Do you have a suitable response for this? John Dummett is a candidate for president. Arnie Begin forwarded message: From: “John A. Dummett” < jdummett@^$1 > Subject: Re: Mr. Branson, may we call upon you for a simple solution? Date: May 10, 2012 9:59:11 AM PDT To…
    Ron Branson 10 May, 2012
  • Show Us a Simple Solution John, you have stated, ” JAIL does not directly accomplish, and probably will not indirectly “enable Americans to restore our Republic” as Arnie surmises.” You then ask my explanation as to how it might do otherwise. As you very well know, John, J.A.I.L., once established, requires John Doe Citizen to bring a complaint in court, or be drawn into court by…
    Ron Branson 09 May, 2012
  • Mr. Branson, may we call upon you for a simple solution by which we can restore our republic? I suspect most Americans would be eternally grateful! Arnie Rosner wrote: My Dear Mr. Branson, Thank you for sharing this very enlightening revelation with regard to the intentional violation of California State law by those whose job is to enforce the law. It appears in the case of Mr…
    Ron Branson 07 May, 2012
  • Christ’s Opinion On Lawyers “Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.” Luke 11:52 Below, lawyers praise one another on their great value to society! http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/section/6/article/67087 / Bar celebrates judicial system achievement Law Day speaker laments funding…
    Ron Branson 05 May, 2012
  • …legislator who wants to touch this J.A.I.L. legislation with a ten foot pole. But does that make it faulty? Nay! It says a lot for JAIL4Judges. Luke 6:26 says, “Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets.” You will…
    Ron Branson 01 May, 2012
  • Rehnquist’s Creed: “If experience demands a presumption that a judge will seize every opportunity presented to him in the course of his official conduct to line his pockets, no canon of ethics or statute regarding disqualification can save our judicial system.” —Justice William Rehnquist Stalinist Creed: “Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes…
    Ron Branson 21 Apr, 2012
  • California Courts – Chief Justice Speaks on Effect of Budget Cuts Courts: The Judicial Branch of California · Judicial Branch Home · Courts … Chief Justice Speaks on Effect of Budget Cuts. Print. for release. Leanne Kozak … http://www.courts.ca.gov/17536.htm Message posted on website by Ron Branson: I have gained considerable practical knowledge of the inner-workings of the legal…
    Ron Branson 20 Apr, 2012
  • Josephn, you have asked, “Too bad we have not had members of Congress with the strength to put a halt to the usurpation of power taken by the judiciary. How would you get the judiciary back on track? ” This question has been asked over and over by thousands of conscientious People all over this nation. The answer is adoption of the Judicial Accountability and Integrity Legislation…
    Ron Branson 13 Apr, 2012
  • http://www.duiblog.com/2012/04/10/super-pacs-now-buying-judges-too/ Super PACs Now Buying Judges, Too DUI Lawyers Blog Watch We all know the impact the Super PACs are having on who will be representing us in our state and national governments. Most senators, congressmen, governors, etc., are now pretty much bought-and-paid-for by Big Money’s deep pockets. This is largely thanks…
    Ron Branson 12 Apr, 2012
  • …Judiciary Back in 1995 the Lord moved upon the heart of Mr. Branson to compose what is now calledJAIL4Judges from his years of court experience. Unknown at the time, the Lord had Mr. Branson at the…doing. Not a thing negative. So, it became apparent that God’s leading in the writing of JAIL4Judges was cutting a new path within this country. Since that time, judicial expose sites have flourished…
    Ron Branson 08 Apr, 2012
  • …Government, the People must be the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last! This is precisely why Government greatly fears JAIL4Judges because it closes the loopholes within our Constitution, especially regarding judges and prosecutors . Ron Branson
    Ron Branson 08 Apr, 2012
  • …espousal of her doctrine of Judicial Independence. She denigrated Judicial Accountability with the words, “They even call it JAIL4Judges.” So, Sandra, where is your voice now that the issue of Judicial Independence is front and center within the news? Were we not…
    Ron Branson 06 Apr, 2012
  • The Legal System Screaming For Your Money – Save the Courts, or Lose Your Freedom Ron Branson * * * ABA (American Bar Association) http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/no_courts_no_justice_no_freedom_2012_law_day_theme_will_resonate_with_calls/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=ABA+Journal+Magazine+Stories No Courts, No Justice, No Freedom: 2012 Law Day…
    Ron Branson 27 Mar, 2012
  • http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504803_162-57403613-10391709/life-after-prison-morton-reunites-with-family/?tag=contentBody;currentVideoInfo 60 Minutes March 25, 2012 Evidence of Innocence: The case of Michael Morton “I did not do this,” Michael Morton said as he was led away in handcuffs, convicted of murdering his wife in 1987. Hardly anyone believed him. Now, after twenty five…
    Ron Branson 26 Mar, 2012
  • …There are approximately four competitive organization here in CA. willing to accept a contract agreement with you. Ron Branson www.jail4judges.org
    Ron Branson 26 Mar, 2012
  • Is Fraud a Way of Life in Our American Judicial System? The following Brief was filed in the U.S. Supreme Court on February 24, 2012, and entered upon the Docket March 1, 2012. Pursuant to Rule 15.3, the Court has given opposing counsel until Monday, April 02, 2012, ten days from today, to oppose this Brief. Please note that this matter is one of out and out fraud from its…
    Ron Branson 23 Mar, 2012
  • The Problem With Commissions By Ron Branson National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief All throughout America People are facing hopeless despair. They just do not know what to do. Well spoken are the words of Hosea the Prophet in Hosea 4:6, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee…” In hopes they may find a remedy…
    Ron Branson 19 Mar, 2012
  • A Crack In the Armor of The Judicial System By Ron Branson Below is breaking news about the former Chief Justice of the State of Alabama. For those of you who are unaware of the history of Judge Roy Moore, he was once the Chief Justice who sat on the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama who took a stand against the establishment over the issue of The Ten Commandments Monument…
    Ron Branson 15 Mar, 2012
  • America’s Greatest Criminals Wear Black Robes, Not Black Masks Below posted on the SacBee Newspaper Comments: America’s greatest criminals wear black robes, not black masks. I am currently in the U.S. Supreme Court over a case in which involves the County of Los Angeles creating a false and fraudulent Minute Order that states I was present and was arraigned on criminal charges in…
    Ron Branson 08 Mar, 2012
  • http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/10101-us-military-program-arming-local-police-expands U.S. Military Program Arming Local Police Expands | Print | Written by Alex Newman Wednesday, 07 December 2011 Billions of taxpayer dollars are being used by the U.S. Department of Defense to provide military-grade weaponry to local law-enforcement departments, and the shadowy “ 1033…
    Ron Branson 29 Feb, 2012
  • Adam Greene Settles Police Beating Suit For $300,000: Nevada Officers Kicked Man In Diabetic Shock First Posted: 02/ 9/2012 4:32 PM Updated: 02/10/2012 12:23 PM Police dash-cam footage captures beating of Adam Greene by Nevada police. Submit this story Diggredditstumble A diabetic who was suffering from insulin shock when Nevada police officers mistook him for a drunk driver and…
    Ron Branson 16 Feb, 2012
  • Will Cameras Keep Our Judges Honest? It is contended that placing cameras in our courtrooms will keep our judiciary honest. Below is a presentation of this contention. NFOJA National Forum On Judicial Accountability A message to all members of NFOJA “The Times”, a local newspaper, would likely appreciate your comments on this subject which you can post on its website by clicking…
    Ron Branson 07 Feb, 2012
  • http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/preserving_court_funding_will_require_effective_political_efforts/ Judiciary Preserving Court Funding Will Require Effective Political Efforts by the Judiciary and Its Allies Posted Feb 4, 2012 7:04 PM CST By James Podgers < img src=”cid:part3.06050504.06010903@^$1″ alt=”Share” border=”0″ height=”16″ width=”171″> Whether they like it or not…
    Ron Branson 05 Feb, 2012
  • The News Behind The News It’s Worse Than You Think! I have just received word from former Attorney Brad Henschel, who covered the word from inside the judicial system on information not revealed within the below news article about the financial situation within the state courts of California. I have known Brad for 33 years. What’s that squawking I hear? Hmmm, I believe it’s the…
    Ron Branson 30 Jan, 2012
  • The Judicial Ship Taking On Water And Leaning To The Left “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:” Matthew 12:25 http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/29/4221061/bill-by-dissident-judges-overreaches.html Editorial: Bill by dissident judges overreaches Share Published: Sunday, Jan. 29, 2012 – 12:00 am…
    Ron Branson 30 Jan, 2012
  • …on federal appeals, which I love to work on.” Roger Roots Roger Roots, I have a question for you. I am Ron Branson, founder of JAIL4Judges. I have taken cases up to the U.S. Supreme Court 14 times over the years since 1981. I am currently on my 15th trip. You responded…
    Ron Branson 20 Jan, 2012
  • …understand this frustration. But is there not a sane, calm, and reasonable response to the situation? Yes, I believe there is. It is JAIL4Judges! But there is not in every man that knowledge, and so their answer is to swing out into a greater circumference in hopes they may…
    Ron Branson 19 Jan, 2012
  • Comparing JAIL4Judges With All Other Proposals Dr. Joseph Zernik, what you have described below is about a good description of judicial…Prison Term After Initia… http://www.scribd.com/doc/38347298/ At 01:43 AM 1/14/2012, you wrote: Comparing JAIL4Judges to All Other Proposals The problem with political bodies handling the subject of judicial accountability, is…
    Ron Branson 17 Jan, 2012
  • …and allow for civil and criminal prosecution for judicial decisions, called bluntly enough JAIL4Judges, legislators have taken an interested in similar efforts. Simultaneous with this interest…and their business is an economic collapse. This occurred starting the very next year after jail4judges was rejected. According to this current news article, it appears that more was going on in…
    Ron Branson 13 Jan, 2012
  • Judicial Accountability & Integrity Legislation (Judicial Bill Written for Congress as Amended 11/24/01) Filed in the Library of Congress (a) Preamble. The House of Representatives and Senate Assembled find: that an inordinate and ever-growing number of complaints for willful misconduct have been lodged with Congress involving federal judges across this nation; that the current…
    Ron Branson 07 Jan, 2012
  • Wall Street Journal http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/01/04/santorum-soundbites-on-the-judiciary-10th-amendment/ January 4, 2012, 9:27 AM Santorum Soundbites on the Judiciary, 10th Amendment By Joe Palazzolo AP Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum Rick Santorum’s loss-as-win in Iowa gives Law Blog a chance to take a look at his views on the Constitution and the judiciary…
    Ron Branson 05 Jan, 2012
  • On My Way To Get Justice, I Just Got Mugged! By Ron Branson National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief As all of you who have been to Las Vegas know, when you lay your money on the table, you get to throw the dice, or spin the wheel. In purchasing a Lotto Ticket, you stand a change of winning. It may be a long shot, but you are in the competitive pool with the others who likewise…
    Ron Branson 30 Dec, 2011
  • http://witnessla.com/lasd/2011/admin/dangerous-jails-part-1-by-matthew-fleischer/ DANGEROUS JAILS: Part 1 – by Matthew Fleischer September 16th, 2011 by Celeste Fremon EDITOR’S NOTE: The article below is Part One of WitnessLA’s two-part investigation into the culture of violence and abuse that, for years, has been reported to exist inside the Los Angeles County Jail system…
    Ron Branson 28 Dec, 2011
  • http://www.natchezdemocrat.com/2011/12/18/is-judicial-system-part-of-the-crime-problem/ Is judicial system part of the crime problem? Published 12:02am Sunday, December 18, 2011 TV viewers sit riveted to crime dramas and often begin to believe the shows are based in reality. In most crime dramas, the good guys win in the end and the bad guys go to prison. In reality, at least in…
    Ron Branson 19 Dec, 2011
  • Fraud & Corruption Appeal Filed 11/2/11 in Ninth Cir. Court of Appeals Ronald Branson 11245 Otsego St., #12 North Hollywood , CA. 91601 (818) 310-8999 Plaintiff Pro Se UNITES STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Ronald Branson, Plaintiff-Appellant v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES ; L.A.P.D. OFFICER KEVIN BAYONA; DOE 1/ aka Marvin Gross; DOE 2/ aka Melony Schoenberg; DOE 3/ aka…
    Ron Branson 04 Nov, 2011
  • The National Law Journal http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202517545616&West_may_resell_personal_information_of_drivers_th_Circuit_rules&slreturn=1 West may resell personal information of drivers, 7th Circuit rules Sheri Qualters Contact All Articles The National Law Journal September 30, 2011 The Sept. 28 unanimous panel ruling in Graczyk v. West Publishing Co…
    Ron Branson 06 Oct, 2011
  • http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/court-funding_crisis_is_about_politics_not_just_money_erwin_chemerinsky/ Judiciary Court-Funding Crisis Is About Politics, Not Just Money, Erwin Chemerinsky Says Posted Sep 23, 2011 5:46 PM CDT By James Podgers Erwin Chemerinsky. Photo Courtesy of ABA Media Relations. The growing financial crisis facing state court systems has coincided with…
    Ron Branson 26 Sep, 2011
  • http://www.hastingslawjournal.org/california-judiciary-slammed-by-deep-budget-cuts Hastings Law Journal Hastings Law Journal – Hastings College of the Law California Judiciary Slammed by Deep Budget Cuts This June, the state legislature cut the budget for California’s judicial system by $350 million for the fiscal year beginning July 1. This budget cut signifies a 6.7 percent…
    Ron Branson 16 Sep, 2011
  • Judges Digging Their Own Pit Sunday, June 24, 2007 By Ron Branson www.jail4judges.org As corruption abounds more and more in the judiciary, so does the inclination to expose the actions of such judges. There is…
    Ron Branson 11 Sep, 2011
  • http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/aug/17/legal-minds-mingle-at-la-costa-amid-budget/ Judges mingle at La Costa amid budget cutbacks Other circuits curtail meetings; the 9th is off to Hawaii next year Enjoying the buffet breakfast are Bridget Bade, at left, a lawyer representative from Arizona, and Robert Lasnik, at right, a Chief District Judge from Seattle — Charlie…
    Ron Branson 18 Aug, 2011
  • Access to Grand Juries Spartacus – OneManWreckingCrew wrote: Ron, Nice job at: http://www.jail4judges.org/ I don’t see a search function. Do you have any articles or advice for those of us who wish to bring charges against govt officials…
    Ron Branson 29 Jul, 2011
  • …be, and such “legislation” is void the very moment it is “made.” Ron Branson Author: Judicial Accountability Initiative Law www.jail4judges.org VictoryUSA@^$1
    Ron Branson 25 Jul, 2011
  • http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_18536379 California’s courts endure third year of cuts By PAUL ELIAS The Associated Press Posted: 07/23/2011 08:02:11 AM PDT Updated: 07/23/2011 10:59:28 AM PDT SAN FRANCISCO—This county’s presiding superior court judge stood at the lectern and looked out at the bank of television cameras and assembled press. She took a deep breath. “This is…
    Ron Branson 24 Jul, 2011
  • http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5idGsW5Ny8iw9Lh2c6JRL0reacbwQ?docId=b7051c4e83b44254b75c08925ba5cf2b San Francisco to shutter courtrooms, lay off 200 By PAUL ELIAS, Associated Press – 9 hours ago SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The San Francisco Superior Court announced Monday that it’s laying off more than 40 percent of its staff and shuttering 25 courtrooms because of…
    Ron Branson 18 Jul, 2011
  • What is U.S. Government Operation “Fast and Furious”? It is an objective by the U.S. Government to use taxpayer money to create a “crime” problem so massive that citizens of this country beg for the collection of all their weapons in the name of peace and safety. – Ron Branson ——————————————————————————— US government openly…
    Ron Branson 14 Jul, 2011
  • Get Out Your Hankie. It is Being Reported That Certain Judges Are Surviving on the Brink of Poverty. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/12/opinion/12tue4.html?_r=1 New York’s Lagging Judicial Pay Published: July 11, 2011 kedin Digg MySpace Permali Across the country, judicial salaries are falling woefully behind what is needed to sustain a high-quality justice system. The problem is…
    Ron Branson 13 Jul, 2011
  • Caution: Driving May Result in Death! Small mountain community around Big Bear Lake in uproar over the killing of one of their own long-time residents by San Bernadino Sheriff Deputies over traffic stop. http://thetruthaboutminnesota.org/cgi/index.pl?fn=g_n&m=cac&i=511733&xm=cops-taser-kill-man&rm=hm Woman handcuffed and stripped totally naked by policemen over traffic stop. http…
    Ron Branson 11 Jul, 2011
  • …the Constitution. The fraud must go on!” As I see it, there are but only two remedies to the instant situation. Either we place JAIL4Judges on the ballot ( www.jail4judges.org ) or the judiciary goes entirely broke. We are well on the way to the latter. The battle lines…
    Ron Branson 07 Jul, 2011
  • Opposition to Presiding Judge Kirschner’s Letter Ronald Branson 11245 Otsego St., #12 North Hollywood , CA. 91601 Superior Court County of Los Angeles 14400 Erwin St. Mall Van Nuys, CA. 91401 In the matter of: CITATION # 83267NR v. Ronald Branson ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Ronald Branson’s Opposition to letter dated June 17, 2011 from Judge Richard Kirschner; Recusal of Commissioner…
    Ron Branson 30 Jun, 2011
  • http://www.metnews.com/articles/2011/budg061611.htm Metropolitan News-Enterprise Thursday, June 16, 2011 Page 1 Lawmakers Pass Budget, Cut Another $150 Million From Courts From Staff and Wire Service Reports California’s Democratic-controlled Legislature voted yesterday to cut $150 million from the state’s courts, over and above the $200 million previously proposed by Gov…
    Ron Branson 17 Jun, 2011
  • “Congress shall make no law…” “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion…” Article I, United States Constitution. This restrictive forbearance concerning government religion is still in our Constitution today. But has the U.S. government obeyed this restraint from establishing an official government religion? The following is not only interesting on…
    Ron Branson 17 May, 2011
  • “We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts that we must be taxed in our meat and drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and amusements, for our callings and creeds … we will have no time to think, no means of calling our mismanagers to…
    Ron Branson 19 Apr, 2011
  • …Appellate Court’s void judgment, but also to take action against each of them. What a joke the entire court system is! Ron Branson JAIL4Judges.org VictoryUSA@^$1 P.O. Box 207 North Hollywood, CA. 91603
    Ron Branson 14 Mar, 2011
  • It is Time to Close Down the Courts The Courts are Bringing Anarchy to Our Country Ron Branson When the City can use law enforcement officials to nab victims off the streets, shove them through a criminal process without neither notice to appear, nor allowing their mark to appear and answer to the charges, and such conduct is upheld on appeal under the alleged theory that they…
    Ron Branson 28 Feb, 2011
  • Richard I. Fine Released From Jail As many of you may already know, Richard Fine was jailed for embarrassing the entire judicial system with the County of Los Angeles. He exposed the judicial system publicly pointing out the all of the judges in the County of Los Angeles were on the take from the county. While the judges were already raking in a mega salary of close to $180,000 a…
    JAIL4Judges.org 24 Sep, 2010
  • …little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?” I Corinthians 5:6 Ron Branson National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/09/judge_thomas_porteous_impeachm_2.html “On Monday, Porteous’ lead attorney, Jonathan…
    JAIL4Judges.org 14 Sep, 2010
  • …ever be able to free ourselves for this judicial quagmire. Ron Branson National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$2 www.jail4judges.org
    JAIL4Judges.org 14 Sep, 2010
  • …endeavor of providing for an effective impeachment process, I recommend the improvements of Federal J.A.I.L as set forth on www jail4judges org. It provides for a Special Federal Grand Jury to indict federal judges when they are found to have willfully violated their…
    JAIL4Judges.org 14 Sep, 2010
  • Court Rules: Fourth Amendment Does Not Apply to Cell Phones By Ron Branson – VictoryUSA@^$1 The below article from CNET unveils a new revelation by the judges as it relates to cell phone use. It is true that our Founding Fathers never conceived of the use of cell phones on December 15, 1791 when they signed off on the Fourth Amendment of our U.S. Constitution. Nonetheless, it is…
    JAIL4Judges.org 07 Sep, 2010
  • …Copyright (c) The Victoria Times Colonist ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Forwarded by VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org
    JAIL4Judges.org 06 Sep, 2010
  • …Humor to Get a Serious Point Across By KJS (aka Kirk Schwoebel) kjs420@^$1 We’ve got to get this (JAIL4Judges) passed, we’re running out of time. The cancer of judicial corruption has metastasized in Los Angeles…vital organs. If symptoms persist, discontinue use and contact a doctor). Ask your physician ifJAIL4judges is right for you. (Take only as directed) KJS
    JAIL4Judges.org 04 Sep, 2010
  • “A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.” – Edward R. Murrow
    JAIL4Judges.org 04 Sep, 2010
  • …and sacrifice one of their own for the sake of the whole. Ron Branson National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org
    JAIL4Judges.org 04 Sep, 2010
  • …hear from certain politicians! ><> Ron Branson National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief Los Angeles, California VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org
    JAIL4Judges.org 03 Sep, 2010
  • …answer to the problem that appropriately protects both judicial independence and judicial accountability which is set forth on www.jail4judges.org (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law – J.A.I.L.). The citizen’s of the State of Iowa are now facing the very same concerns…
    JAIL4Judges.org 02 Sep, 2010
  • …People restore the freedom envisioned by our Founding Fathers. Ron Branson National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA.@^$1 www.jail4judges.org
    JAIL4Judges.org 01 Sep, 2010
  • …Special Grand Jury to establish when judicial immunity shall apply. Ron Branson National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@jail4judgesorg www.jail4judges.org
    JAIL4Judges.org 31 Aug, 2010
  • http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115931733674775033.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Dcomments Wall Street Journal SEPTEMBER 27, 2006 The Threat to Judicial Independence BY SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR In November, South Dakotans will vote on a state constitutional amendment being advocated by a national group called “JAIL 4 Judges.” If the amendment passes, it would eliminate judicial…
    JAIL4Judges.org 28 Aug, 2010
  • …googlenews_wsj This judicial warfare against the Constitution, the laws, and the judicial Oath of Office is set forth at http://www.sd-jail4judges.org . It will not be until the People awaken as to what is going on with the judiciary and set forth to establish an Independent…
    JAIL4Judges.org 28 Aug, 2010
  • …Special Citizens’ Grand Jury be created to avoid all the potential governmental conflicts that are inherent in Grand Juries. www.jail4judges.org has meticulously set forth just how this must be done point by point, including dealing with the federal judiciary. Ron Branson…
    JAIL4Judges.org 26 Aug, 2010
  • …Internet Your article re: Online Safe Haven in Sweden sounds interesting in light of what is going on here in America. The website www.jail4judges.org exposing judicial corruption and proposing a nationwide remedy through the initiative process was pulled from the internet…
    JAIL4Judges.org 24 Aug, 2010
  • …the question of whether the Proponents of Prop 8 have standing. Federal Judges Vaughn Walker says they do not. As the founder of JAIL4Judges I wish to check in on this debate. In the U.S. Supreme Court Case of Windsor v. McVeigh, 93 U.S. 274 the Court issued a scathing…
    JAIL4Judges.org 17 Aug, 2010
  • Report: Judicial spending doubles in last decade Posted: Aug 15, 2010 9:10 PM PDT Updated: Aug 16, 2010 1:30 AM PDT http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=12983569 By GREG BLUESTEIN Associated Press Writer Campaign fundraising for elections to the nation’s top state courts has doubled to more than $200 million over the last decade, fueled partly by super-spending individuals and…
    JAIL4Judges.org 16 Aug, 2010
  • Critique of JAIL4Judges http://www.carolynsteeves.com/blog/2010/08/15/lets-hear-it-for-the-girl/comment-page-1/#comment-4298 Let…Kagan on this incredible achievement. Comment by Ron Branson – August 16, 2010 @7:32 pm As the Founder of JAIL4Judges, and having been notified of the above comments regardingJAIL4Judges and the subject matter of judicial immunity…
    JAIL4Judges.org 16 Aug, 2010
  • …determine who can and who cannot use the internet. I suggest that all of you who have the knowledge and the ability to download the www.jail4judges.org and http://www.sd-jail4judges.org websites do so as a measure to preserve this data. J.A.I.L. has many enemies who wish nothing more…
    VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org 19 Jul, 2010
  • …would you do that?” I to her “You said that Ronald George knows me, so I thought we should get together and discuss getting JAIL4Judges passed here in California .” She did not crack a smile. Anyway, below you will see Ronald George mourning the closures of his…
    JAIL4Judges 14 Sep, 2009
  • …it becomes necessary from time to time to remind people of the need for financial support. JAIL4Judges is no different. The J.A.I.L. Constitution & By-Laws, http://www.jail4judges.org/goals/implementation…J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To…
    JAIL4Judges 13 Sep, 2009
  • How Much Justice Can You Afford? By Walter Buller – giembryo@^$1 Years ago, while still living at home, my baby brother, then age 17, got caught taking part in an armed robbery. This was his second felony arrest. He was the getaway driver. My Mother’s lawyer told her of a high powered lawyer that could “take care of it.” She got in touch with him, and gave him his reduced asking…
    JAIL4Judges 13 Sep, 2009
  • …Mike Duvall campaign office ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 11 Sep, 2009
  • …Do it for the children! ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 04 Sep, 2009
  • …Press. All Rights Reserved.) ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 03 Sep, 2009
  • …2009 Rasmussen Reports, LLC ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 31 Aug, 2009
  • …prolonged. Proverbs 28:2. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 29 Aug, 2009
  • …From: Diane Johnson [mailto:flutend@^$1] Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2009 10:08 PM To: JAIL4JudgesSubject: Re: * * * DEAR ROBERT * * * Dear JAIL for Corrupt: Would you know of any lawyer…From: Robert L. Cheney Jr. [mailto:cheney5512@^$5] Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 7:25 AM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Unlawful Arrest by Court Dear Jail4Judges: Hello. My name is Robert L. Cheney Jr…
    JAIL4Judges 26 Aug, 2009
  • …of your work there in the State of New Mexico . Much of the complaints we receive here at JAIL4Judgesregards the Family Courts around the nation. The reason, I believe, is because of the proximity…VictoryUSA@^$2 From: YouJudge Tv [mailto:youjudgetv@^$3] Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 8:08 AM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Hi. Mr. Branson, I am a board member of the New Mexico Center for Family Justice…
    JAIL4Judges 21 Aug, 2009
  • …Convention, 1829-1830 (pp. 616, 619), O’Donoghue v. U.S. , 289 U.S. 516 (1933). J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 20 Aug, 2009
  • …confidential files had been granted. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 18 Aug, 2009
  • …response below – VictoryUSA@^$1 ) From: Robert L. Cheney Jr. [mailto:cheney5512@^$2] Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 7:25 AM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Unlawful Arrest by Court Dear Jail4Judges: Hello. My name is Robert L. Cheney Jr., and I have been in the Father’s Rights…
    JAIL4Judges 14 Aug, 2009
  • …Newsmax. All rights reserved. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 13 Aug, 2009
  • U.S. Transition From Socialism To Communism The distinction between Socialism and Communism is the same as the distinction between seduction and rape – in either case, you will be screwed in the end! “When we see the federal government buying up the stock in the major industrial companies of the US , this is no longer government control (aka – socialism), but government…
    JAIL4Judges 08 Aug, 2009
  • …in the name of “peace.” ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 06 Aug, 2009
  • …Amendment in our Constitution. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 05 Aug, 2009
  • …Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 05 Aug, 2009
  • —–Original Message—– From: rich mckee [mailto:seven77out@^$1] Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 9:40 AM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: * * * The Federal Reserve T.A.R.P. Conspiracy * * * I love you sounding the alarm, Ron, and keep it up. The typical…
    JAIL4Judges 31 Jul, 2009
  • The Federal Reserve Conspiracy of T.A.R.P. We have been told that T.A.R.P. (Troubled Asset Recovery Plan) was created to save the collapsing American economy because the banks could no longer make loans to Americans. A $700,000,000,000 Bailout Bill of Main Street’s money [you and I] was rushed through Congress with no time to read it to meet this national “emergency.” But…
    JAIL4Judges 31 Jul, 2009
  • …SoCal_Judges_Los_Angeles.html ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 29 Jul, 2009
  • …government accountable? Does anyone have a solution? Mark Adams Answer offered by henrymorgan@^$4 Sure Mark, right here: http://www.jail4judges.org/state_chapters/ca/Initiative/CaliforniaJAILInitiative.htm Reply by Mark Adams: Close, Henry . Actually, there are 3 really…
    JAIL4Judges 29 Jul, 2009
  • …7w4f04zrF2s&feature=player_embedded ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 28 Jul, 2009
  • …and the publication presented of late of the unthinkable of “Bulldozing America.” Therein I stated, as quoted in http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2009/2009-06-19.html , “[T]he entire middle-class is planned to be obliterated, including you who are influential…
    JAIL4Judges 25 Jul, 2009
  • …news/51196597.html?viewAll=y ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 24 Jul, 2009
  • JAILers4Justice (J4J) ____________________________________________________________ Los Angeles , CA July 23, 2009 A Public Service Announcement to America (To be removed from this PSA see instructions below) ____________________________________________________________ The Battle Lines are Drawn: J.A.I.L. versus The Foreign Power A Power Foreign to Our Constitution…
    JAIL4Judges 23 Jul, 2009
  • …broken bones in her feet. …. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 23 Jul, 2009
  • …Angeles. © Thomson Reuters 2009 ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 22 Jul, 2009
  • …every time I hear this music independent of Stang as it became synonymous with Stang in my mind. The year following the founding of JAIL4Judges (1995) I invited Alan to be our speaker at one of our J.A.I.L. meetings which we held in the back of the Denny’s Restaurant on…
    JAIL4Judges 22 Jul, 2009
  • …ARA money involved in this.” ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 15 Jul, 2009
  • …Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$2 ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 14 Jul, 2009
  • …Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$2 ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 13 Jul, 2009
  • 60 Minutes on Swine Flue Vaccinations 1979 CBS 60 Minutes episode Re: 1976 swine flu pandemic. This episode was banned after its first showing on television. (16 minutes in length) http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6636 Currently, the plan is to force the weaponized “swine flu” vaccine on the most vulnerable segment of our population …
    JAIL4Judges 12 Jul, 2009
  • …Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$3 ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 09 Jul, 2009
  • …through our Initiative Process as set forth in the Judicial Accountability Initiative Law (J.A.I.L.) such as found at http://www.jail4judges.org/state_chapters/ca/Initiative/CaliforniaJAILInitiative.htm “ If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do…
    JAIL4Judges 07 Jul, 2009
  • RESOLUTION OF THE PATRIOT MOVEMENT UNITED (5/15/09) We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Jul, 2009
  • …Kristi Devine [mailto:devinekristi@^$1] Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 12:10 AM To: kirk beck; JAIL4JudgesCc: JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: * * * Of Apples and Oranges * * * Dear Ron: I so subscribe to…accountability over judicial immunity by an independent, autonomous citizen’s Grand Jury. (www.jail4judges.org) -Ron Branson – the crazy guy with radical principles of right and wrong. VictoryUSA…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Jul, 2009
  • …09) I sent out a publication under the title of “California Going Broke.” http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2009/2009-06-27.html Therein, I appealed to an illustration of apples and…accountability over judicial immunity by an independent, autonomous citizen’s Grand Jury. ( www.jail4judges.org ) -Ron Branson – the crazy guy with radical principles of right and wrong. VictoryUSA…
    JAIL4Judges 29 Jun, 2009
  • Have the Seeds for Depopulation of Earth by the New World Order Begun in America ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho-0SHFEgGo
    JAIL4Judges 27 Jun, 2009
  • …emergency response programs. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 27 Jun, 2009
  • …VictoryUSA@^$2 —–Original Message—– From: Kristi Devine [mailto:devinekristi@^$3] Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 5:59 AM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: RE: Taking Baby-Steps in Establishing Judicial Accountability Ron: EVERYTHING you say and do makes perfect sense to me…
    JAIL4Judges 26 Jun, 2009
  • …From: James McErlean [mailto:geothermal09@^$2] Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:40 AM To: JAIL4JudgesSubject: Judicial Accountability Hello, I was wondering if smaller steps might not make the…for those who have never read J.A.I.L. You may read the entire Initiative at; http://www.jail4judges.org/state_chapters/ca/Initiative/CaliforniaJAILInitiative.htm By practical application of…
    JAIL4Judges 23 Jun, 2009
  • …but she failed to do so. ” ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 23 Jun, 2009
  • …com/view?i=426_1244785050 ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 20 Jun, 2009
  • …it can bear fruit again”. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 19 Jun, 2009
  • …historical document preserved under glass for the public to view in Washington , D.C. , and nothing more. It is because of reality, JAIL4Judges exists. American shall never extricate itself from its present quagmire until all government is subject to the judges, and all…
    JAIL4Judges 16 Jun, 2009
  • Honorarium for Bill Stegmeier (And others) This week POPULAR will be announcing its “Restore Integrity Award” for Fine and others as indicated below (see copy of email sent to Senator Webb): Hello U.S. Senator James (Jim) Henry Webb, Jr.: As you may know, I am Executive Director of POPULAR, Inc. (POPULAR), a nonprofit good government advocate and legal reform organization…
    JAIL4Judges 16 Jun, 2009
  • …constitutional; the latter is not. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 13 Jun, 2009
  • …with the New World Order? ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 11 Jun, 2009
  • …for bitter!” Isaiah 5:20 ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 10 Jun, 2009
  • …corrupt is directly related to the fact that the judges are totally unaccountable. If we bring about judicial accountability, i.e., JAIL4Judges, then all the government would give account when sued in honorable courts. What’s more, a movement to audit the judges will prove…
    JAIL4Judges 07 Jun, 2009
  • …give praise to these mugging judges? I tell you, Nay! Let them be known for the thieves and robbers they are. – Ron Branson www.jail4judges.org Posted by: Ron Branson – National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief | June 07, 2009 at 09:38 PM…
    JAIL4Judges 07 Jun, 2009
  • …prejudices are appropriate … ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 07 Jun, 2009
  • …15779, Sacramento , CA 95852. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 03 Jun, 2009
  • …History of the Confinement of Att. Richard Fine Back in the early days of JAIL4Judges prior to becoming known as J.A.I.L. when we were meeting in the rear of Denny’s Restarant…J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To…
    JAIL4Judges 03 Jun, 2009
  • …to go should be its judges. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Jun, 2009
  • …of their Oaths of Office. As a Justice, she is anxious to establish new laws for this country. -Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.JAIL4Judges.org PS – One of our long-time notable JAILers, Scott Huminski has experienced being a plaintiff before Sonia Sotomayor, and here…
    JAIL4Judges 30 May, 2009
  • …it serves.” — Joel Rubin ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 30 May, 2009
  • …Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? ____________________________________________________________ “JAIL4Judges Worrisome” Says CA. Chief Justice Ronald George The lines are buzzing around the country among the Chief Justices in various…
    JAIL4Judges 27 May, 2009
  • …The Seattle Times Company ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 27 May, 2009
  • …From: VictoryUSA@^$2 Subject: “Anger-Driven Assholes” Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 05:16:38 +0000 “Anger-Driven Assholes” http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2005/Anger.html Our former JIC of Alabama has saw fit to renew the below information which he has dug up and has…
    JAIL4Judges 27 May, 2009
  • “Anger Driven Assholes” http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2005/Anger.html Our former JIC of Alabama…measures to fortify and immunize itself from the likes of JAIL4Judges ever entering their State. – Ron Branson Sen. Adam Kline…E-Groups may sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join Open forum to make your voice heard JAIL-SoundOff…
    JAIL4Judges 26 May, 2009
  • …Copyright 2009 Los Angeles Times _____________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 24 May, 2009
  • …Constitution? ~ ~ ~ —–Original Message—– From: Greg Halvorson [mailto:ghalvie@^$2] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 8:37 PM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: The Right to a Jury Trial In 2004 my constitutional rights were trampled on in South Dakota in a Domestic Violence Case…
    JAIL4Judges 21 May, 2009
  • …sunshinedodgeisuzu.com/staff.html ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 21 May, 2009
  • …level of corruption in vote counting and pass some measure that puts accountability back into the hands of the people, such as JAIL4Judges! Susan Kennedy flamingfury@^$2 ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law…
    JAIL4Judges 20 May, 2009
  • …California ballot for a vote. ______________________________________________ J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence since 1995, and is in all 50 states and foreign countries. To manage your email, place the word Subscribe…
    JAIL4Judges 20 May, 2009
  • …they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana . …. J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence for over 14 years, and is in all 50 states and several foreign countries. To manage your email, place…
    JAIL4Judges 18 May, 2009
  • …be reached at: 928-792-4340 or 928-428-8180. His email is: SherrifMack@^$1 J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence for over 14 years, and is in all 50 states and several foreign countries. To manage your email, place…
    JAIL4Judges 18 May, 2009
  • …L.A. County , Leslie Dutton , Richard I. Fine , SBX2 11 , Sterling Norris J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence for over 12 years, and is in all 50 states and several foreign countries. To manage your email, place…
    JAIL4Judges 16 May, 2009
  • US Government Could Go Bankrupt US Treasury forced to pay higher interest on bonds http://conservativeoutpost.com/us_treasury_forced_pay_higher_interest_bonds Posted by : Drew McKissick May 15, 2009 – 12:53pm It’s been said over and over by those who have a basic understanding of money, investments, debt and, well, just basic math, that it wouldn’t be long before the rapid…
    JAIL4Judges 16 May, 2009
  • This Too, Touches on the Need for ~ JAIL4Judges ~ http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4069761537893819675
    JAIL4Judges 14 May, 2009
  • …American legal corruption. One should note the brave grass-roots attempt at judicial reform mentioned above ( Jail 4 Judges – www.jail4judges.org ), which has been attempting to place onto American ballots, a referendum for a procedure to give citizens a real right of…
    JAIL4Judges 09 May, 2009
  • …Floor Washington , DC 20036 (202) 872-8600 Fax (202) 872-8690 assist@^$1 J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence for over 12 years, and is in all 50 states and several foreign countries. To manage your email, place…
    JAIL4Judges 09 May, 2009
  • …Message—– From: Paula J Michaud [mailto:pjm2008@^$2] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:02 AM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: Idea Hi Ron, As always, I’m trying to find an easy way to get judges held accountable…Administrative Law” in a past J.A.I.L. News Journal, and peppered it with humor. See http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2003/2003-12-09.html . The nature of government is to convert God-given inalienable…
    JAIL4Judges 05 May, 2009
  • Texas : City Councilman Arrested for Opposing Red Light Cameras Duncanville , Texas mayor silences anti-camera councilman by having him arrested. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/27/2745.asp The mayor of Duncanville , Texas had a member of the city council arrested last Tuesday for speaking out against the use of red light cameras during an official meeting. The incident took…
    JAIL4Judges 04 May, 2009
  • …Keller for almost nothing, but that the ethics commission has not clarified whether that was an ethics violation. Distributed by: JAIL4Judges.org VictoryUSA@^$1
    JAIL4Judges 02 May, 2009
  • Pastors in the Pulpit Subject to Imprisonment for “Hate Crimes” Pastors at risk; Hate Crimes Bill favoring certain “classes” more than others Christian Worldview/Issues ProphecyNewsWatch, April 1,2009 ~ Kade Hawkins House agrees to muzzle pastors with ‘hate crimes’ plan The U.S. House today approved a federal “hate crimes” bill that would provide special protections to…
    JAIL4Judges 01 May, 2009
  • Is the current “world” outbreak of swine flu a made-to-order plan? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBeKB7aKzOs
    JAIL4Judges 30 Apr, 2009
  • …President Barack Obama is expected to sign the measure if it reaches his desk. John P. Connolly can be reached at jconnolly@^$1 Sent by JAIL4Judges.org J.A.I.L. is the only answer! P.O. Box 207 North Hollywood , CA 91603 VictoryUSA@^$2
    JAIL4Judges 27 Apr, 2009
  • Corporate CFR members get lion’s share of bailout funds Written by Thomas R. Eddlem Monday, March 23, 2009 Newspapers are fixated upon $160 million in bonuses given to American International Group (AIG) executives. And it’s nice to know where the millions are going (note: the bonuses could have been cancelled had the federal government let the company go bankrupt, as officials…
    JAIL4Judges 25 Apr, 2009
  • Can JAIL4Judges Help? By Joseph Worrell – joseph.worrell@^$1 As a father and service member now deploying to the middle east…great education. This is how I learned what the “law” is, and by which experience I learned the need for JAIL4Judges. I am known for repeatedly saying that there is no hope for this nation outside of the passage of JAIL4Judges
    JAIL4Judges 23 Apr, 2009
  • …Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 —–Original Message—– From: CryerLaw@^$2 [mailto:CryerLaw@^$3] Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 7:17 PM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: Exposing Judges Ron, I found a list of horror stories posted on the site, but not a directory of rogue judges. I may…
    JAIL4Judges 21 Apr, 2009
  • …WilliamRaymond@^$1 From: the church at Salem [mailto:WilliamRaymond@^$2] Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 5:50 PM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Church seized for refusing to incorporate! Dear J.A.I.L. On 03-24-05 our church was seized by Counter…whether the churches will receive it. He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear. Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$3 www.jail4judges.org
    JAIL4Judges 18 Apr, 2009
  • …unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.” —Sixteenth American Jurisprudence Second Edition, Section 177 www.JAIL4Judges.org VictoryUSA@^$1 P.O. Box 207 North Hollywood , CA. 91603
    JAIL4Judges 18 Apr, 2009
  • Baptist pastor beaten and tazered for absolutely nothing except asserting his rights as protected under the U.S. Constitution. Signs of things to come for Americans living in a police state. See video below. http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=YUzd7G875Hc Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1
    JAIL4Judges 17 Apr, 2009
  • Embezzling From The Embezzlers Thursday, April 9, 2009 – Page 3 Metro News-Enterprise Former State Bar Employee Charged With Embezzlement By a MetNews Staff Writer Attorney General Jerry Brown has filed seven criminal charges against a former State Bar employee from Oakland over her alleged embezzlement of $675,000 from the organization. Brown filed one count of embezzlement and…
    JAIL4Judges 14 Apr, 2009
  • …directly to the People, through a Special Grand Jury, on issue of judicial immunity, are welcomed. – Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org _______________________________________________________ —– Original Message —– From: Liberty Dollar To: myprivate@^$2…
    JAIL4Judges 09 Apr, 2009
  • …said. “I’ve never seen an ocean, never seen any mountains. I’m kind of behind on that kind of stuff.” mwalberg@^$1 Sent by: www.jail4judges.org P.O. Box 207 North Hollywood , CA. 91603
    JAIL4Judges 08 Apr, 2009
  • Judge$ Reigning A$ King$! “In transgressing and lying against the LORD, and departing away from our God, speaking oppression and revolt, conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood. And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter. Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil…
    JAIL4Judges 06 Apr, 2009
  • …DeLuca said. Thanks to Attorney Gary Zerman, gzerman@^$3 , for sending the above. PS – Along this line, Ron Branson , author of JAIL4Judges, received a call from two District Attorney Deputies from the County of Los Angeles regarding their filing a criminal complaint…
    JAIL4Judges 04 Apr, 2009
  • …foreclosure had been stopped. “That move really almost destroyed us,” Mr. Kimbrough said. “It was all for nothing.” Sent by: .JAIL4Judges.org P.O. Box 207 North Hollywood , CA. 91603 VictoryUSA@^$1
    JAIL4Judges 03 Apr, 2009
  • —–Original Message—– From: ned fairaday jr. [mailto:vizstim@^$1] Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 4:50 PM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: RE: ABC’s 20/20: Jailing Kids for Cash Sad to say these judges are from up here … happy to say RON, you inspired us…
    JAIL4Judges 30 Mar, 2009
  • …has shown a story on this on their 20/20 program, and trailers of this program may be seen as per below. Attorney Gary Zerman of JAIL4Judges has placed out the following; To All: If you missed it, check out the below ABC 20/20 video re corrupt & dastardly juvenile court…
    JAIL4Judges 30 Mar, 2009
  • We Haven’t Seen Anything Yet! The real US financial crisis has yet to begin Editorial Desk http://www.nationmultimedia.com/ The Nation ( Thailand ) Publication Date: 23-03-2009 During his visit to London more than a week ago, Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva got the impression from business people and investors there that the United States did not have enough political will…
    JAIL4Judges 27 Mar, 2009
  • …Message—– From: Clive Boustred [mailto:clive@^$1] Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 5:14 PM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: RE: Patriots Are Such Ignorant Folk Dear Ron, I know who you are and you are an…thing good that happened there was that it afforded me the opportunity to distribute 600 JAIL4Judgesbusiness cards. Someone who took the card asked me if I was a judge. I told him “No!” So…
    JAIL4Judges 27 Mar, 2009
  • “Why We Can Never Get Anything Done!” By Kenneth Pangborn – Mississippi On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Kenneth Pangborn, MS pangborn@^$1 wrote: Hello Mr. Smith , I simply try to keep it simple. There will never be a massive gathering of advocate of father’s rights on the same accord similar to activists as depicted by the Civil Rights Movement. I can literally write a 10…
    JAIL4Judges 14 Mar, 2009
  • From: Pass the Salt [mailto:contact@^$1] To: JAIL4Judges …::: News and Announcements :::… Dear Friends, Does Two Plus Two Equal Four? “A metaphysician is one who, when you remark that twice…father in heaven . So what do you say, does two and two still equal four? Passing the Salt, Coach Dave Daubenmire http://www.ptsalt.com Forwarded by JAIL4Judges VictoryUSA@^$2
    JAIL4Judges 11 Mar, 2009
  • …times learning that it was insanity to expect anything from the courts in the line of Redress of Grievances. Thereafter I created JAIL4Judges in 1995 and promoted it on the internet. I now have the attention of no less than six state Supreme Court Justices, and retired…
    JAIL4Judges 09 Mar, 2009
  • …MeWarden? South Dakota Seeks to Undermine The People’s Initiative Process as a Result of JAIL4Judges It is no secret that JAIL4Judges provided a real scare to the establishment in South Dakota…words addressed to Chief Justice David Gilbertson, South Dakota Supreme Court, at http://www.sd-jail4judges.org/Gilbertson.htm . J.A.I.L. presents the following question: If it is indeed true that…
    JAIL4Judges 03 Mar, 2009
  • …am unmoved, for the truth is the truth which cannot be altered! I am compelled by our J.A.I.L. Constitution & By-Laws http://www.jail4judges.org/goals/implementation/ByLaws.htm to tell you accordingly; J.A.I.L. hereby imposes a National J.A.I.L. semi-annual financial…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Mar, 2009
  • …Original Message—– From: Kit Carson [mailto:ceo@^$1] Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 7:06 AM To:JAIL4Judges Forming Common Law Grand Juries in Each State Dear Sir, Thank you for the letter to Ron Branson…joseph mcnicholl [mailto:josephmcnicholl@^$4] Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 12:29 PM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: RE: Forming a Common Law Grand Jury in each State Hi Ron, You know I support you…
    JAIL4Judges 01 Mar, 2009
  • “[S]timulate the working class to buy more and more of expensive goods, houses and technology, pushing them to take more and more expensive credits, until their debt becomes unbearable. The unpaid debt will lead to bankruptcy of banks, which will have to be nationalized, and the State will have to take the road which will eventually lead to communism.” — (Karl Marx, /Das…
    JAIL4Judges 26 Feb, 2009
  • Bay State ‘s top jurist says courts are in crisis SJC’s Marshall warns of ‘painful choices’ “A perfect storm of circumstances threatens much of what we know, or think we know, about our American system of justice,” said Margaret H. Marshall, Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court . (Pat Greenhouse/Globe Staff/File) By Megan Woolhouse Globe Staff / February 17, 2009 http://www&#8230;
    JAIL4Judges 19 Feb, 2009
  • …diploma and go to college. “I got a raw deal, and yeah, it’s not fair,” he said, “but now it’s 100 times bigger than me.” Sent by JAIL4Judges.org VictoryUSA@^$1
    JAIL4Judges 16 Feb, 2009
  • CA Judge Rules Defense of Marriage Act Unconstitutional By Kathleen Gilbert http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09021008.html SACRAMENTO , California , February 10, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Two judges in California ‘s 9th Circuit Court have ruled in two separate cases that the same-sex “spouse” of federal employees must be granted the same health benefits as a heterosexual…
    JAIL4Judges 13 Feb, 2009
  • Bracing For Your Economic Future The “Stimulus Package” will prove to result in an economic disaster, and will actually make things very much worse than they are now. I recommend proceeding to set up barter exchanges among the JAILers, i.e. “I will give you a bushel basket of oranges for a bushel basket of your apples.” But this barter system must provide for three-way trade, “I…
    JAIL4Judges 06 Feb, 2009
  • Wake Up America ! Important February 11 th Notice 6801 Western Ave. Buena Park ( Orange County ), California People everywhere are expressing concern about the direction America is headed. It is unfortunate that it takes such a great disaster to get the attention of the American People. In 1996 J.A.I.L. stated exactly what would be happening to America , setting forth the “What…
    JAIL4Judges 05 Feb, 2009
  • Dog Bleeds To Death After Microchip Implant From Katherine Albrecht 2-3-9 http://www.rense.com/general84/dog.htm Dog Bleeds to Death After “Routine” Microchip Implant Procedure Grieving owner calls for an end to mandatory microchipping in Los Angeles A fluffy bundle of life, love, and enthusiasm named Charlie Brown was laid to rest last week, the victim of a microchip implant gone…
    JAIL4Judges 04 Feb, 2009
  • Medical Doctor Testifies To Life Without J.A.I.L. It is no secret that J.A.I.L. has on board representation from every type of profession imaginable, including current and former judges as well as medical doctors. What follows is the testimony of a former medical doctor who has been with J.A.I.L. for quite some time, and is greatly respected as one of sound mind and judgment. He…
    JAIL4Judges 31 Jan, 2009
  • Why Just the Second Amendment? People: This is Barbie of JAIL4Judges responding, or better– reacting– to the below article by Peter Mancus, “This Will Anger Many…light of the election fiasco of 2006 in South Dakota . To refresh your memory, go to http://www.sd-jail4judges.org . Barbie victoryusa@^$1 _________________________________________________ —–Original…
    JAIL4Judges 30 Jan, 2009
  • The cost of a fix-it ticket — and others — just got quite a bit steeper http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_11575358?nclick_check=1 By Gary Richards Mercury News Posted: 01/29/2009 Got a broken blinker? You’d better get it fixed. Under a little-noted law that took effect Jan. 1, the cost of a fix-it ticket has nearly tripled, and drivers who are tardy taking care of a burned…
    JAIL4Judges 29 Jan, 2009
  • Different Strokes For Government Folks By Attorney Gary Zerman National J.A.I.L. Lieutenant Commander-In-Chief GZerman@^$1 To All: Why is it that the government actors – our servants – have different rules and greater rights, than *We* the People do? *We* who are supposed to be Sovereign, the masters over government? Answer: Because there are different strokes for government folks…
    JAIL4Judges 29 Jan, 2009
  • …deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. Matthew 6: 9 – 13 Sent to you by www.jail4judges.org J.A.I.L. P.O. Box 207 North Hollywood , CA. 91603 VictoryUSA@^$1 J.A.I.L. is God’s call to America whether they will hear Him…
    JAIL4Judges 28 Jan, 2009
  • Reviewing Wall Street Journal Re: J.A.I.L. http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2006/11/08/south-dakotas-jail-4-judges-measure-fails-2/ Please note comments below. One is by O.J. Simpson, and another, pechmerle, Is an agent provocateur, who seeks to cover for the courts and corrupt judges. Asia Europe Earnings Economy Health Law Autos Management Media & Marketing More Industries Accounting…
    JAIL4Judges 27 Jan, 2009
  • http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=IFR0qodhPJ4 CODE RED – Economy in Collapse Drastic Actions Will Be Taken Trends Research Institute 1-23-9 KINGSTON , NY , 22 January 2009 — President Barack Obama will use his poll shattering popularity to swiftly enact policies that will prove to be among the most costly and potentially destructive in America ‘s history, predicts Trends Research…
    JAIL4Judges 24 Jan, 2009
  • Extremely Important to Preserving Freedom in America ! America is planned next! Subject: We are next! MUST SEE NEWS STORY UNSEEN IN AMERICAN NEWS! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTq2NEUlhDE
    JAIL4Judges 21 Jan, 2009
  • From: ariagroup@^$1 [mailto:ariagroup@^$2] Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 5:08 PM To: JAIL4JudgesSubject: Thank you! Dear Mr. Branson, Firstly, let me thank you for your services and contributions…Tel: 310.265.0030 Fax: 310.486.6427 Email: ariagroup@^$3 —–Original Message—– From: JAIL4Judges To: www.jail4judges.org Sent: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 4:05 pm Subject: I Have A Dream … I Have…
    JAIL4Judges 19 Jan, 2009
  • The Boss Sent to J.A.I.L. from Duncan Campbell New York JAILer – dcpcugfifi@^$1 To All My Valued Employees, There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your job. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn’t pose a threat to your job…
    JAIL4Judges 18 Jan, 2009
  • …iron and lead on the hip! Everyone benefits and prospers! Now the only way this shall ever happen is by adopting the mandates of JAIL4Judges, namely, “Notwithstanding common law or any other provision to the contrary, no immunities shielding a judge from frivolous and…
    JAIL4Judges 13 Jan, 2009
  • It’s All Starting to Add Up If we continue our current path, it won’t take long before we will be in debt to the Federal Reserve Banksters. – Ron From: Spencer, Dave [mailto:Dave.Spencer@^$1] Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 1:29 PM To: Spencer, Dave Subject: RE: Its All Starting to Add Up Billions & Billions & Trillions & Trillions. In less than a year federal lawmakers have…
    JAIL4Judges 08 Jan, 2009
  • It’s All Starting to Add Up If we continue our current path, it won’t take long before we will be in debt to the Federal Reserve Banksters. – Ron From: Spencer, Dave [mailto:Dave.Spencer@^$1] Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 1:29 PM To: Spencer, Dave Subject: RE: Its All Starting to Add Up Billions & Billions & Trillions & Trillions. In less than a year federal lawmakers have…
    JAIL4Judges 08 Jan, 2009
  • “We have met the enemy… and he is us” – Pogo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dqsNrmXgP0
    JAIL4Judges 28 Dec, 2008
  • THE DAY WILL COME By Barbie (Administrator) National J.A.I.L. Associate Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$1 P.O. Box 207 , No.Hwd., CA. 91603 Forwarded by Ron Branson In these days of dark distress I come to you, I must confess.. I come to you with outstretched hand To tell you of that Promised Land! I come to tell you of my Lord How you can trust Him by His Word. Now, you may scoff…
    JAIL4Judges 28 Dec, 2008
  • Who is the Master, and Who is the Servant? By Ron Branson – National J.A.I.L. CIC VictoryUSA@^$1 It seems America has gotten this whole thing of master/servant totally backwards. It has now become offensive to every public official to be referred to as a “Public Servant.” Our Declaration of Independence, passed by unanimous vote of Congress July 4, 1776 states, “We hold…
    JAIL4Judges 26 Dec, 2008
  • Give us your money and shut up December 23, 2008 By Bob Ingle The Associated Press took a look at banks getting federal handouts. It found their top executives got almost $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses and other benefits last year when the signs the economy was going to tank were abundant. For instance, Lloyd Blankfein , president and chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs…
    JAIL4Judges 24 Dec, 2008
  • Budget woes are forcing courts to cut back on judges By Stephen Hunt The Salt Lake Tribune http://www.sltrib.com/ci_11289798 Updated: 12/22/2008 State court officials said Monday they plan to leave judicial vacancies unfilled indefinitely — an unprecedented move tied to the state’s budget woes. The first casualty is Judge Judith Billing’s seat on the Utah Court of Appeals, which…
    JAIL4Judges 24 Dec, 2008
  • America Facing a Judicial Meltdown Supreme Chief Justice John Broderick of New Hampshire says, “I’ve never felt as insecure about the state courts in terms of operations and resources as I do now.” “The court process is breaking down,” says David Slawsky. “This is the worst I’ve ever seen it,” says John Safford. The U.S. , the imprisonment capitol of the world, may have to cut…
    JAIL4Judges 22 Dec, 2008
  • Subject: Brasscheck TV: Where are we headed? Jim What’s the long term future of the US economy? One highly successful investor, Jim Rogers, says it’s going nowhere until the Federal Reserve is abolished. Here’s why: http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/498.html – Brasscheck
    JAIL4Judges 20 Dec, 2008
  • …by the entire Legislature, the Judiciary, the Governor, and last, by not least, State Attorney General Larry Long. (See http://www.SD-JAIL4Judges.org ).
    JAIL4Judges 19 Dec, 2008
  • Comment on Ron Branson – The Worst Person in the World By Movie Producer Dennis Grover dennis@^$1 To:JAIL4Judges Cc: kptbrady@^$2 Subject: Re: The Worst Person In The World The Worst Person In The World From the Judges perspective your perceptions…
    JAIL4Judges 16 Dec, 2008
  • …event page ] _______________________________________________________________________________ While the length of the criticism of JAIL4Judges is only momentary and very short, it is noteworthy that this nation’s judiciary and the Bar Association of this entire nation…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Dec, 2008
  • Jesus Is Leading Me Home (Sent to J.A.I.L. by a New York JAILer) Jesus is leading me home When I am weary my Saviour is strong, He gaves me grace when the journey is long, He is the sourse and the theme of my song, For Jesus is leading me home. When I am anxious my Saviour is there, Ready to keep me and lift all my care, There’s not a trial that He will not share, For Jesus is…
    JAIL4Judges 27 Nov, 2008
  • Jesus Is Leading Me Home (Sent to J.A.I.L. by a New York JAILer) Jesus is leading me home When I am weary my Saviour is strong, He gaves me grace when the journey is long, He is the sourse and the theme of my song, For Jesus is leading me home. When I am anxious my Saviour is there, Ready to keep me and lift all my care, There’s not a trial that He will not share, For Jesus is…
    JAIL4Judges 27 Nov, 2008
  • JAIL4Judges – The Movie J.A.I.L. has been contacted by The Apollo Project. The question has been raised about producing…From: wd4193@^$2 [mailto:wd4193@^$3] Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 6:28 PM To:JAIL4Judges Ron Getting these changes will take a lot of action and cooperation. I am in hopes of finding collaborators…
    JAIL4Judges 19 Nov, 2008
  • …Original Message—– From: Danny17n@^$3 [mailto:danny17n@^$4] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:49 PM To: JAIL4Judges I am very interested in becoming Tennessee JIC. I have taken the opportunity to read your J.A.I.L. Constitution & By-Laws. I have…
    JAIL4Judges 17 Nov, 2008
  • …Then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.” Jeremiah 13:23. J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org , has been in existence for over 12 years, and is in all 50 states and several foreign countries. To manage your email, place…
    JAIL4Judges 11 Nov, 2008
  • The Lies of South Dakota While searching the internet, I came across an heretofore unknown by me post placed on the internet by Attorney Tom Barnett, the Director of the South Dakota Bar Association, who spread lies regarding the South Dakota J.A.I.L. Initiative. It is found on the internet at http://sdra.org/dwnld/amendment_e.doc -Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 Vote NO on Amendment E…
    JAIL4Judges 11 Nov, 2008
  • September 27, 2006, 12:16 pm SDO Decries “JAIL 4 Judges” and Other Attacks on Judiciary Posted by Peter Lattman Have you heard about this South Dakota ballot initiative to pass a state constitutional amendment that would eliminate judicial immunity? Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor has, and in today’s WSJ she attacks it and other threats to judicial…
    JAIL4Judges 06 Nov, 2008
  • Past Propaganda Launched Against JAIL4Judges. (Listen to Radio Program) http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=6288938&m=6288939 Witness the warfare and perplexity over our nation’s judiciary (O’Connor Concerned About J.A.I.L.) http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=6165651&m=6165652
    JAIL4Judges 06 Nov, 2008
  • …From: David E. Klarr [mailto:djour8142@^$3] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 10:33 AM To: JAIL4JudgesSubject: Your interview in BlogTalkRadio Ron, I just listened to you interview on Judicial Reform by Citizen G rand J ury overseeing…
    JAIL4Judges 03 Nov, 2008
  • Internationally Renowned Judicial Reform Advocate to be Interviewed Posted by: “Zena Crenshaw” zcrenshaw@^$1 Sat Nov 1, 2008 1:06 pm (PDT) Sent by MARANZ Public Relations Company. The next segment of “Change Of Venue” will feature Reverend Ron Branson who has long advocated the Judicial Accountability Initiative Law (J.A.I.L.) “to remedy several deficiencies in judicial policing…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Nov, 2008
  • Truth Stranger Than Fiction It is commonly said that truth is stranger than fiction. I was invited as a guest to a free screening of the movie “Changeling.” It will be coming out soon to the public. Do not let the strangeness of the title fool you as it is a “must see” which I would rate at least a 9 ½ on a scale of 1 to 10. It is based upon a true story and involves the…
    JAIL4Judges 30 Oct, 2008
  • Letter from CA. Legislative Analyst’s Office Background: Unbeknownst to you, J.A.I.L. has suffered being assailed by the City of Los Angeles . This has caused us upheaval and to seek recovery. The City just happened to seek entrance into the garage out of which J.A.I.L. functions, and we were told that we must remove everything from the garage. While we realize that the constraint…
    JAIL4Judges 27 Oct, 2008
  • Letter from CA. Legislative Analyst’s Office Background: Unbeknownst to you, J.A.I.L. has suffered being assailed by the City of Los Angeles . This has caused us upheaval and to seek recovery. The City just happened to seek entrance into the garage out of which J.A.I.L. functions, and we were told that we must remove everything from the garage. While we realize that the constraint…
    JAIL4Judges 27 Oct, 2008
  • Psalm 58 by Isaac Watts http://poetryfoundation.org/archive/poem.html?id=180939 Warning to Magistrates Judges, who rule the world by laws, Will ye despise the righteous cause, When th’injur’d poor before you stands? Dare ye condemn the righteous poor, And let rich sinners ’scape secure, While gold and greatness bribe your hands? Have ye forgot or never knew That God will…
    JAIL4Judges 17 Oct, 2008
  • The Judiciary: The Greatest Consumer Fraud in the World July, 2007 Dear Clients, Friends and alleged honorable members of the Judiciary. Years ago I discovered what more of ‘the People’ are discovering all the time. Our Third Branch of Government; our alleged honorable judiciary, is not only infested with liars, cheats, thugs and thieves, but this completely autonomous, self…
    JAIL4Judges 14 Oct, 2008
  • Making Wise Investments If you had purchased $1,000.00 of Delta Air Lines stock one year ago, you would have $49.00 left. With Enron, you would have had $16.50 left of the original $1,000.00. With WorldCom, you would have had less than $5.00 left. But if you had purchased $1,00.00 worth of beer one year ago, drank all of the beer, then turned in the cans for the aluminum recycling…
    JAIL4Judges 07 Oct, 2008
  • Politicians By Charlie Reese Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them. Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes? You and I don’t propose…
    JAIL4Judges 04 Oct, 2008
  • Is Your Pastor’s Sermons IRS Approved? Seven California Churches are now being sued because their sermons do not meet approved standards of the Internal Revenue Service. One of the pastors which is known by us is Pastor Wiley Drake, First Southern Baptist of Buena Park. We are informed that the nature of the complaint specifies, “These pastors have decided to thumb their noses…
    JAIL4Judges 04 Oct, 2008
  • Why the “People” Face Proposed Monetary Bail-Outs. 47 minute ‘Money as Debt’ animated documentary http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279
    JAIL4Judges 01 Oct, 2008
  • Comment Re: How Do We Get Cases Before Grand Juries? By Kevin – kevinsbjornson@^$1 Thank you for your work to get constitutional amendments to allow creation of grand juries not controlled by the gov. However getting anything like that passed is problematical. FIJA takes a different approach. They try to get things passed, sure, but in the meantime they utilize what already exists…
    JAIL4Judges 19 Sep, 2008
  • JAIL4Judges 19 Sep, 2008
  • It is pleasurable looking into the archives of past J.A.I.L. News Journals to seek how appropriate J.A.I.L.s messages still are. This September 7, 2002 JNJ is entitled, “The Passing of the Bar.” – Ron Branson J.A.I.L. News Journal _____________________________________________________ Los Angeles , California September 7, 2002 HotSeat4Judges/M-Th/5pmPT TheJAILerMakers What…
    JAIL4Judges 13 Sep, 2008
  • …docjohnson@^$3] Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 2:36 AM To: JAIL4Judges; Joyce Miller; Louise Kingon; mbsibley@^$4; Scotsman; devinekristi…62; Themis; ahs@^$63 Subject: Re: Removal confirmed – fromjail4judges.org remove my name docjohnson@^$64 —– Original Message…injusticebusters@^$407, “Attorney- Isidoro Rodriguez” , “JAIL4Judges– Ron Bronson” , jail4judges@^$408, james_liu29@^$409, baileysmom59…
    JAIL4Judges 12 Sep, 2008
  • …hannahphaynes@^$28; injuredworkers@^$29; injusticebusters@^$30; Attorney- Isidoro Rodriguez;JAIL4Judges; jail4judges@^$31; james_liu29@^$32; jeritoms@^$33; jjzbj@^$34; jon.roland@^$35; judgewatch…hannahphaynes@^$278; injuredworkers@^$279; injusticebusters@^$280; Attorney- Isidoro Rodriguez; JAIL4Judges– Ron Bronson; jail4judges@^$281; james_liu29@^$282; jeritoms@^$283; jjzbj@^$284; jon.roland…
    JAIL4Judges 10 Sep, 2008
  • …Original Message—– From: Jeff Soder [mailto:jdsoder@^$2] Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 8:33 PM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: * * * How Do We Get Cases Before Grand Juries? * * * * * * How Do We Get Cases Before Grand Juries? * * * Thanks Ron…
    JAIL4Judges 09 Sep, 2008
  • …REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES.” The system in power does not offer the People redress. See http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2007/2007-05-16.html We don’t have a real government– we have a power foreign…33 AMTo: dr.richard.cordero.esq@^$54; ‘zhenlu zhang’Cc: ironman_89122@^$55; isidoror@^$56;jail4judges@^$57; james_liu29@^$58; jeritoms@^$59; jjzbj@^$60; jmiller@^$61; jon.roland@^$62; jonmoseley…
    JAIL4Judges 03 Sep, 2008
  • …Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 10:33 AM To: dr.richard.cordero.esq@^$3; ‘zhenlu zhang’ Cc: ironman_89122@^$4; isidoror@^$5; jail4judges@^$6; james_liu29@^$7; jeritoms@^$8; jjzbj@^$9; jmiller@^$10; jon.roland@^$11; jonmoseley@^$12; judgewatch@^$13; justice@^$14; justice96…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Sep, 2008
  • Attention JAILers of America : We have now entered the month of September. What does that mean? Our Constitution and By-Laws sets forth; Article VII. National J.A.I.L. Support: J.A.I.L. hereby imposes a National J.A.I.L. semi-annual financial support of ten ($10) dollars on each and every JAILer payable during the months of March and September of each year. Such support shall be…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Sep, 2008
  • …Message—– From: Mark Adams [mailto:markadamsatty@^$2] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 9:25 AM To: annehunt@^$3 Cc: Branson, Ron; JAIL4Judges; ZermanEsqJAIL, Gary Subject: FW: Judicial Book Banning Anne: Your secret trial and contempt sanction is outrageously unjust. The…
    JAIL4Judges 28 Aug, 2008
  • …From: ANNE HUNT [mailto:annehunt@^$2] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 12:05 PM To: JAIL4JudgesAlthough I live in New Zealand , I appreciate receiving your e-mails and knowing that Americans are doing something about the judges…
    JAIL4Judges 26 Aug, 2008
  • California Judicial System Waning California is finding that financial constraints is causing them to have to employ belt-tightening measures. As commonly known, our American prison system far supersedes that of all other nations of the earth. There is not even a close second to our per-capita prison population. Likewise, the U.S. has many more lawyers than in any other place in…
    JAIL4Judges 21 Aug, 2008
  • California Judicial System Waning California is finding that financial constraints is causing them to have to employ belt-tightening measures. As commonly known, our American prison system far supersedes that of all other nations of the earth. There is not even a close second to our per-capita prison population. Likewise, the U.S. has many more lawyers than in any other place in…
    JAIL4Judges 21 Aug, 2008
  • …by her usage is “Touch not my judiciary, and do my judges no harm,” i.e., a god-like mentality. This is why her main target is JAIL4Judges. She has time and time again mentioned JAIL4Judges by name in her dissertations of defending the independence of the judiciary…
    JAIL4Judges 15 Aug, 2008
  • Ron B ranson …M ight B e T he M ost H ated M an I n America A mong A ll J udges Because J.A.I.L. is an organization with a thousand eyes, there is not much that is published in America relating to the judiciary that the JAILers do not catch. What’s more, we spend many hours pursuing the judicial news to grab significant stories that need to be published by us. B elow is a prime…
    JAIL4Judges 13 Aug, 2008
  • Monday, July 28, 2008 Images Judicial Independence: A Two-Way S treet By KAREN LEE TORRE http://www.ctlawtribune.com/getarticle.aspx?id=31028 “Judicial independence” has become a trendy mantra. In a recent speech, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Chase Rogers invoked its value. Justice Peter Zarella took it a step further. He has new bar admittees thinking there is a…
    JAIL4Judges 12 Aug, 2008
  • …I say, But to stand up with pride and help them all fade away. * * * Our best record shows this was sent to us by ” Spiker .” [JAIL4Judges: – The answer to an otherwise hopeless situation.] We are still at; P.O. Box 207 North Hollywood, CA. 91603
    JAIL4Judges 02 Aug, 2008
  • …united effort to subject the judicial power of this country to the power of the People. Great! JAIL4Judges has led this forefront for thirteen years, since April, 1995. However, the people are still…group? ALL, we really need to combine the efforts and expertise of all those good people at Jail4Judges, and so many more groups. (Does J4J have a yahoo group for discussion similar to AMOJ?) What…
    JAIL4Judges 29 Jul, 2008
  • DETNEWS.COM http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080722/OPINION01/807220309 Nation’s worst supreme court requires reform U.S. District Court Judge Avern Cohn seems more concerned about protecting his $155,000 per year salary and the $165,000 salary of Michigan Supreme Court justices than support the much-needed and long overdue ethics reform offered by the Reform…
    JAIL4Judges 24 Jul, 2008
  • DETNEWS.COM http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080722/OPINION01/807220309 Nation’s worst supreme court requires reform U.S. District Court Judge Avern Cohn seems more concerned about protecting his $155,000 per year salary and the $165,000 salary of Michigan Supreme Court justices than support the much-needed and long overdue ethics reform offered by the Reform…
    JAIL4Judges 24 Jul, 2008
  • JAILers of America: For all of you who are interested and have the time, JAIL4Judges will be on the radio this evening (Wednesday the 23rd) at 6 pm PST. (Please add an hour for each time zone East of California…
    JAIL4Judges 23 Jul, 2008
  • JAILers of America: For all of you who are interested and have the time, JAIL4Judges will be on the radio this evening (Wednesday the 23rd) at 6 pm PST. (Please add an hour for each time zone East of California…
    JAIL4Judges 23 Jul, 2008
  • RedCounty.com Our Judicial Masters http://www.redcounty.com/national/2008/07/our-judicial-masters/ Posted by: Chris Angle | 07/12/2008 4:46 PM The last couple of months have seen some interesting judicial decisions, which should be troubling for those who believe that judges should follow the Constitution and precendents as opposed to passing laws from the bench. First, the…
    JAIL4Judges 21 Jul, 2008
  • …Judicial Accountability.” Now, back to former governors Davis and Wilson. What they are really saying is this organization known as JAIL4Judges is spreading “their” propaganda about bad judges all over this nation and is making our judges look bad – so very bad, and we must…
    JAIL4Judges 16 Jul, 2008
  • Found: Federal Reserve Bank is Privately Owned by Bankers, Therefore Not Liable Under Federal Torts, However, for purposes of taxation, it is government and therefore immune. http://www.geocities.com/chrisforliberty/lewis.html JOHN L. LEWIS, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant/Appellee. No. 80-5905 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, NINTH CIRCUIT 680 F.2d…
    JAIL4Judges 10 Jul, 2008
  • …Double Jeopardy By Glynis Bethel From: Glynis Bethel [mailto:prophetessglynisbethel@^$1] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 8:03 AM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: The 5th Amendment; Double Jeopardy; Trial De Novo …. Mr. Ron Branson; GOD bless you for your work. I have a question…
    JAIL4Judges 09 Jul, 2008
  • Google Told to Turn Over User Data of YouTube http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/04/technology/04youtube.html?em&ex=1215230400&en=3420440712817131&ei=5087 By MIGUEL HELFT Published: July 4, 2008 SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge has ordered Google to turn over to Viacom its records of which users watched which videos on YouTube , the Web’s largest video site by far. Complaint…
    JAIL4Judges 07 Jul, 2008
  • The following was sent to me by my medical doctor friend, James Privitera. – Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 City Hall in San Francisco ( A scene at City Hall in San Francisco ) “Next.” “Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license.” “Names?” “Tim and Jim Jones.” “Jones? Are you related? I see a resemblance.” “Yes, we’re brothers.” “Brothers? You can’t get married.” “Why not…
    JAIL4Judges 01 Jul, 2008
  • …1 From: LOMA WHARTON [mailto:hairpiggie@^$2] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 7:46 AM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: Why Don’t Judicial Reformers Side With J.A.I.L.? Hi Ron, thank you. Stay Tuned…1857 God bless you, Loma. -Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$4 —– Original Message —– From:JAIL4Judges To: www.jail4judges.org Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 11:21 PM Subject: Why Don’t Judicial…
    JAIL4Judges 26 Jun, 2008
  • …Handouts for Deprived Judges! Ron Branson – National J.A.I.L. CIC VictoryUSA@^$1 Years ago whenJAIL4Judges was first founded in 1995, a search was done on J.A.I.L.’s behalf to find any other websites…defend their positions. She says, even one of the opposition organizations calls themselvesJAIL4Judges! Since the founding of J.A.I.L. we have pushed out some 15,000,000 emails pounding away at…
    JAIL4Judges 25 Jun, 2008
  • …and I are mutually recognized foes of each other, and are watching each other. I feel honored to have such a foe of our work of JAIL4Judges. The one thing I cannot stand is being ignored when I speak the Truth! I have already accumulated something around six state’s…
    JAIL4Judges 18 Jun, 2008
  • …the handwriting on the wall of such action taking place here in the good ole U.S. in the absence of J.A.I.L.. In fact, outside of JAIL4Judges what is there to stop them? For instance, had J.A.I.L. already been in place in California, the recent decision of the California…
    JAIL4Judges 17 Jun, 2008
  • …Judicial Reformers Side With J.A.I.L.? By Jim Henderson From: JCHMB@^$1 [mailto:JCHMB@^$2] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 3:34 PM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: Ron Branson in the TV News Again Hi Ron, I just don’t understand it. There are SO many people in the media saying…
    JAIL4Judges 15 Jun, 2008
  • …is Null and Void Ab Initio By Dan Stuart – DStu@^$1 From: DStu@^$2 [mailto:DStu@^$3] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:49 AM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: California Supreme Court Refuses to Delay Gay Marriage In a message dated 6/9/2008 2:50:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time…
    JAIL4Judges 12 Jun, 2008
  • …investigate judges. – Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 From: William J. Wagener [mailto:producer@^$2] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 1:35 PM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Ron BRANSON in the TV news again O.S.T. Judge candidate stammers…. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhIuemxuL1g The mere…
    JAIL4Judges 11 Jun, 2008
  • …investigate judges. – Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 From: William J. Wagener [mailto:producer@^$2] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 1:35 PM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Ron BRANSON in the TV news again O.S.T. Judge candidate stammers…. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhIuemxuL1g The mere…
    JAIL4Judges 11 Jun, 2008
  • …Courts? From: cruz gomez [mailto:setonrock2@^$1] Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 9:25 PM To: JAIL4JudgesSubject: Re: VictoryUSA@^$2 California Supreme Court Refuses to Delay Gay Marriage June 8…restaurant for the purpose of an interview for a 4/24/06 Los Angeles Times article regarding JAIL4Judges. This article did indeed appear in the Los Angeles Times on that date and is reproduced in…
    JAIL4Judges 09 Jun, 2008
  • …Courts? From: cruz gomez [mailto:setonrock2@^$1] Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 9:25 PM To: JAIL4JudgesSubject: Re: VictoryUSA@^$2 California Supreme Court Refuses to Delay Gay Marriage June 8…restaurant for the purpose of an interview for a 4/24/06 Los Angeles Times article regarding JAIL4Judges. This article did indeed appear in the Los Angeles Times on that date and is reproduced in…
    JAIL4Judges 09 Jun, 2008
  • …article, met with me personally in a restaurant for the purpose of an interview for a 4/24/06 Los Angeles Times article regarding JAIL4Judges. This article did indeed appear in the Los Angeles Times on that date and is reproduced in full at http://www.tulanelink.com/jail&#8230;
    JAIL4Judges 08 Jun, 2008
  • Setback In MicroChipping Every Man, Woman, And Child Katherine Albrecht wrote: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 3, 2008 CASPIAN RELEASES NEW EVIDENCE OF VERICHIP LIES AND DECEPTION Group’s Latest Report Sets Record Straight on Chip Implants, Cancer, and more . Opponents of the VeriChip implant are launching a new offensive against the controversial human microchip this week, amid…
    JAIL4Judges 06 Jun, 2008
  • Setback In MicroChipping Every Man, Woman, And Child Katherine Albrecht wrote: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 3, 2008 CASPIAN RELEASES NEW EVIDENCE OF VERICHIP LIES AND DECEPTION Group’s Latest Report Sets Record Straight on Chip Implants, Cancer, and more . Opponents of the VeriChip implant are launching a new offensive against the controversial human microchip this week, amid…
    JAIL4Judges 06 Jun, 2008
  • “If We Only Had More Reps To Rep Us” J.A.I.L. consistently receives ideas expressed by others as to what J.A.I.L. should focus upon. Just a couple days ago a recommended cure for America’s woes was made to our Oregon JIC, Sherree Lowe, that we should focus on getting more Reps to rep us. Sherree Lowe is to be commended for her excellent response. I deemed it appropriate to…
    JAIL4Judges 04 Jun, 2008
  • …possess authority. – Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 From: Dr. Don JONES [mailto:irsinfo@^$2] Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 2:56 PM To: JAIL4Judges; irsinfo@^$3 Subject: Title-15 (USC) Mail.com is again censoring! Re: Ron Branson – J.A.I.L. CIC Relating to: Nancy Lazaryan Hi…
    JAIL4Judges 03 Jun, 2008
  • …Warrior” From: gdebra91@^$1 [ mailto:gdebra91@^$2 ] Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 7:59 PM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: Going After Judges Minus J.A.I.L. is Spinning One’s Wheels You are such a Warrior…Albert Einstein From: Lcagee@^$5 [ mailto:Lcagee@^$6 ] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 5:15 AM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: Why Access to Grand Juries Are Being Blocked MY OWN EXPERIENCE FILING A COMPLAINT…
    JAIL4Judges 30 May, 2008
  • Mocking JAIL4Judges By Ron Branson – J.A.I.L. CIC In pursuing various websites on the web…opposition will go to make J.A.I.L. look bad. The following is designed to mock JAIL4Judges and Ron Branson on an article he wrote prior to 2000 regarding how plans…rule, the people mourn.” Proverbs 29:2. Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org (818) 310-8999
    JAIL4Judges 29 May, 2008
  • …CIC From: Nancy Lazaryan [mailto:nancylazaryan@^$1] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 7:52 AM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: Why Access to Grand Juries Are Being Blocked Ron, Thanks for you comments. In…country be restored to its founding principles without the key to the Grand Jury system of JAIL4Judges! Not Minnesota, not any other state, nor this country. The fact is that God has raised me…
    JAIL4Judges 28 May, 2008
  • …and expecting different results. – Albert Einstein From: Lcagee@^$1 [mailto:Lcagee@^$2] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 5:15 AM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: Why Access to Grand Juries Are Being Blocked MY OWN EXPERIENCE FILING A COMPLAINT IN VERMONT AGAINST A JUDGE My experience…
    JAIL4Judges 28 May, 2008
  • …the Perfect Grand Jury From: Suzonfm@^$1 [mailto:Suzonfm@^$2] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 1:57 AM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: the key to creating an independent grand jury Very interesting, Ron. There is nothing to stop…told you! I take it from you comments that you have never read the J.A.I.L. Initiative. See it at www.jail4judges.org . God bless you, Suzon. – Ron
    JAIL4Judges 28 May, 2008
  • Why Access to Grand Juries Are Being Blocked By Ron Branson – J.A.I.L. CIC Nancy Lazaryan, I have read of your below frustration, and I need to bring something to your attention regarding Grand Juries. Back in 1960 the State of California created what has now become known as the Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP). This commissions have spread throughout the other 49 states…
    JAIL4Judges 26 May, 2008
  • Are Banks a Safe Place for Your Valuables? * * * Not-So-Safe-Deposit Boxes: States Seize Citizens’ Property to Balance Their Budgets Elisabeth Leamy http://silverbearcafe.com/private/5.08/ripoff.html State governments are seizing contents and auctioning off citizen’s valuables. The 50 U.S. states are holding more than $32 billion worth of unclaimed property that they’re…
    JAIL4Judges 23 May, 2008
  • Just posted by William Wagner, “On Second Thought.” Check it out! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvvC7j42kks
    JAIL4Judges 22 May, 2008
  • Now is the Time to Act – Sure, I’ll sign! From: DStu@^$1 [mailto:DStu@^$2] Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 10:24 AM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: JAIL NOW Ron, Right now in California, is the best time to go for the JAIL legislation. Anyone who has a moral objection…
    JAIL4Judges 22 May, 2008
  • …itself “J.A.I.L.” led by California minister and frustrated pro se litigant Ron Branson, came up with a proposal called “JAIL4JUDGES,” that would strip judges of judicial immunity, and even subject them to criminal sanctions. Branson, the “commander-in-chief…
    JAIL4Judges 17 May, 2008
  • Notice To All California JAILers – FYI Here is an opportunity for a California JAILer to serve on the California Judicial Nominee Commission. The California Government Code requires the establishment of a Judicial Nominees Evaluation Commission which must have a certain number of just plain citizens. The job calls for evaluating all judicial candidates who are under consideration…
    JAIL4Judges 17 May, 2008
  • Congress Invested To The Hilt In Killing People International Herald Tribune New study shows US lawmakers have as much as $196 million invested in defense companies http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/03/america/NA-GEN-US-Congress-Defense-Investments.php The Associated Press April 3, 2008 WASHINGTON : Members of the U.S.Congress have as much as $196 million (€126.2 million…
    JAIL4Judges 13 May, 2008
  • Falsely Imitating JAIL4Judges Ron Branson – National J.A.I.L. CIC This past week a tear…DePonceau came out of nowhere claiming that he was the Founder of JAIL4Judges, and collecting money from people with legal problems supposedly…the State of New York, nor in any of our other fifty state JAIL4Judges Chapters, nor in any of our three foreign countries in which…
    JAIL4Judges 10 May, 2008
  • …JAIL-SoundOff@^$1 , JAIL-Legal-Discussions@^$2 , No_SSN@^$3 , etc., and we have a Yahoo Group to which no one may post, which is JAIL4Judges@^$4 . You might ascertain to which group you are intending to subscribe and post. If after you have information as to which group…
    JAIL4Judges 09 May, 2008
  • …She said the judiciary faces attack, such as in South Dakota, where voters considered a “Jail4Judges” measure in which an unsuccessful litigant could file a complaint and judges could be fined…She said the judiciary faces attack, such as in South Dakota, where voters considered a “Jail4Judges” measure in which an unsuccessful litigant could file a complaint and judges could be fined…
    JAIL4Judges 08 May, 2008
  • …regarding the below “decision” of the Federal District Court, please feel free to do so.
    Montgomery may be reached at mbsibley@^$2 .
    JAIL4Judges also requests that it be cc’ed at VictoryUSA@^$3 .
    Thank you.
    – Ron Branson UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA…
    JAIL4Judges
    08 May, 2008
  • …Paul Clark
    From: Paul C. Clark [mailto:clark@^$1]
    Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 8:52 AM
    To:JAIL4Judges
    Subject: Re: Dealing with Judicial Misconduct I have my own plan. …. I believe the only…bloody revolution if the people of this country stand-by waiting for it.
    However, the cause of JAIL4Judges is to restore our Constitution to its original state by passing a State Constitutional Amendment…
    JAIL4Judges 08 May, 2008
  • Mercury News Felony cases tossed due lack of judges in Riverside County The Associated Press 04/24/2008 http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_9039622?nclick_check=1
    RIVERSIDE, Calif.—More felony cases are being dropped in Riverside County because there aren’t enough judges to hear them.
    Supervising Superior Court Judge Helios Hernandez this week dismissed two more felony…
    JAIL4Judges
    24 Apr, 2008
  • …involved in the Terri Schiavo case, or proposals to cut judicial terms short, or a particularly disconcerting movement towards ” Jail4Judges ,” a campaign to allow citizen panels to review rulings from the bench, with the ability to even imprison—as the name tantalizingly…
    JAIL4Judges 23 Apr, 2008
  • Turning the Tables Citizen Issues Parking Ticket to Cop The Portland Mercury April 20, 2008 http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/Content?oid=753233&category=22101
    BY MATT DAVIS A CITIZEN who watched a cop illegally park, then walk into a Chinese restaurant to wait for his food, has issued the officer a series of citizen-initiated parking violations. Eric Bryant says he was…
    JAIL4Judges 20 Apr, 2008
  • Florida JAILer, Bob Hurt, Hits The Lime Light The Liberty Sentinel April 2008 http://www.libertysentinel.org/issue/TheLibertySentinel-2008-04.pdf Are Florida’s judges for real? A Florida lawyer armed with evidence of widespread criminal activity in the judiciary is finally bringing attention to the issue after making the accusations on national TV. The implications of the law…
    JAIL4Judges 17 Apr, 2008
  • …University and author of the blog http://www.sharkandshepherd.blogspot.com J.A.I.L. P.O. Box 207 North Hollywood, CA. 91603 Passage of Jail4Judges solves the above imperfect dilemma.
    JAIL4Judges 14 Apr, 2008
  • Lawsuit challenges prosecutors’ immunity The Supreme Court has been asked to rule where responsibility lies in instances of wrongful convictions.
    By David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer April 13, 2008 WASHINGTON —
    Prosecutors have long been shielded from lawsuits brought by people who…
    JAIL4Judges
    14 Apr, 2008
  • The Plan for Social Security Numbers
    By Ron Branson –National J.A.I.L. CIC
    Unfortunately many people are ignorant of the ultimate goal of “government” regarding the Social Security Number. It is generally viewed by people as an innocent retirement program wherein the government will take care of you until you are lowered into your grave. However, reality is much more dastardly…
    JAIL4Judges
    11 Apr, 2008
  • …correct agenda. In either case, justice towards the populace is threatened.
    The position of JAIL4Judges is that the only answer that will curb judicial immunity of judges, whether elected or appointed…slash the terms of sitting judges in Colorado, and, most notoriously, the recently failed “Jail4Judges” campaign in South Dakota to have citizen grand juries sit in judgment on members of the…
    JAIL4Judges
    09 Apr, 2008
  • http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=60643 Government stakes claim to every newborn’s DNA ‘We now are considered guinea pigs, instead of human beings with rights’
    April 03, 2008
    By Bob Unruh © 2008 WorldNetDaily
    An Orwellian plan that has state and federal governments staking claim to the ownership of every newborn’s DNA in perpetuity is advancing under the…
    JAIL4Judges
    04 Apr, 2008
  • …to charter or private schools – ought to prevail. It’s worth the fight. J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges. org , has been in existence for over 12 years, and is in all 50 states and several foreign countries. To manage your email , place…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Apr, 2008
  • …Applied Digital and that $8 million to $10 million would be invested in developing VeriChip over the next two years. Sent out by www.jail4judges.org VictoryUSA@^$1
    JAIL4Judges
    01 Apr, 2008
  • Police denounce area Web site that rates officers’ performance
    By Rachel Uranga, Staff Writer Article Launched: 03/25/2008 11:15:57 PM PDT
    CULVER CITY – Armed with a laptop and the names of tens of thousands of police officers across the country, a Southland entrepreneur is raising the ire of law enforcement with an online, five-star rating…
    JAIL4Judges
    30 Mar, 2008
  • …a revolution. But even if the later be consider the answer, J.A.I.L. will still be essential!
    – Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$1 www.jail4judges.org
    California’s top judge pleads for judiciary funds
    By Crystal Carreon – ccarreon@^$2
    JAIL4Judges
    28 Mar, 2008
  • March 25, 2008
    How the open net closed its doors By Clark Boyd Technology correspondent, in Boston China blocks many Western media websites A new book details the extent to which countries across the globe are increasingly censoring online information they find strategically, politically or culturally threatening.
    Access Denied: The Practice and Policy of Global Internet Filtering…
    JAIL4Judges
    26 Mar, 2008
  • Receiving MicroChip Implants
    Watch video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMd6rde4MX8&feature=related Bible Context: ” And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image. ” Revelation 16:2
    Once the mark is fully implemented and in place, which…
    JAIL4Judges 23 Mar, 2008
  • State Justices Worried Over Judicial Budget Cuts
    Mar 17, 2008
    Reporter: Morgan White
    Email Address: morgan.white@^$1
    Several areas of the court system are in jeopardy this this week as officials try to determine how to make ends meet.
    WBKO spoke with Kentucky Supreme Court Justices who are worried about how it will all play out…
    JAIL4Judges
    17 Mar, 2008
  • As It Was In The Days of Noah
    (By Brian Lyons) Brian-lyons@^$1 writes: G od sees all.
    J.A.I.L. has pass ed in G od ‘ s sight as in N oah ‘s days .
    Dear Brian Lyons,
    it is interesting that you have broached this issue in the manner you have done. Inasmuch as all things are open unto the eyes of Him with whom we have to do, when God sees a nation setting itself up for judgment, He…
    JAIL4Judges
    12 Mar, 2008
  • USA Today 3/11/08
    Threats up against federal judges, lawyers
    By Jeff Roberson, AP
    U.S. District Judge Joan Humphrey Lefkow attends her husband’s funeral in March 2005.
    Lefkow’s husband and mother were murdered in her home. ‘; sclListTop +=’ ‘; sclListTop +=’ Digg ‘; sclListTop +=’ del.icio.us ‘; sclListTop +=’ Newsvine…
    JAIL4Judges
    11 Mar, 2008
  • Being Faithful Followers It is with an earnest conviction that I know that God has raised up J.A.I.L. for such perilous times as this for the purpose of opening a door of deliverance to America against the powers of darkness that we face. While it is true that this battle will not be won by carnal weapons, “Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts,” it…
    JAIL4Judges 11 Mar, 2008
  • …paragraphs in color. God bless.
    – Ron Branson
    From: DonRufty@^$1 [mailto:DonRufty@^$2]
    Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 7:06 AM
    To: JAIL4Judges
    Subject: Fwd: Strategizing
    Re: [AMOJ_MAIN] Attorney David Limbaugh ADMITS some JUDGES… Ron, Is this an accurate summary? Don…
    JAIL4Judges
    10 Mar, 2008
  • Federal Judiciary Panicking Over JAIL4Judges —–Original Message—-
    – From: Montgomery Sibley [ mailto:mbsibley@^$1 ]
    Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 11:39 AM
    To: JAIL4Judges…FW: Open letter to Chief Justice Roberts re judges’ adoption on March 11 of rules for self-exemption from discipline Ron, FYIJail4Judges is putting the federal judiciary in a panic. I will have more thoughts on this for you later.
    Montgomery —–Original Message…
    JAIL4Judges
    07 Mar, 2008
  • …2006 election cycle the subject of driving licenses was brought up in the legislature’s alleged “Resolution” against South Dakota
    “WHEREAS, the author of Amendment E has publicly…
    JAIL4Judges
    29 Feb, 2008
  • …petition for writ of certiorari was docketed in the United States Supreme Court titled Florida JAIL4Judges, Petitioner v. The Florida Bar, Respondent, prepared and filed by Montgomery Blair Sibley…Constitutional Amendment must be registered as a Political Action Committee (PAC). Florida JAIL4Judges, pursuant to this law, is an officially-recognized PAC with a State-assigned number. However…
    JAIL4Judges 13 Feb, 2008
  • New World Order Christmas CD Nine Free New Songs for 2004! Get yours today! Send Property Forfeitures, copy of your National ID, retina scan, and complete set of fingerprints to:
    NWO CD Homeland Security C\o Gestapo Division Washington , DeCeived 00666
    Bring back holiday memories with old time favorites such as… It’s Beginning To Look A Lot Like Russia Deck The Streets With Mics…
    JAIL4Judges
    23 Dec, 2007
  • Officer Shoots Innocent Customer With Taser Gun MSNBC News Officer uses Taser to tame Best Buy customer Sides split on what happened;
    review begins
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22361567/ WESH.com updated 2:38 p.m. PT, Fri., Dec. 21, 2007
    DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. – A review is under way in the case of a Florida police officer who used a stun gun on a woman who had yelled at her. Last…
    JAIL4Judges
    23 Dec, 2007
  • …in the immediate takeover of tyrannical Power B y Conquest, discussed in Forfeiture of The Great American Experiment
    Therein we stated: The People must remain eternally vigilant to maintain the use of that…
    JAIL4Judges
    20 Dec, 2007
  • …the record California Supreme Court Justice Joyce L. Kennard’s DUI case in October of 1999.
    This is also true with lawyers. Posted on the bulletin board in the Superior Court County…
    JAIL4Judges
    19 Dec, 2007
  • …Behalf Of LAWoman
    Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:13 AM
    To: JAIL-Legal-Discussions@^$3
    Subject: [JAIL-Legal-Discussions]
    New Jail4Judges Oregon Web site Check it out.
    Oregon Jail -In -Chief: Sherree Lowe, has a new web site
    Let her know…
    JAIL4Judges
    18 Dec, 2007
  • http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-land3dec03,1,876407.story?ctrack=1&cset=true This land is their land — now A Colorado couple use a rarely invoked law to take part of a neighbor’s lot. The squatters’ rights case sparks outrage.
    By DeeDee Correll, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
    December 3, 2007
    BOULDER, COLO. — For more than 20 years, a retired judge and…
    JAIL4Judges
    17 Dec, 2007
  • …after judges criminally. To back this up, two upper-level Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Officials contacted me by email to JAIL4judges and said they were having trouble with two Los Angeles County Superior Court Judges they were attempting to prosecute, but judicial…
    JAIL4Judges 14 Dec, 2007
  • …From: antolak@^$1 [ mailto:antolak@^$2 ]
    Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:30 AM
    To: JAIL4JudgesSubject: Re: Yes, 1st Amendment Right to Criticize, But Not Too Much! …. The judges in…person, even though Blacks Law dictionary states to the contrary.
    Stan Antlocer antolak@^$3 JAIL4Judges > Yes, 1st Amendment Right to Criticize, > But Not Too Much! > > ~ ~ ~ > > > Lawyer may lose…
    JAIL4Judges
    13 Dec, 2007
  • Yes, 1st Amendment Right to Criticize, But Not Too Much! ~ ~ ~ Lawyer may lose license for blog entry on Broward judge By Tonya Alanez | South Florida Sun-Sentinel December 13, 2007
    A defense attorney’s law license is at risk because he posted an angry description on the Internet of embattled…
    JAIL4Judges
    13 Dec, 2007
  • Still Remembering S.D. J.A.I.L.
    They just cannot get off it – J.A.I.L. that is!
    Today’s New York Law Journal has a story about the South Dakota J.A.I.L. effort, and its supposed objective to punish judges for making decisions that we just do not like, i.e. “…to subject judges to removal and possible jail time for making decisions considered invalid…”
    The J.A.I.L. Initiative…
    JAIL4Judges
    11 Dec, 2007
  • Giving Thanks By Dennis Grover dennis@^$1
    In these times of poisoned food and water, chemicals from the sky, mind-altering pharmaceuticals, revised history and mind-numbing education; there has emerged an unusual breed of humanity.
    People like you and I who can clearly see what is happening in our once free country. I like to call this wonderfully immune group, Americans. The…
    JAIL4Judges
    30 Nov, 2007
  • First-Hand Voter Fraud
    Subject: YESTERDAY, FIRST HAND INFORMATION ABOUT VOTER FRAUD…VIRGINIA BROOKS Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 23:14:55 -0500
    From: Virginia Brooks To: vareforms1@^$
    1 *From:* Jim Welch < mailto:pbls40@^$2 > *- TEXAS 979-657-81
    09 HE AND THE POLL WORKER WITNESSED HIS VOTE BEING CHANGED BEFORE THEIR EYES.
    – VIRGINIA BROOKS, 419-368-6074*
    I ask for your support on an…
    JAIL4Judges
    30 Nov, 2007
  • …woconnor@^$1]
    Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 7:09 AM
    To: JAIL4Judges
    Subject: Re: VictoryUSA@^$2 Was the Police Video on Tasering…O’Connor woconnor@^$3 —– Original Message —–
    From: JAIL4Judges
    To: jail4judges@^$4 Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 7:54…thousand dollar lawsuit. The result is now the existence of JAIL4Judges, which we are all seeking to place into enforcement.
    – Ron…
    JAIL4Judges
    28 Nov, 2007
  • …me to get a decision on my thirteen million six-hundred and twenty thousand dollar lawsuit.
    The result is now the existence of JAIL4Judges, which we are all seeking to place into enforcement.
    JAIL4Judges
    26 Nov, 2007
  • …founder, Legislative Education Action Drive FAMILY: Wife, Andrea; two grown sons
    Source: MediaNews Sacramento Bureau reporting *
    JAIL4Judges offers a correction. The above says,
    ” Two initiatives funded by Rich’s shell groups were aimed at the judiciary last year. One…
    Ron Branson, Author/Founder of J.A.I.L. 20 Nov, 2007
  • Police to search for guns in homes http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/11/17/police_to_search_for_guns_in_homes/?page=2 City program depends on parental consent By Maria Cramer Globe Staff / November 17, 2007
    Boston police are launching a program that will call upon parents in high-crime neighborhoods to allow detectives into their homes, without a warrant, to search…
    Ron Branson, Author/Founder of J.A.I.L. 20 Nov, 2007
  • J.A.I.L. Under Attack By The “Democracy Defined” Campaign By Ron Branson It is a faithful saying that no army wastes their ammunition firing at corpses, but rather focus their attention at targets that present a threat to their agenda. Below, the “Democracy Defined” Organization turns its cross hairs upon J.A.I.L. in a meager attempt to denigrate and undermine its call for…
    Ron Branson, Author/Founder of J.A.I.L. 20 Nov, 2007
  • It’s Not About Spam! Visit: http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/FreedomOfS peechNow/ message/352 To those who say that censorship is not happening: It is hard to imagine that there is still anyone who will honestly claim that censorship is not happening: After it has been on TV documentaries, and after it has been in the courts, and after whistleblowers have come forward from the…
    Ron Branson, Author/Founder of J.A.I.L. 20 Nov, 2007
  • First-Hand Voter Fraud Subject: YESTERDAY, FIRST HAND INFORMATION ABOUT VOTER FRAUD…VIRGINIA BROOKS Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 23:14:55 -0500 From: Virginia Brooks To: vareforms1@^$1 *From:* Jim Welch < mailto:pbls40@^$2 > *- TEXAS 979-657-8109 HE AND THE POLL WORKER WITNESSED HIS VOTE BEING CHANGED BEFORE THEIR EYES. – VIRGINIA BROOKS, 419-368-6074* I ask for your support on an…
    Ron Branson, Author/Founder of J.A.I.L. 20 Nov, 2007
  • What J.A.I.L. Would Have Prevented by Lawrence Agee, MD Dear Ron, If JAIL had existed 10 years ago, my home would not now be in foreclosure. I am about to lose $350,000 of equity because of a sham judgment lien placed on my home. This lien was literally created out of thin air by a judge. He denied me due process in a divorce (7 month marriage). I sued him. His defense? “I’m…
    JAIL4Judges 09 Nov, 2007
  • Internet Censorship By Wayne Madsen 12-9-5 Internet censorship. It did not happen overnight but slowly came to America’s shores from testing grounds in China and the Middle East. Progressive and investigative journalist web site administrators are beginning to talk to each other about it, e-mail users are beginning to understand why their e-mail is being disrupted by it, major…
    JAIL4Judges 26 Oct, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? http://www.sd-jail4judges.org We Do Have a Constitution; What We Don’t Have Is a Government By Barbie, ACIC, National…I.L. by holding judges accountable. J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges. org To manage subscription , place the word Subscribe or Un s ubscribe in ‘subject’ line…
    JAIL4Judges 17 Sep, 2007
  • Fear That Laws Against RFID MicroChipping of Everyone Impedes Progress and Makes Us Less Safe September 5th, 2007 RF Laws That Matter: A Late Summer 2007 Update http://www.securityinfowatch.com/online/The-Latest/RF-Laws-That-Matter–A-Late-Summer-2007-Update/12189SIW306 Flaws in RF legislation could chill innovations used for security, consumer convenience Kathleen Carroll…
    JAIL4Judges 11 Sep, 2007
  • …Mike McKee —–Original Message—– From: antolak@^$2 [ mailto:antolak@^$3 ] Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 6:49 PM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: Today’s Google Alert – 9/8/07 What is the address that we can send mail to this moron. This is the reason the California…
    JAIL4Judges 10 Sep, 2007
  • Lessons From American History A long time ago in America a man knocked on the door of a house of ill repute. The madam opened the little door, and asked, “How may I help you, Sir?”
    The gentleman said, “I am here to see Dolly.”
    The madam says, “Oh, Dolly is our most expensive woman, I’m sure you would be well satisfied with one of our other more economical women.” The man says, “No…
    JAIL4Judges
    31 Aug, 2007
  • The Judiciary: The Greatest Consumer Fraud in the World July, 2007
    Dear Clients, Friends and alleged honorable members of the Judiciary Years ago I discovered what more of ‘the People’ are discovering all the time.
    Our Third Branch of Government ; our alleged honorable judiciary, is not
    only infested with…
    JAIL4Judges
    21 Jul, 2007
  • …National J.A.I.L. Commander-In-Chief VictoryUSA@^$2
    From: kpatbrady [mailto:kptbrady@^$3]
    Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 3:02 PM
    To: JAIL4Judges
    Subject: Your NEW ACIC July 2, 2007
    Ron Branson JAIL
    Commander-in-Chief
    North Hollywood, California 91603 Sa
    lutations Sir, It honestly…
    JAIL4Judges
    04 Jul, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden?
    Dedication of J.A.I.L. to America On her 231st Anniversary On this 231st anniversary…BLESS AMERICA, MY HOME SWEET HOME!! J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges. org To be automatically added to future mailings, place the word Subscribe in the subject…
    JAIL4Judges 04 Jul, 2007
  • Judicial System in USA Worse Than Communist Poland in 1980 (Dated today, 7/2/07) Andrei Kemp 1179 Carlton Terrace, Union , NJ 07083-4110 Tel.: (908) 688 4427; (908) 370 8614 (mobile) E-mail: AnKemUS@^$1 , AnKemUS@^$2 July 2…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Jul, 2007
  • Judicial System in USA Worse Than Communist Poland in 1980 (Dated today, 7/2/07) Andrei Kemp 1179 Carlton Terrace, Union , NJ 07083-4110 Tel.: (908) 688 4427; (908) 370 8614 (mobile) E-mail: AnKemUS@^$1 , AnKemUS@^$2 July 2…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Jul, 2007
  • …CIC From: Dan Manville [mailto:dmanville197474@^$1] Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 4:59 AM To:JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: ***The Final Authority in America*** From reading your reports, it seems that…L. News Journal (JNJ) of 5/16/07 titled “The Right to Redress –not Petition” http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2007/2007-05-16.html wherein we discussed the decision by the Court of Appeals…
    JAIL4Judges 02 Jul, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? http://www.sd-jail4judges.org One Answer By: Barbie, National J.A.I.L. victoryusa@^$1 Is there one person who can answer…itself is a serious violation of the People’s rights. See the South Dakota website, http://www.sd-jail4judges.org especially the pre-election portion, that records the evidence of the many violations…
    JAIL4Judges 27 Jun, 2007
  • …Ron From: rcutting14@^$1 [mailto:rcutting14@^$2] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 10:08 PM To: JAIL4JudgesSubject: Re: Hi Ron or Barbie: Roberta Cutting states: I understand that J.A.I.L is unique…of themselves as unique and worthy of J.A.I.L.’s promotion. I find myself as the leader of JAIL4Judges being made a point of contention mostly by political candidates, but also organizations…
    JAIL4Judges 26 Jun, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? http://www.sd-jail4judges.org Judges Digging Their Own Pit By Ron Branson – National J.A.I.L. CIC VictoryUSA@^$1 As…Properties, Inc. All rights reserved. J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges. org To be automatically added to future mailings, place the word Subscribe in the subject…
    JAIL4Judges 24 Jun, 2007
  • …sammyerichardson [mailto:sammyerichardson@^$1] Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2007 7:51 AM To:JAIL4Judges How can stop these bastards from taking our rights away when they control the Judi c iary…Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? http://www.sd-jail4judges.org Propaganda: The Weapon of Mass Deception When the technique has been perfected, every…
    JAIL4Judges
    23 Jun, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement
    JNJ Library
    F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? www.sd-jail4judges.org
    Propaganda: The Weapon of Mass Deception When the technique has been perfected, every…Russell, “The Scientific Outlook” , 1931 J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges. org To be automatically added to future mailings, place the word Subscribe in the subject…
    JAIL4Judges
    22 Jun, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? http://www.sd-jail4judges.org Red Light Cameras Declared Unconstitutional By Ron Branson – National J.A.I.L. CIC VictoryUSA…Reach Josh Verges at 605-331-2335. J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges. org To be automatically added to future mailings, place the word Subscribe in the subject…
    JAIL4Judges 19 Jun, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library
    F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What? MeWarden?
    www.sd-jail4judges.org Judge Hides Behind “Judicial Canons”
    Judges find all kinds of hiding places to keep from…with the SJC asking it to intervene. J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges. org To be automatically added to future mailings, place the word Subscribe in the subject…
    JAIL4Judges
    04 Jun, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library
    F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden?
    More O’Connor Propaganda By Barbie, ACIC National J.A.I.L. victoryusa@^$1 “But when a…decisions.” See JNJ
    dated November 22, 2006, titled “Decisions, Decisions, Decisions!” http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2006/2006-11-22.html .
    Now this lovely-appearing distinguished lady wouldn…
    JAIL4Judges
    04 Jun, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? http://www.sd-jail4judges.org Mafia, or the Courts: Which is Worse? By Ron Branson – National J.A.I.L. CIC Above, I…said has gone on quietly for decades. J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges. org To be automatically added to future mailings, place the word Subscribe in the subject…
    JAIL4Judges 24 May, 2007
  • New York JIC, Patrick Brady, Hits TV From: kpatbrady [mailto:kptbrady@^$1] Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 5:46 AM To: JAIL4Judges Subject: Re: Lone leafletter in a black Dress Ohhh and such a stunning lil’ black dress it is, wooden you agree? Thanks guys, for…
    JAIL4Judges 24 May, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? http://www.sd-jail4judges.org Jury Trials Becoming Extinct Another constitutional guarantee disappearing by a power…York Times Company For a current example of the deprivation of jury trials, see http://www.jail4judges.org/state_chapters/ca/Other/DonBird.htm J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law…
    JAIL4Judges 20 May, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? http://www.sd-jail4judges.org The Righ t to Redress –Not ” Petition ” By Barbie, ACIC, National J.A.I.L. victoryusa…exhausting the USSC and the violation is not corrected. See Federal J.A.I.L. Bill, http://www.jail4judges.org/state_chapters/dc/DC_initiative.html 2. The court fails to rely on the Constitution as…
    JAIL4Judges 20 May, 2007
  • In-Fighting In Florida Courts Broward court blog is going too far, critics claim Others call it `open forum’ http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl-cblog13may13,0,1498387.story?page=1&coll=sfla-news-broward By Tonya Alanez South Florida Sun-Sentinel Posted May 13 2007 A weblog created to constructively look at Broward judges’ performances on the bench is now raising…
    JAIL4Judges 14 May, 2007
  • …Alaska JIC From: Frank Turney [mailto:fturney@^$1] Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 6:59 PM To:JAIL4Judges; fturney@^$2 Ron Branson Mocking the Alaska Bar Convention lawyers and judges in a peaceful…lawyers across Alaska . They couldn ‘ t help but notice a man in a black robe with a signJAIL4JUDGES. ORG . The Fairbanks Police came over just to check to see if I was ok! More to come ! I…
    JAIL4Judges 14 May, 2007
  • …Constitution Mission Statement JNJ Library F ederal J.A.I.L. F AQs What?MeWarden? http://www.sd-jail4judges.org Is There A Way Around The Need For J.A.I.L ? By Ron Branson – National J.A.I.L. CIC A…bill!” -Ron Branson VictoryUSA@^$2 J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges. org To be automatically added to future mailings, place the word Subscribe in the subject…
    JAIL4Judges 14 May, 2007

Texas Divorce Activist Targets No-Fault Intent

Smartmarriages © cmfce at smartmarriages.com 
Mon Aug 7 12:01:38 EDT 2000

subject: Texas Divorce Activist Targets No-Fault Intent

from: Smart Marriages 

Note: This is not a press release issued by CMFCE/Smart Marriages.
I recieved this today and am forwarding it to you because
of it's interesting angle on "no fault divorce".  -diane sollee

> Truncellito claims that no one is married because the
>misinterpretation of the no-fault law took away all the previous
>protections of marriage, turning marriage into nothing more than
>"registered cohabitation."

>For 30 years, up to now, "unilateral
>divorce on demand" has been the practice in Texas courts. According to
>Truncellito, that was not Texas legislative intent.

P R E S S    R E L E A S E 

For Immediate Release, August 5, 2000

This month a Houston attorney, Ed Truncellito, is petitioning the Texas
Supreme Court to review the "no-fault" divorce laws, enacted 30 years
ago.  

Two years ago, Truncellito objected to the "no-fault" divorce filed by
his wife in Harris County's 246th District Court, but the divorce was
granted anyway.  His shock and frustration over that ruling set in motion
Truncellito's subsequent 1500-hour investigation into Texas divorce laws.
 In his research, he uncovered substantial problems with both the
language of the law and its implementation in the courtrooms.  He is now
asking the high court to sort out the confusion surrounding Texas
"no-fault" divorce law, which was enacted in 1969.

Truncellito believes that the law was meant for "uncontested-only" cases,
saying that this is clearly shown by all the commentary surrounding the
law's enactment.  In May, 1999, he appealed his divorce to the First
Court of Appeals in Houston, but they would not even discuss the no-fault
law. Instead, they denied him a 15-minute hearing and then penalized him
$4,500 for appealing. He claims that their unpublished decision, handed
down this April, is a sham.

While the Texas Supreme Court does not have to grant Truncellito his
requested hearing, they may find it hard to refuse.  He is inviting
others concerned about this problem to blanket the high court with pleas
to grant his petition-for-review.  

Two weeks ago, Truncellito set up a web site with information on how
others can get involved or how they can appeal their own divorces at
www.no-one-is-married.com. He claims that no one is married because the
misinterpretation of the no-fault law took away all the previous
protections of marriage, turning marriage into nothing more than
"registered cohabitation."

Truncellito, along with other supporters, will be stationed outside
Harris County's Family Law Center at 1115 Congress, starting Tuesday
morning, August 8, handing out information to couples headed for divorce
court.  He is hoping to solicit interest in his project from spouses who
wish to stop their own divorces. For 30 years, up to now, "unilateral
divorce on demand" has been the practice in Texas courts. According to
Truncellito, that was not Texas legislative intent.

The following week of August 14, Truncellito plans to file a $7.5 billion
lawsuit against the State Bar of Texas, alleging that they covered up
like Big Tobacco, who knew they had a destructive product. He insists
that the State Bar knew all along that the no-fault law was being
misapplied, but they covered it up for financial gain. Divorce attorneys
could guarantee divorce for their clients after the payment of the
requisite retainer fee. Then the divorce would frequently spawn
additional legal fees from future custody disputes, at three-digit hourly
rates.

With today's no-fault divorce practice in Texas, when one spouse says
it's over, the other spouse has no choice. Truncellito claims this is
mistaken, that no-fault was enacted for divorces only where both spouses
agree that divorce was needed, and that the Texas Legislature gave
spouses the right to refuse a no-fault divorce and demand proof of
grounds, such as abuse, adultery, or abandonment. However, because the
State Bar of Texas covered up, no one has listened.

Contact:  Ed Truncellito - 281-354-5869
                                                                         
#   #   #


**************************
This FREE online newsletter shares information on marriage, divorce and 
skills-based educational approaches.  Opinions expressed are not 
necessarily shared by members of the Coalition.

Copyright © 2000 CMFCE. All rights reserved.

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to the list, mail majordomo at lists.his.com
Leave the subject line empty. In the body of the 
message type: subscribe smartmarriages or unsubscribe smartmarriages 
(do this on the first line, do not skip a space at the top)

- to CHANGE YOUR ADDRESS, unsubscribe your old address and subscribe your 
new address.  

- this is a moderated list.  When you send a reply message it is read by 
Diane Sollee, director, only.  

Newsletter archive - all past posts to the newsletter:
http://archives.his.com/smartmarriages/index.html#start 

The 4th Annual Smart Marriages conference was held
June 27 - July 4, 2000 in DENVER. Tapes of all workshops & keynotes are
available (90 min audiotapes $10, videos $25) at 800-241-7785 or  
tapes at playbacknow.com

The 5th annual conference dates & location will be announced
on the newsletter as soon as they are available.    

List your program in the Directory of Courses at 
http://www.smartmarriages.com 

Coalition for Marriage, Family and Couples Education, LLC (CMFCE)
Diane Sollee, Director
5310 Belt Rd. NW, Washington, DC 20015-1961
www.smartmarriages.com  202-362-3332  










FAIR USE AND DISCLAIMER

(PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

Author of this blog, Dedicated to the Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America, and our Children Who Want to Come Home, and Especially to My Little Julian, is not a lawyer, attorney, or legal practitioner, therefore, no information contained herein this post and/or blog could be (mis)construed as “legal advice.”  Anyone who exercises he/r rights, and private property sometimes called “child” for deceptive, possibly malicious or retaliatory, and profiteering/privateering and in the “best interests” . . . of the “state” Texas General and other Funds at one’s own peril, risk, and/ or self-fulfillment.  The choice is yours.

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN America, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the uS Constitution and  Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, uS Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement/demand, then contact Author of this blog immediately as fair notice and due diligence requires so that Author shall act lawfully and reasonably with expedience pursuant to any supplemental knowledge.

					

MORE FAMILY COURT FRAUD: Murphy v. MurphyI


Judge Quillian A. Baldwin.Michelle Murphy Case.Coweta County.GA.Newnan.Free Jack and Thomas

CHIEF JUDGE QUILLAIN A. BALDWIN,  credit to author of MURPHY V. MURPHY; Newnan, GA (Coweta County Superior Court)

IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF GEORGIA Case No. ___________
Nancy Michelle Murphy and Millard Farmer, Petitioners
vs.
John Harold Murphy, Respondent
Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia The Court of Appeals Decision is Case No. A14A1137
Millard Farmer Georgia Bar No. 255300
P.O. Box 1728 Atlanta, GA 30301-1728
(404) 688-8116 millardfarmer@millardfarmer.com
Counsel for Nancy Michelle Murphy and Millard Farmer
Petition for Writ of Certiorari
Questions Presented
Question One.
     Whether the Court of Appeals, as did the trial court, without any evidence to support an indirect contempt conviction, could, by shifting the burden of proof and using an illegal standard of proof, affirm the trial court’s adjudication of Nancy Michelle Murphy of civil indirect contempt for violating the trial court’s August 23, 2013 Order directing that, “[e]ach party and the Children shall fully cooperate with the custody evaluator” that the guardian ad litem selected and the Court designated.
 Question Two.
      Whether the Court of Appeals and the trial court could, without violating the protections accorded Millard Farmer by the United States Constitution’s Due Process and Equal Protection provisions and the corresponding protections of the Georgia Constitution, the laws and Rules of Court of Georgia and the holdings of the appellate courts of Georgia, uphold the criminal indirect contempt conviction of Millard Farmer, adjudicate him in absentia, without evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, under the following fatal, legal infirmities with the criminal conviction:
1.      When, in a case with two jointly participating lawyers, the charging document only identified the charged individual, as “defendant’s lawyer” [singular, with no further identity]. 
2.      When the August 23, 2013 Order (R. V11 p. 2192) placed a restriction upon the “parties” discussing matters with the children except for implementing the August 23, 2014 Order or the final decree that was used as the basis of the criminal contempt conviction of Millard Farmer.
     The restriction provided, in its entirety, as follows. Neither party shall discuss any of the issues, allegations or claims in this case with the Children, unless such discussions are necessary to implement the terms of this Order or the terms of the Final Decree.
3.      When the restriction was written in the August 23, 2013 Order by the Prosecutors/Plaintiff’s attorneys and when they charged the alleged illegal conduct relating to this “don’t discuss” restriction in their September 27, 2013 Amended motion for contempt, (R. V14, p. 2781) they stated that the charge was that “Neither party shall discuss.”
     This restriction applies only to the “Parties” and certainly cannot be used as the basis for a criminal conviction for anyone other than a “Party.” Millard Farmer was not a “Party.”
     The “Parties” were identified sixteen (16) times in the August 23, 2013 Order, that clearly identified the parties to be only the parents. In another segment of the Order, where the lawyers were intended to be included, the lawyers were identified as the “Parties’ lawyers.”
     There was no restraint placed upon Millard Farmer by the August 23, 2013 Order drafted and presented with an ex parte, hand delivered letter to Judge Baldwin by a Glover & Davis lawyer in order to have 2 the August 23, 2013 Order executed by Judge Baldwin with information never supported by oath or any other form of admissible evidence. (R. V11, p. 2214)
     The August 23, 2013 Order, sought to be enforced with criminal contempt charges, resulted from the wealth of the Plaintiff and his current wife to engage in habitual, litigious efforts to capture Jack and Thomas from these Children’s mother with unnecessary, expensive to defend, schemes that only these wealthy litigants could afford to successfully litigate with their judge-shopped jurist.
4.      When this criminal contempt action was based upon the August 23, 2013 Order that, in part, held and reaffirmed as follows:
     On July 19, 2013, Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint and requested this Court have a temporary hearing to determine whether circumstances exist which support a temporary change in the physical custody of the Children * * *
     Pursuant to the terms of the Final Decree, Defendant was awarded physical custody of the Children. . . . The Final Decree specifies the parties have joint legal custody of the Children but it is silent as to which parent has “final decision making authority” on legal custody issues. * * *
Conclusions of Law
     It would not be in the best interests of the Children for temporary custody to be changed.  
Order
     The physical custody of the Children shall not be changed at this time.
     The parties shall continue to exercise the parenting time with the Children as detailed in the Final Decree. 
5.      When, albeit that Millard Farmer was not legally charged, noticed, or that the August 23, 2013 Order was not applicable to Millard Farmer and that Millard Farmer was convicted in absentia, without any admissible evidence showing that he was engaged in any type of discussion that was not a necessity to implement the terms of the August 23, 2013 Order, or the Final Decree.
6.      When there was no evidence supporting the following finding of fact identifying Millard Farmer.
     Based upon the Court’s review of two affidavits signed by the children and filed by Defendant on September 23, 2013 in support of her Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Contempt, the Court further finds that Defendant and Millard Farmer, one of her lawyers, are discussing the issues, allegations, and claims in this case with the children and that such discussions are not necessary to implement the terms of the August Order.

The affidavits (R. V14, pp. 2761, 2768) do not in any manner provide evidence that even if discussions took place the discussions were not due to the professional obligation of the lawyer for Michelle Murphy in order to implement Michelle Murphy’s rights under the August 23, 2013 Order.
     The court only found that defendant’s counsel, Millard Farmer, was found to be in contempt of the provision of the August Order prohibiting “parties” from discussing this case — that would be the professional obligation of an attorney in a case where the client was charged with criminal contempt, as was Michelle Murphy, who was charged with contempt.
     The children had the 4 recorded statement that proved John Harold Murphy swore falsely (R. V14, p.2721) in the contempt charging papers. Millard Farmer was not convicted of anything relating to the final decree.
 7.      When the burden of proof was upon the Prosecutors/Plaintiff in this criminal case to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the communications took place and thereafter that the communications were not necessary to implement the terms of the August 23, 2013 Order, and the prosecutors proved neither.
8.      When the prosecutors did not even carry their burden of proving that there were communications about the case or the August 23, 2013 Order.
     And they never presented any information that there was not a necessity to discuss the numerous changes relating to visitation in the August 23, 2013 Order that were necessary to implement that Order.
9.      When the Court, failing to convict Millard Farmer of anything relating to the final decree, which eliminated the issues regarding the final decree, as this would be an acquittal of that criminal charge due the absence of a conviction of that charge.
The criminally charged violation segment of the August 23, 2913 Order follows:
Neither party shall discuss any of the issues, allegations or claims in this case with the children unless such claims are necessary were not to implement the terms of the [August 23, 3013] Order (R. V11, p. 2192)
5      Millard Farmer was criminally convicted of indirect criminal contempt as follows with language not contained in the Order alleged to be violated, supported or noticed in the criminal charging document, unsupported by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
     Defendant’s counsel Millard Farmer is hereby found to be in contempt of the provisions of the August Order prohibiting Defendant or her attorneys from discussing this case or the issues raised herein with the Children.
     Mr. Farmer further is found in to be in contempt of this Court because of Defendant’s failure to appear at the duly noticed contempt hearing on October13 Mr. Farmer shall be immediately incarcerated in the Coweta County, Georgia jail for a period of 20 days or until he pays One Thousand Dollars.(“$1,000) to the Court. (R. V17, p. 3628)
     The prosecuting attorneys falsely stated above in the Order that they drafted and Judge Baldwin signed, “…the provisions of the August Order prohibiting Defendant or her attorneys…”
10.      When the Order adjudicating Millard Farmer omits adjudication of the exempting part of the discussing restriction, i.e., unless such claims are necessary to implement the terms of this Order.
     The segments of the criminal charging document that were used as the basis for the criminal conviction of Millard Farmer for indirect contempt of court are as follows.
7.      The Order also provides the following: Neither party shall discuss any of the issues, allegations or claims in this case with the children, unless such claims are necessary to implement the terms of this Order, or 6 the terms of the Final Decree.
8.      Since the entry of the Order, [August 23, 2013] the Children have made several comments to Plaintiff that clearly indicate Defendant and her lawyer have allowed the Children to read the hearing transcript from the August 13 hearing.
     Furthermore, it is evident Defendant and her lawyer have discussed the issues and allegations in this case with the Children since the entry of the Order. (R. V14, p. 2781)
Question Three
     Whether Judge Baldwin was disqualified from adjudicating any of the November 19, 2013 indirect contempt adjudications after January 1, 2013, when the Clerk of Coweta Superior Court, pursuant to the authority of Coweta Judicial Circuit’s long mandated, but only recently enacted, Uniform Superior Court Rule 3.1 case management plan, administratively assigned this case to Superior Court Judge Dennis Blackmon, as confirmed to the Clerk of the Court of Appeals of Georgia by letter (R. V7, p. 1435) that the Coweta Clerk entered into the record of this case, as also confirmed by Judge Blackmon, who, without adjudicating the pending not adjudicated disqualification motions against Judge Baldwin, illegally attempted to transfer the case back to Judge Baldwin (R. V8, p. 1670 and R. V7, p. 1503), as both judges had illegally failed to act upon and comply with the intent of USCR 25.3 and the constitutional Due Process and Equal Protection protections afforded the accused. See, Horn v. Shepherd, 294 Ga. 468, 470 (2014).
     Judge Baldwin is further disqualified, based upon the unadjudicated disqualification motions pending against him at the time that he adjudicated the contempt motions (R.V14, p. 2941) and for his personal bias against Millard Farmer, Larry King, Michelle Murphy and “defendant’s lawyer” (singular, not otherwise identified). (R. V10, pp.1913, 1918, 1927, R. V12, p. 2327; R. V14, pp.2732-2733, 2812, 2898, 2905, 2929; R. V16, pp. 3377, 3379; R.V17, pp. 3652, 3654; Tr. Oct 13, 2013, pp. 17-18, passim)
     The following unadjudicated motions to disqualify Judge Baldwin were pending and not referred to an independent judge for adjudication as mandated by Uniform Superior Court Rule 3.1 at the time that Larry King identified his plea to the personal jurisdiction of Judge Baldwin and was placed in custody for identifying the disqualification motions in the packed courtroom awaiting the calendar call.
  State v. Hargis 294 Ga. 818 doctrine Record Cite June 13, 2012 No USCR 3.1 case management plan confirmed by Clerk of Court (R. V3, p.437)
July 2, 2012
     Order appointing Elizabeth F. Harwell as Guardian ad Litem at the request of Elizabeth Griffis, disq. Co-Sponsor with Glover&Davis (R. V3, 503) August 19,2013 not allowing evidence, on granting GAL illegal authority to modify custody without Ct, approval and for modification of full Court Standing Order to allow Plaintiff to remove children from jurisdiction of Court. (R. V10 p.1914)
August 28, 2013
     Judge Baldwin’s threat to put Michelle Murphy in jail if she doesn’t physically force children to visit their father (R. V11 p.2195)
Sept. 13, 2013 for continuously violation of USCR 25.3 mandate to cease to act upon the merits of the matter” (R. V12 p.2321)
8      Judge Baldwin denied numerous requests for certificates for immediate review.
     The illegal standard that Judge Baldwin maintained for disregarding his disqualification, as stated many time was as follows.
     So the — on the motion to recuse, I’ll just right now tell you, I find that that motion was not timely filed. I have been in this case for over a year.
     One of the things you have to have is showing that — that has to be filed within — I forget what it is — so many days after you find out who the judge is, stating what the causes are.
     I’ve been in this thing for over a year. You have already tried to recuse me one time, and the Court of Appeals did not uphold your efforts to recuse me, and so my finding is, is it was not timely filed, and that you had already been denied a motion to recuse once before.
     And I don’t believe you can continue, as you go through a case, every time you don’t like some order that the judge has given, that you can try to recuse, and recuse, and recuse him. So that’s my ruling on that. Tr. Oct 3, 2013, p. 39, line 18 – p. 40, line 9
 Question Four
     Whether the trial court, acting as the trier of fact and the law, used an illegal and unconstitutional standard of law in adjudicating the pending Motions to disqualify him, to proceed at both the contempt hearing and in adjudicating each of the contempts. (Tr. Oct 3, 2013, p. 5, l. 23 – p. 6, l. 18)
Question Five
     Whether the court erred in holding Michelle Murphy in contempt for not cooperating, within the time provided by the Court, with the expert witness, Nancy McGarrah, the custody evaluator, who presented an illegal condition for Michelle Murphy to perform in order to “cooperate” by requiring that Michelle 9 Murphy execute this psychologist’s contract (R. V17 p.3627), when, even if Michelle Murphy violated any directive of the custody evaluator, it placed an illegal condition upon Michelle Murphy that would have subjected Michelle Murphy to additional expensive litigation for relief from the following, illegal conditions: Michelle Murphy was required to execute a contract that is void against the public policy of the State of Georgia, in that:
(a)     the contract which Michelle Murphy was ordered to sign in order to be released from jail required Michelle Murphy to grant the psychologist expert witness full immunity from liability (R. V17, p. 3785), (see, OCGA § 13-8-2 (a)(1); Unami v. Roshan, 290 Ga. App. 317 (2008); (see also, fraud issues pending before this Court in Hoard v. Beveridge, S15D0360); not just immunity from liability provided by statute that exempts immunity to a custody evaluator resulting from her bad faith;
(b)      the contract required that Michelle Murphy become financially liable for fees that she cannot afford, as it requires that she pay expensive fees to obtain discovery and production, testimony at trial, or be deprived of this expert witnesses’ evidence that could be necessary to her defense of the expert witness psychologist’s findings or for use by her as evidence against the plaintiff;
(c)      the contract provides that the psychologist be paid 18% interest for late payments of fees (R. V16, p. 3461);
(d)      unless Michelle Murphy executed the contract, the psychologist would not inform her counsel of the method to be used for the “custody evaluation,” and would not provide other information about the scope 10 of the investigation of John Harold Murphy and Renee L. Haugerud that would be conducted before rendering an opinion to the Court;
(e)      unless Michelle Murphy executed the contract, the expert witness psychologist stated that she would not talk to Michelle Murphy’s counsel or Michelle Murphy;
(f)      Michelle Murphy would have been subjected to a psychologist who was selected by the guardian ad litem, who was exposed by Michelle Murphy’s counsel for converting to her personal use trust funds provided to her in the case, in violation of USCR 24.9 (8)(g) and exposed for engaging in other illegal conduct that was similar to some of the illegal conduct of John Harold Murphy (R. V12, p. 2326); and,
(g)      the Order appointing the expert witness psychologist stated that “[a]t the final hearing in this case, the Court shall decide whether to allocate the costs of this evaluation between the parties” (R. V11, p. 2192) that could subject Michelle Murphy to having no assets to provide for her children, as the modification of custody litigation has been used to divest Michelle Murphy of her assets with costs a hair stylist cannot afford.
Question Six
     Whether the Court erred in failing to grant the motion to dismiss the charges of contempt (Tr. Oct 13, p. 113) as requested by Larry King.
     The charges did not set forth a cause of action against Millard Farmer or Michelle Murphy relating to the charged conduct, as Judge Baldwin did not have personal jurisdiction of the case with the numerous motions to disqualify him pending that he had not 11 adjudicated, or forwarded to another jurist for adjudicating.
     The charges against Millard Farmer were an abuse of the criminal process designed to weaken the legal representation of Michelle Murphy and thereby also create unnecessary legal cost to Michelle Murphy that these lawyers knew their hand selected jurist would never award to Michelle Murphy, as this jurist has actively participated in attempting to drain the personal assets of Michelle Murphy and made threats that he would not provide her attorney fees. (R. V16, pp. 3648, 3652) In re Crane, 253 Ga. 667 (1985)
Question Seven
     Whether the Court erred in adjudicating attorney fees against Michelle Murphy in an attempted criminal contempt case against her and her attorney under OCGA § 19-9-3, without specificity of the basis for the amount, or consideration of the disparity of the financial assets of the parties.
     The award of the attorney fees was as follows. (R. V17, p. 3627) Findings of Fact In addition to the $6,400 Plaintiff previously paid in connection with the custody evaluation, Plaintiff also has incurred substantial and unnecessary attorney’s fees in seeking to compel Defendant’s compliance with the August Order and in bringing Defendant’s contempt to the Court’s attention.
Conclusions of Law
     Defendant Michelle Murphy shall pay the amount of $5,000 to Plaintiff John Murphy within 30 days of the date of this Order.
     This amount is awarded pursuant of OCGA 19-9-3 and is based on, inter alia the attorney’s fees Plaintiff incurred in seeking to compel Defendant’s compliance with the August Order an in bringing Defendant’s contempt to the Court’s attention. 12 (R. V17, p. 3628)
Additional Reasons in Support of Granting the Petition upon the Questions Presented, i.e., Enumerations of Error
     The grant of the Writ is of great concern and importance to the public required to be subjected to examination by expert witnesses who require full immunity from prosecution as a condition of their service, and to lawyers whose reputations are affected by criminal convictions resulting from an abuse of the criminal process by opposing parties and lawyers seeking criminal convictions and financial assets from the opposing counsel and party after selecting a judge, trier of fact, in a court without a mandated case management plan.
     The “custody evaluator” scheme in no more than the “expert witness” scheme once used in medical malpractice case well-funded medical groups obtained legislative and judicial branch protection. is no such protection for the litigant with less financial resources in a domestic relations case. The choice is, as it was for Michelle Murphy, take it or go to jail and lose by that choice.
Introduction
     This Mother, with sole physical custody of two children, initially with the father’s absence from the family and thereafter by the incorporation of an Settlement Agreement into a 2006 Divorce Decree has successfully raised Jack and Thomas since the children were physically abandoned by their father when they were toddlers, Jack Murphy, age 16, and Thomas Murphy, who will be 14 on January 1, 2015, are legally and constitutionally deserving of due 13 process rights that this hair stylist can afford.
     There have been a barrage of financial attacks upon Michelle Murphy and her counsel, as they have sought to obtain a constitutional forum in which the issues relating to Jack and Thomas can be resolved.
     This fair and equitable forum has not included that of the current jurist, who was obtained by counsel for the Plaintiff’s judge shopping.
     Michelle Murphy obtained counsel without any judicial political connection, as her lawyers had earlier successfully assisted her in recovering for a part of the malpractice by her divorce lawyer that prevented a fair distribution of the marriage assets of the Plaintiff, long before he married his current wife, who is an enormously wealthy hedge fund operator. (R. V14, p. 2925)
     The divorce proceeding, under the absence of a Uniform Superior Court Rule 3.1 mandated case management plan, shifted Michelle Murphy’s case among five (5) judges, with each picking up a fresh file upon their selection, as judge shopping is prevalent in such a system. (R. V14, p. 2927)
     The absence of a Rule 3.1 case management plan is extremely detrimental to the litigant who does not have a lawyer with judicial political associations.
     Attempting to correct this illegal system has been detrimental to Michelle Murphy, as her lawyers’ only strength was to provide Michelle Murphy and her children statutory and constitutional protections that resulted in a liability to this family, as John Harold Murphy engaged the politically connected Glover & Davis law firm at the suggestion of 14 Judge Louis Jack Kirby, another Coweta Judicial Circuit Judge. (RV10, p. 1919)
     Once the judge-shopped judge was in place, the house of cards begins to tumble with the judge’s selection of the guardian ad litem, who selects the custody evaluator experts favorable to the lawyer who so successfully judge shopped.
     The representation of John Harold Murphy, once the case began with a designated appellate panel, expanded his representation from the three Glover & Davis lawyers to the assistance of the must larger, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, law firm with its cadre of corporate lawyers, whose briefs before the Court of Appeals panel frequently cite to Christopher J. McFadden, et al., Georgia Appellate Practice.
     This petition, with only reliance upon the law and constitutional protections, seeks this Court’s protection that has offered the only glimmer of legal respite for unconstitutional and illegal treatment of Michelle Murphy and the disabling of her counsel.
     The underlying modification of custody action was initiated after Michelle Murphy and the Children chose not to succumb to the threat of John Harold Murphy to be subjected to a modification action if the family did not move from Newnan, GA to Chattanooga, TN in order to live near the Lookout Mountain mansion of Renee L. Haugerud, an extremely wealthy hedge fund operator now married to John Harold Murphy and wanted the children. (R. V10, p. 1919)
15      In this case, the Superior Court of Coweta County never implemented a mandated case management plan until after sustained challenges by Michelle Murphy’s counsel (R. V2, p. 310, R. V17, p. 3649) and until this day, Chief Judge Baldwin has not complied with the mandates of Superior Court Rule 25 et seq. (Recusal) and particularly by not complying with Rule 25 (3.l) of presenting his disqualifying motions to another jurist.
     Judge Baldwin will not allow another jurist to review any of the numerous disqualification motions that enumerate his disqualifying conduct within the required five (5) day of the conduct occurring.
     Judge Baldwin’s unconstitutional application of the law, often expressed as expressed to Larry King at the beginning of the day that these contempt matters were adjudicated, is as follows.
Question Presented One (E of E One)
     The Court of Appeals, as did the trial court, without any evidence in support of Michelle Murphy being held in civil contempt, ordered her to pay John Harold Murphy $5,000 in attorney fees under OCGA §19-9-3 “based on inter alia, the attorney’s fees Plaintiff incurred in seeking to compel Defendant’s compliance with the August Order and in bringing Defendant’s contempt to the Court’s attention” (R. V17, p. 3637) without these lawyers bringing supporting testimony, for what amounts to a failed, illegal attempt to have Michelle Murphy held in criminal contempt for visitation issuesthat even the Court would not accept (R. V17, p. 3627).
16       Michelle Murphy was ordered to pay $5,000 to learn of the treatment of her lawyer, Larry King, for offering to call Judge Baldwin’s attention to legal documents and for not making Michelle Murphy come to Court, and to further learn that her other lawyer, at that time, would be criminally convicted, in absentia, and fined for no legal reason and for no practical reason but to diminish the legal representation of Michelle Murphy and the best interest of Jack and Thomas.
     Malicious abuse of the criminal process, an actionable tort, is one of the detrimental results of judge shopping that occurs when the protections of the Uniform Superior Court Rules are not allowed to protect the politically and financially weak in our society.
     During the attempt at the hearing to have Michelle Murphy held in indirect civil contempt, in absentia, Judge Baldwin, on several occasions warned the Glover & Davis lawyer that he had not presented any admissible evidence to support that Michelle Murphy had not complied with the August Order relating to the expert witness, custody evaluator.
     On one occasion, Judge Baldwin warned the Glover & Davis lawyer as follows. (Tr. Oct 3, 2013 p. 56, l. 8)
THE COURT:      You know, let me tell y’all, I want — One of the problems in this case is, is really to get in the information y’all want to get in, we really need the evaluator, and we really need the driver.
     You know, I’ll let him [John Harold Murphy] go so far as trying to tell things, but a lot of this stuff you just can’t get in because it’s hearsay, and 17 I just — you know, I don’t understand why those folks are not here. I understand the evaluator may cost money and may, you know, have other things to do, but, shoot, I think — you know, I think we need to get them here.
     On the other occasion, Judge Baldwin had held Larry King in direct contempt and ordered him held in custody until he paid a $1000 for attempting to notice the Court of a plea to the personal jurisdiction of Judge Baldwin.
     The affidavit of Larry King in support of the Response to the Amended Motion for Contempt, which the Court of Appeals used at another segment of its opinion, states as follows (R. V14, p. 2910):
17.      During John Harold Murphy’s testimony, Judge Baldwin stated that he wished to talk to counsel in chambers. The court reporter did not proceed to chambers, or take down the communications that occurred in chambers.
17.1      As counsel walked down the hallway with Judge Baldwin to his chambers, he stated, “I did not want to embarrass anyone out there, but I can’t do anything about the failure to cooperate with the evaluator unless I hear from her.” (meaning the Custody Evaluator).
     The Glover and Davis lawyer did not present the custody evaluator or anyone who fulfilled the burden of proof. Judge Baldwin finally reasoned as follows:
The Court:     Okay. It appears to me that just like the situation in a woman getting up and saying, “He hasn’t paid my child support,” it’s necessary for that guy to be in court and refute what was being said. And, of course, his – the plaintiff’s testimony, I believe is sufficient to 18 show that she’s not cooperating with this deal. Tr. Oct 3, 2013, p. 110.
Judge Baldwin did not make the legal distinction that it was not failure to cooperate with John Harold Murphy that was at issue. Judge Baldwin issued the following Order, prepared by the Glover & Davis lawyers. (R. V17, p. 3627)
     Defendant Michelle Murphy is hereby found to be in contempt of the custody evaluation provision of this Court’s August Order. Defendant shall be immediately incarcerated in the Coweta County, Georgia jail until she complies with the August Order by signing the document previously submitted to her by Dr. Nancy McGarrah’s office.
     The reasoning of the Court of Appeals for upholding the contempt conviction of Michelle Murphy is equally fallacious as that of Judge Baldwin. The Court of Appeals opined as follows.
     And, in a response to the amended motion for contempt which she filed on October 22, 2013, [that was not due or filed until after the October 3, 2013 hearing] Nancy Michelle Murphy expressly defied the August 23 order and declared herself justified in refusing to sign the documents that were a prerequisite to the custody evaluation.
The trial court was therefore authorized to conclude that she had not signed those documents. See OCGA § 24-8-821 (“Without offering the same in evidence, either party may avail himself or herself of allegations or admissions made in the pleadings of the other.”). Murphy v. Murphy, 2014 Ga. App. LEXIS 760, 18-19 (Ga. Ct. App. Nov. 17, 2014)
19      Counsel for Michelle Murphy was entitled to offer a defense to the criminal contempt conviction that the Glover & Davis lawyer sought, which Judge Baldwin did not impose, and was entitled to present alternative defenses in a brief, as any litigant is entitled to present in any civil case.
     The information that the Court of Appeals claims supported the infirm, indirect civil contempt adjudication was as follows, in Michelle Murphy’s response to the contempt motion prepared by counsel, beginning at R. V16, p. 3459:
     The Conduct of Judge Baldwin on October 3, 2013 is a Part of the Pattern of Obstruction of Justice in the Case
     There was a motion to disqualify Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell (V3 p. 549) that Judge Baldwin denied in a one sentence Order. (V12 p. 2318)
    Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell, the guardian ad litem, who is presently still serving, after being caught converting funds, has obtained counsel who has moved to prevent her deposition and inspection of subpoenaed documents, in part, relating to her conversion of trust funds to her personal use.
     This conduct by counsel for the guardian ad litem prevents further documentation of Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell’s conversion of trust funds and her other illegal conduct that motivates her retaliation against Michelle Murphy and her counsel.
      The conduct of the guardian ad litem is relevant, as she alone selected a “custody evaluator” to continue the economic assault upon the meager income of Michelle Murphy.
     The contract that the “custody evaluator” requires Michelle Murphy to execute is void as against public policy when the party is ordered by a 20 Court to obtain the services of the “custody evaluator,” as the contract requires Michelle Murphy to waive not just the OCGA § 19-9-3 (a)(7) statutory immunity provided to the “custody evaluator,” but, additionally, to release the “custody evaluator” from all liability (Contract p. 9 XVII IMMUNITY; V15 p. 3318).
     The “custody evaluator” has communicated that she will not begin the evaluation until all the parties sign the contract, (V15, p. 3322) which requires Michelle Murphy to be responsible for a large amount of money subject to 18% interest for past due payments, which depletion of funds from this family would affect the best interests of the children.
     Michelle Murphy is a hair stylist against whom John Murphy and his now spouse, a hedge fund operator, have engaged over six lawyers to economically bully Michelle Murphy into surrendering the children to John Murphy for the sole reason that they can provide the children better economic benefits than Michelle Murphy.
     The Glover & Davis lawyers illegally and unconstitutionally prepared documents to have Michelle held in criminal contempt and civil contempt, without a subpoena or rule nisi to obtain either her presence or the presence of the designated custody evaluator, Nancy McGarrah, that they failed to support with any evidence.
     The trial court illegally required Michelle Murphy to pay attorney fees based upon OCGA §19-9-3 for what was no more than the failure of these prosecuting lawyers to properly notice and prepare their case, if they had one and were not just waiting for a judge-shopped gratuity (R. V17, p. 3627).
     In keeping with the Court of Appeals’ conduct of attempting to supply evidence from the response to the motion, the 21 affidavit of Larry King is again relevant on the absence of notice issue and on the issue of the bias of Judge Baldwin. Larry King swore as a part of the Response as follows. (R. V14, p. 2907)
14.      In response to the calendar call I was prepared to make my announcement in the following order
14.1      I wanted to provide Judge Baldwin of the dates of the pending disqualification motions that were awaiting a ruling by him and that Uniform Superior Court Rule 25 required Judge Baldwin to cease acting on the matter until he ruled upon the disqualification motions.
     The following documents relating to the disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. are pending and awaiting a ruling by Judge Baldwin or an independent judge assigned to hear the motions.
     These disqualification motions are summarily identified as follows.
July 2, 2012
     Consolidated Motions for Disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. Monday,
August 19, 2013
     Consolidated Motions for Disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr., Constitutional Challenges to Uniform Superior Court Rule 25 et seq. and for Other Uses as Allowed by Law August 28, 2013:
Amendment to Monday, August 19, 2013
Consolidated Motions for Disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.,
Initiated with this Judge’s “I’ll Put You in Jail” Threats that Motivated John Murphy to Sic the Deputy Sheriff of Coweta County on the Mother of the Children whom She Raised Since John Murphy Abandoned the Family.
Friday, September 13, 2013
 Addendum to Wednesday, August 28, 2013 22
Amendment to the Monday, August 19, 2013
 Consolidated Motions for Disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.
14.2      After informing Judge Baldwin of the pending disqualification motions, I wanted to advise the Court that the required personal service and a Rule Nisi, had not been given and that the matter was not before the Court.
14.3      I wanted to advise the Court that it had no jurisdiction, as the Amended Motion for Contempt attempted to add what could be one of two parties, identified as the “lawyer” for Nancy Michelle Murphy.
     The adding of one of possible two new parties to the motion for contempt was a violation of the rights of the newly added party but was additionally prejudicial to Nancy Michelle Murphy, as such conduct is detrimental to Michelle Murphy to have Judge Baldwin allowing the Glover & Davis lawyers attacking her lawyer.
14.4      I wanted to advise the Court that the August 23, 2013 Order was on appeal and that any contempt of that Order was superseded by the appeal.
14.5      Additionally, I wanted to advise the Court that the September 27, 2013 motion was not noticed nor ripe for hearing on October 3, 2013.
15.      At some point during my monotone announcement of the above statements of what I felt to be an initial consideration, Judge Baldwin stated something like, “I hold you in contempt. I am tired of all this stuff you all are doing. I order you incarcerated until you pay $1000.00 attorney fees as a purge.”
     It was in this judicial environment that Larry King attempted to defend Michelle 23 Murphy, Millard Farmer, himself and “defendant’s lawyer.” (R. V14, p. 2942)
     The conviction of Michelle Murphy should not stand, as the trier of fact expressed his bias to her counsel for presenting constitutional and statutory defenses. “All parties before the court have the right to an impartial judicial officer.” Stephens v. Stephens, 249 Ga. 700, 702 (292 SE2d 689) (1982).
     The issue of judicial disqualification can rise to a constitutional level since “[a] fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due process.” In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 (75 SC 623, 99 LE 942) (1955). See also Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (129 SC 2252, 173 LE2d 1208) (2009).
     Judicial integrity is “a state interest of the highest order” because the power and prerogative of a court to resolve disputes rests upon the respect accorded by citizens to a court’s judgments which, in turn, depends upon the issuing court’s absolute probity. Id. at 889.
     “If the public lacks confidence in the impartiality of judges, or worse, refuses to comply with judicial decisions voluntarily, the notion that ‘we are a government of laws’ would necessarily collapse.” Dmitry Bam, Making Appearances Matter: Recusal and the Appearance of Bias, 2011 B.Y.U. L. Rev. 943, 968.
       It is vital to the functioning of the courts that the public believe in the absolute integrity and impartiality of its judges [see Smith v. Guest Pond Club, 277 Ga. 143, 146 (586 SE2d 623) (2003)], and judicial recusal serves as a linchpin for the underlying proposition that a court should be fair and impartial. 2011 B.Y.U. L. Rev., supra, at 949. n 1
24      The commitments of Mayor & Aldermen of Savannah v. Batson-Cook Co., 291 Ga. 114 (2012) are of no moment to Michelle Murphy, Millard Farmer and her children if she is retroactively shielded from the protections until the expiration of the illegal conduct of a judge and a person to whom the judge has illegally delegated his authority.
     The law books, Uniform Superior Court Rules and Constitutional protections toppled like a house of cards once Judge Baldwin was judge-shopped and initially made no pretense of fairness, by, over strong objection, signing without reading the appointment of the guardian ad litem who had co-sponsored with the Glover & Davis lawyer the night before, a judicial fundraiser attended by Judge Baldwin. (R. V14, p. 2722)
     The Order illegally delegated authority to the guardian ad litem to temporarily change custody of the children without approval of the Court, which Elizabeth Harwell attempted to use. (R. V16, p, 3371; R. V10, p. 2012)
Question Presented Two (E of E Two)
     The August 23, 2013 Order, criminally adjudicating Millard Farmer, and the charging document were each prepared by Taylor Drake of Glover & Davis PA and signed with express consent for Taylor Drake by Michael Warner.
     The August 23, 2013 Order and the charging document were also approved as to form by Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell, the guardian ad litem.
     The Glover & Davis lawyers and the Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP lawyers for John Harold Murphy sought upholding of the criminal conviction of Millard Farmer in the Court of Appeals.
25      It is relevant to understand that each of the documents that used the criminal process to financially and otherwise diminish the ability of Michelle Murphy were initiated, prepared and attempted to be enforced by the lawyers attempting to deprive Jack and Thomas of their lives with their mother while enriching themselves with an enormous amount of attorney fees and depleting the financial resources of Michelle Murphy.
     There is no way to gently state that, with the assistance of Judge Baldwin, these lawyers and the guardian ad litem, who is a lawyer, have been compensated to maliciously abuse the criminal process by having Millard Farmer criminally convicted and immediately incarcerated until he pays $1,000, or expends many times over that to be relieved of the criminal conviction that the Court of Appeals has upheld, at their insistence.
     The Order was apparently hastily drafted on Friday, August 23, 2013 by an inexperienced drafter, if it was intended to pass muster for a criminal conviction.
     The Order was drafted to accommodate the social schedule of John Harold Murphy and Renee L. Haugerud as a priority to Thomas’s football jamboree that he had planned to attend if the visitation, alternating weekend schedule, had not been changed with the August 23, 2013 Order. (R. V14, p. 2770)
     Within five (5) days of obtaining the August 23, 2014 Order, the lawyers for John Harold Murphy filed a contempt action against Michelle Murphy based in part upon a false swearing by John Harold Murphy, evidence of which one of the children had 26 recorded after the child was informed that John Harold Murphy was no longer going to allow accommodation of the children’s local obligations and visitation as they desired. (R. V14, p. 2765)
     Anyone with teenaged children realizes that children that age do not hang around the house and visit with their parents, nor do they wish to sit in an expensive hotel room at some resort; instead, the children, as their mother well knew, wished to be with own social group around their school friends, as compensation for accomplishing their school work and behaving during the week.
     It is an unrealistic person and judge who yelled at Michelle Murphy as follows about the children not wishing to visit with John Harold Murphy, who made no attempt to participate with the children’s activities, but instead sent a chauffeur to pick up the children on their visitation weekends. Tr. Aug. 13, 2013, p. 259, lines 1 –15
[The Court] . . . I’m going to say that they have got to both go to visitations when they go.
     I am ordering you to make them go.I don’t care whether they jump up and down, scream and holler, lock themselves in their room. Whatever they do, you have got to make them go. Do you understand that?
MS. MURPHY:     Yes.
THE COURT:      And that’s going to be in the order. And I don’t -want you to — I don’t know how to say it any plainer than this, now. And this same thing is going to go for Mr. Murphy. If you don’t do what I tell you to do– and I’m telling you to see that they go; I’m not giving them the option and I’m telling them they’ve got to go. But if you don’t do that, I’ll put you in jail.And I’m not kidding with you.
      Okay?
27      Attempting to treat the children as commodities resulted in exposure of judicial misconduct that even illegal contempt Orders cannot suppress. On the day that Judge Baldwin adjudicated his contempt convictions from the bench, Larry King, one of the lawyers for Michelle Murphy who has now retired and is no longer in the case, was greeted by Judge Baldwin with a boisterous, “You are in contempt” as Larry King, in a crowded courtroom, attempted to announce his presence and to explain his plea to the personal jurisdiction of Judge Baldwin. (Tr. Oct 3, 2013, p. 7)
     Larry King was immediately taken into custody by the Deputy Sheriff and required to pay $1,000 in cash, as Judge Baldwin would not accept his check before he was loosened from the Deputy Sheriff. (R. V14, p. 2942)
     Later that morning, Judge Baldwin informed Larry King that he had been mad when he held him in contempt and would refund his money. (Tr. Oct 3, 2013, p. 19)
     At the end of the day, Judge Baldwin again summarily announced that he was finding Larry King in contempt for not having Michelle Murphy present in Court and again took his $1,000. (Tr. Oct 3, 2013, p. 112)
The Court of Appeals resolved the contempt of the lawyers’ “failure” to have Michelle Murphy present by overturning the conviction of both Larry King and Millard Farmer after an expensive appellate process that still left the contempt convictions of Millard Farmer and Michelle Murphy and required Michelle Murphy to pay John Harold Murphy’s attorney fees illegally based upon OCGA §19-9-3 for 28 the Glover & Davis lawyers’ illegal attempt to present evidence on alleged contempts.
     The point in describing the criminal action of Judge Baldwin against Larry King is to identify the depth of the vindictive hostility of Judge Baldwin to both of the lawyers representing Michelle Murphy.
     The prosecutors of the criminal contempt actions knew that they only need ask and Judge Baldwin would allow them to prepare and obtain the retaliatory criminal conviction against Millard Farmer, who Judge Baldwin accurately knew, brought the disqualification motions and other actions against him, in order to obtain a judge that on appellate review could obtain Mayor & Aldermen of Savannah v. Batson-Cook Co., 310 Ga App. 878 (2011) approval.
     Counsel opposing Michelle Murphy were not naïve in expecting that the Glover & Davis lawyers could obtain the criminal conviction from Judge Baldwin that would please their paymasters.
     They knew that with Judge Baldwin, they could draft a criminal conviction Order on which they stood a good chance of obtaining treatment accorded them in Mayor & Aldermen of Savannah v. Batson Cook Co., 310 Ga App. 878 (2011) with the Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP name on the appellate brief. The lawyers who initialized and attempted to enforce the criminal contempt action against Millard Farmer have adequate legal training in interpreting contracts, and even without criminal prosecuting experience understand the meaning of the charges that they used to obtain a criminal conviction.
29      The term “Defendant’s lawyer” (singular, without further identity) in a case involving two lawyers, both of whom were known personally by the prosecuting individuals, with neither lawyer served a rule nisi or subpoena, that was used to obtain the conviction of Millard Farmer, fails muster for a charging document and procedure seeking the option of obtaining a criminal conviction of either lawyer in the case.
     These lawyers knew that “party” as they used the word in the August 23, 2013 Order did not mean Millard Farmer or Larry King.
     The supporting argument and authority for Questions 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 is contained in the question presented or in other argument, or authority, as we have reached that thirty (30) page red light. Request for Relief Nancy Michelle Murphy requests that the petition be granted.
Respectfully submitted,
/Millard Farmer Millard Farmer
Georgia Bar No. 255300
P.O. Box 1728
Atlanta, GA 30301-1728
(404) 688-8116
millardfarmer@millardfarmer.com
Counsel for Nancy Michelle Murphy and Millard Farmer
30 SECOND DIVISION DOYLE, P. J., MCFADDEN and BOGGS, JJ.
NOTICE:
     Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed.
November 17, 2014
In the Court of Appeals of Georgia
A14A1137. MURPHY v. MURPHY.
MCFADDEN, Judge.
     Although this is our third opinion in this custody modification action, we are still not presented with a final order on the petition to modify. Instead we are presented with a series of rulings holding appellant Nancy Michelle Murphy and her attorneys, Millard Farmer and Larry King, in contempt of court. Farmer has been held in contempt of an earlier order that prohibited the parties from discussing the case with their children.
     As Farmer signed a brief to which he exhibited affidavits of the children echoing their mother’s anger at John Murphy, there is sufficient evidence to support that ruling; and we find that Farmer received sufficient notice and opportunity to be heard before he was held in contempt.
    Nancy Michelle Murphy has been held in contempt of another provision of that order which Appendix 1, Page 1 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals required her to cooperate with a custody evaluator.
     Any insufficiency of the evidence presented on that charge at the contempt hearing was supplied by her own brief in opposition to the motion for contempt. In that brief she announced that she deemed herself to be entitled to defy the provision directing her to cooperate with the evaluator. And again we find sufficient notice and opportunity to be heard.
    Finally Farmer and King have been held in contempt for failure to have Nancy Michelle Murphy present at the contempt hearing. But as she was not under subpoena and had not been ordered to appear in person, she was entitled to appear through counsel; so that ruling must be reversed. We therefore affirm the trial court’s contempt order in part and reverse it in part.
1. Prior appeals.
     Nancy Michelle Murphy and John Murphy were divorced in 2006. They have two children, born in November 1998 and January 2001.
     In April 2012, John Murphy filed this action, seeking to modify the child custody provisions of the divorce decree. Nancy Michelle Murphy has repeatedly moved to recuse the trial court judge.
Murphy v. Murphy, 322 Ga. App. 829 (747 SE2d 21) (2013), her first appeal in this case, was a direct appeal from an interlocutory order denying one of her motions to 2 Appendix 1, Page 2 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals recuse.
     We dismissed on the basis the order was not appealable as a collateral order and was not appealable under the version of OC
GA § 5-6-34 (a) (11) adopted in 2013, which authorizes direct appeals from “judgments or orders in child custody cases awarding, refusing to change, or modifying child custody or holding or declining to hold persons in contempt of such child custody judgment or orders.”
     Our Supreme Court granted Nancy Michelle Murphy’s petition for certiorari to address whether we erred when we concluded that the 2013 amendment of OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (11) applied retroactively.
     In Murphy v. Murphy, 295 Ga. 376 (761 SE2d 53) (2014), the Supreme Court ruled that the amendment did not apply retroactively but nonetheless affirmed the dismissal of Nancy Michelle Murphy’s appeal on the ground that, “even under the prior version of OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (11), there was no right of direct appeal from the recusal order at issue.” Id. at 379.
In the meantime, on August 23, 2013, the trial court entered an order that, among other things, denied John Murphy’s motion to temporarily change physical custody of the children, directed the parties not to discuss the case with the children, ordered a custody evaluation, and directed the parties to cooperate with the custody evaluator. In Nancy Michelle Murphy’s second appeal to our court, Murphy v. Murphy, __ Ga. App. __ (759 SE2d 909) (2014), we affirmed that order.
     We imposed a frivolous appeal penalty against Nancy Michelle Murphy’s counsel, finding that the appeal was frivolous and dilatory and rife with violations of Court of Appeals Rule 10, which forbids oral or written personal remarks that are discourteous or disparaging to any judge, opposing counsel, or any court.
2. Facts underlying the present appeal.
     Six days after the August 23, 2013 order was entered, John Murphy filed a motion seeking to hold Nancy Michelle Murphy in contempt for violating its visitation provisions.
     In response Nancy Michelle Murphy filed affidavits from the children, testifying that the motion for contempt had been read to them in the presence of their mother, that their mother had not interfered with their father’s visitation as alleged in the motion for contempt, and that they were extremely angry at their father for not telling the truth to the court.
     John Murphy then amended his motion for contempt. He alleged that Nancy Michelle Murphy and “her lawyer” were in contempt of the order’s provision prohibiting the parties from discussing the case with the children.
     He also alleged that Nancy Michelle Murphy was violating the requirement of the August 23 order that she cooperate with the custody evaluator in that she had refused to complete the paperwork the custody evaluator required before beginning the evaluation.
     The trial court conducted a hearing on the contempt motion on October 3, 2013. Nancy Michelle Murphy and Farmer did not appear, but King did appear on behalf of Nancy Michelle Murphy.
     After hearing testimony from John Murphy and the driver hired to transport the children from Nancy Michelle Murphy’s residence to John Murphy’s residence, the trial court found Nancy Michelle Murphy, Farmer, and King to be in contempt.
     The trial court found Farmer to be in contempt for discussing the case with the children in violation of the August 23 order.
     It found Nancy Michelle Murphy to be in contempt for wilfully refusing to cooperate with the custody evaluator in violation of the August 23 order.
     And it found King and Farmer to be in contempt because of Nancy Michelle Murphy’s failure to appear at the contempt hearing. Nancy Michelle Murphy, Farmer, and King filed an application for discretionary appeal of the contempt order. We granted the application, and this latest appeal followed.
     We first address John Murphy’s motion to dismiss the appeal, then turn to the deficiencies in the appellants’ brief, and finally, address the merits of the challenges to the contempt order.
3.      Motion to dismiss the appeal. 5 Appendix 1, Page 5 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals
     Because this is an appeal from a contempt order, the appellants were not required to follow the interlocutory appeal procedure. OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (2); Massey v. Massey, 294 Ga. 163, 164-165 (2) (751 SE2d 330) (2013) (citations omitted); see also OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (11) (making “[a]ll judgments or orders in child custody cases awarding, refusing to change, or modifying child custody or holding or declining to hold persons in contempt of such child custody judgment or orders” immediately appealable); OCGA § 5-6-37 (“Unless otherwise provided by law, an appeal may be taken to the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals by filing with the clerk of the court wherein the case was determined a notice of appeal.”).
     Because they filed an application for discretionary appeal, we have jurisdiction regardless of whether or not they were entitled to follow the direct appeal procedure. OCGA § 5-6-35 (j). So we do not decide if they were so entitled, and we deny John Murphy’s motion to dismiss the appeal.
4. Deficiencies in the appellants’ brief.
     As a threshold matter, we address the deficiencies in the appellants’ brief. The Appellate Practice Act, at OCGA § 5-6-40, provides that enumerations of error are to be concise and “shall set out separately each error relied upon.”  “It is desirable that each enumeration be explicit, precise, intelligible, unambiguous,  unmistakable, and unequivocal.” MacDonald v. MacDonald, 156 Ga. App. 565, 569 (1) (d) (275 SE2d 142) (1980) (physical precedent).
     Our rules direct that, “[t]he sequence of arguments in the briefs shall follow the order of the enumeration of errors, and shall be numbered accordingly.” Court of Appeals Rule 25 (c) (1).
 
     As to each enumeration of error, an appellant is to specify how the error was preserved and to state concisely the applicable standard of review. Court of Appeals Rule 25 (a). Briefs and enumerations of errors that do not conform to those requirements hinder our ability to determine the basis and substance of an appellant’s appeal. Williams v. State, 318 Ga. App. 744, 744-745 (734 SE2d 745) (2012).
     Appellants’ brief does not conform to those requirements.
     Their brief and enumerations of error is rambling and difficult to follow; several enumerations contain multiple allegations of error.
     These deficiencies are illustrated by enumeration of error four, which is set out in the margin.
1 1      “Whether the court erred in holding Michelle Murphy in contempt for not cooperating, within the time provided by the Court, with the custody evaluator, who presented an illegal condition for Michelle Murphy to perform in order to “cooperate” by requiring that Michelle Murphy execute the psychologist’s contract. (V17 p.3627)
     The contempt adjudication was not supported with proof beyond a reasonable doubt of Michelle Murphy’s violation of the Order.
     If proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Michelle Murphy violated any directive of the custody evaluator, the directive placed an illegal condition upon Michelle Murphy that is being appealed.
     In order to accomplish what Judge Baldwin ordered, Michelle Murphy would have had to be As to some of the issues that appellants attempt to raise, these deficiencies constitute abandonment.
     Appellants do not address each enumeration of error in the argument section of their brief, and their arguments in that section do not follow the order of the enumeration of errors.
     And many of the alleged errors referenced in the enumeration of errors, are not supported with arguments, citations to the record, or citations of authority.
Court of Appeals Rule 25 (c) (2) provides, “Any enumeration of error which is not supported in the brief by citation of authority or argument may subjected to the following, illegal conditions: Michelle Murphy would have been required to execute a contract that is void against the public policy of the State of Georgia, in that:
(a)      the contract that requires Michelle Murphy to grant the psychologist full immunity from liability, not just the immunity from liability provided by statute that exempts immunity to the psychologist resulting from her bad faith;
(b)      the contract requires that Michelle Murphy become financially liable for fees that she cannot afford, as it requires that she pay expensive fees to obtain discovery and production, testimony at trial, or be deprived of this evidence that could be necessary to her defense of the psychologist’s findings or for use by her as evidence against the plaintiff;
c)      the contract provides that the psychologist be paid 18% interest for late payments of fees;
 (d)      unless Michelle Murphy executed the contract, the psychologist would not inform her counsel of the method to be used for the “custody evaluation,” and would not provide other information about the scope of the investigation of John Harold Murphy and Renee L. Haugerud that would be conducted before rendering an opinion to the Court;
(e)      unless Michelle Murphy executed the contract, the psychologist stated that she would not talk to counsel for Michelle Murphy or Michelle Murphy; and,
(f) Michelle Murphy would have been subjected to a psychologist who was selected by the guardian ad litem, who was exposed by counsel for Michelle Murphy for converting to her personal use trust funds provided to her in the case, in violation of USCR 24.9 (8)(g).”
      Appendix 1, Page 8 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals be deemed abandoned.” See also Court of Appeals Rule 25 (c) (2) (i) (“Each enumerated error shall be supported in the brief by specific reference to the record or transcript. In the absence of such reference, the Court will not search for or consider such enumeration.”).
     In spite of these deficiencies, we will review the claims of error that we are authorized to reach to the extent that we can ascertain the appellants’ arguments, Williams, 318 Ga. App. at 744-745, and to the extent they have not abandoned them.
 5.      Claim that trial judge is disqualified.
     The appellants argue that the Honorable A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. was disqualified from adjudicating the contempt motion for two reasons:
     because another judge’s transfer of the case to Judge Baldwin was illegal,
     and because unadjudicated disqualification motions were pending against Judge Baldwin at the time that he decided the contempt motion.
However, the appellants have cited no authority for the 
     Finally as noted above, our previous opinion rebuked appellants for repeated violations of Court of Appeals Rule 10 which provides, “Personal remarks, whether oral or written, which are discourteous or disparaging to any judge, opposing counsel, or any court, are strictly forbidden.” Murphy v. Murphy, __ Ga. App. __, __ (4) (759 SE2d 909) (2014).
     Their present brief is only somewhat better. It includes, for example, repeated unsupported and irrelevant assertions that a particular witness has substance abuse problems.
     We again rebuke appellants. This lack of professionalism does less than nothing to advance their cause. 9 Appendix 1, Page 9 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals proposition that the transfer of the case to Judge Baldwin was illegal.
On the contrary, Uniform Superior Court Rule 3.3 authorizes “an assigned judge [to] transfer an assigned action to another judge with the latter’s consent in which event the latter becomes the assigned judge.” And there are no unadjudicated disqualification motions.
     Judge Baldwin orally denied all such motions before hearing the contempt motion. See Uniform Superior Court Rule 25.1 (“In no event shall the motion [for disqualification] be allowed to delay the trial or proceeding.”).
     The appellants argue that Judge Baldwin was deprived of jurisdiction to consider the contempt motion because the August 23 order was currently on appeal and subject to supersedeas.
     Under OCGA § 5-6-34 (e), however, when a party appeals an order granting nonmonetary relief in a child custody case, the order stands until reversed or modified by the reviewing court unless the trial court states otherwise in its judgment or order.
     The trial court did not state otherwise in the August 23 order, so that order stood and remained enforceable through contempt proceedings notwithstanding the pending appeal. See Walker v. Walker, 239 Ga. 175, 176 (236 SE2d 263) (1977) (custody award that is not subject to supersedeas is enforceable through contempt; decided before July 1, 2011 effective date of OCGA § 5-6-34 (e)).
6.      Contempt citations. 10 Appendix 1, Page 10 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals
     Having addressed these preliminary matters, we now turn to the trial court’s order finding Farmer to be in contempt for discussing the case with the children in violation of the August 23 order, finding Nancy Michelle Murphy to be in contempt for wilfully refusing to cooperate with the custody evaluator in violation of the August 23 order, and finding both attorneys to be in contempt because of Nancy Michelle Murphy’s failure to appear at the contempt hearing.
(a) Violation of the prohibition of discussing this case with the children.
     The trial court held attorney Farmer in contempt after finding that he was “discussing the issues, allegations, and claims in this case with the children and that such discussions are not necessary to implement the terms of the August Order.”
     The appellants argue that this judgment of contempt must be reversed because Farmer did not receive adequate notice and because the evidence does not support it.
(i) Notice.
     The appellants argue that the trial court erred in finding that they had sufficient notice of the contempt allegations against them and the hearing on the contempt. We conclude that the notice was reasonable.
     Whether or not a party is entitled to notice of the charges of contempt and a hearing on those charges depends on the type of contempt he is charged with.
     “Acts 11 Appendix 1, Page 11 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals of contempt are either direct, meaning they are committed within the sensory perception of the judge, or they are indirect, meaning they occur outside the sensory perception of the judge.” In re Shook, 254 Ga. App. 706, 707 (563 SE2d 435) (2002) (citation and punctuation omitted).
     When a party is charged with committing direct contempt, no advanced notice is required and due process is satisfied “by simply giving [the party charged] an opportunity to speak on her own behalf.” Johnson v. State, 258 Ga. App. 33, 36 (2) (b) (572 SE2d 669) (2002) (citation omitted).
     When a party is charged with committing indirect contempt, the party is “entitled, among other things, to reasonable notice of the charges, to counsel of his own choosing, and to the opportunity to call witnesses.” Ramirez v. State, 279 Ga. 13, 16 (3) (608 SE2d 645) (2005).
     Farmer was charged with indirect contempt and therefore was entitled to reasonable notice of the allegations against him. “[T]he notice must be reasonably calculated to inform persons of the charges against them and their opportunity for a hearing at a specific time and place to present their objections.” Hedquist v. Hedquist, 275 Ga. 188, 189 (563 SE2d 854) (2002) (citation omitted). The notice here met those requirements.
 12      Appendix 1, Page 12 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals Appellants were adequately informed of the charges.
     The amended motion for contempt sufficiently specified the allegedly contumacious conduct.
     It sought to hold counsel in contempt for discussing the issues in the case with the parties’ children.
     The appellants argue that referring to “Defendant’s lawyer” instead of “Millard Farmer” rendered the motion insufficient.
     They cite no supporting authority for that argument, and we reject it.
     Appellants were adequately notified of their opportunity to be heard at a specific time and place.
     On September 12, 2014, counsel for John Murphy served upon counsel for Nancy Michelle Murphy a “Notice of Hearing” that specified the date, time, and location of a hearing before the trial court “in order for [the trial court] to consider the relief requested in Plaintiff’s Motion for Contempt filed in the above captioned matter on August 29, 2013.”
     Counsel served that “Notice of Hearing” by United States mail and by email. Additionally the trial court issued a calendar to counsel for the parties, confirming that a hearing was scheduled for October 3, 2013.
     The appellants do not deny receiving the notice of hearing or the calendar. Counsel for John Murphy served the amended motion for contempt upon counsel for Nancy Michelle Murphy on September 27, 2013, six days before the scheduled hearing. Under these facts, we find that the trial court did not err in concluding that the
13       Appendix 1, Page 13 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals appellants received reasonable, sufficient notice. See Gibson v. Gibson, 234 Ga. 528, 529-530 (3) (216 SE2d 824) (1975) (notice less than five days before hearing, which appellant did not dispute receiving, was reasonable). Compare Hedquist, 275 Ga. at 190 (notice of hearing that did not specify that trial court would hear the contempt motions at pretrial conference was inadequate).
(ii) Sufficiency of the evidence.
     Farmer argues that the contempt must be reversed because the evidence does not support the finding of contempt. Our standard of review is dictated by the nature of the contempt, whether criminal or civil. In re Waitz, 255 Ga. App. 841, 842 (567 SE2d 87) (2002).
     The trial court sentenced Farmer to “be incarcerated in the Coweta County, Georgia jail for a period of 20 days or until he pa[id] One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) to the Court.” Because he was sentenced to imprisonment for a specified, unconditional period, Farmer’s contempt was criminal. See In the Interest of J. D., 316 Ga. App. 19, 21 (1) (728 SE2d 698) (2012) (“If the contemnor is imprisoned for a specified unconditional period . . . the purpose is punishment and thus the contempt is criminal.”) (citation, footnote, and punctuation omitted).
“On appeal of a criminal contempt conviction the appropriate standard of appellate review is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier 14 Appendix 1, Page 14 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” In re Waitz, 255 Ga. App. at 842 (citation and punctuation omitted).
     After viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we conclude that the trial court could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
     Farmer signed the brief to which the affidavits reflecting the children’s knowledge of the case were attached. Also attached to that brief is an affidavit of Farmer himself, notarized on the same day by the notary who notarized the children’s affidavits.
     To the extent Farmer argues that he cannot be held in contempt for violating a provision directed at the parties rather than himself, his argument is unavailing.
     The violation of a court’s order by one who was not a party to the proceedings can be punished as a contempt if the contemnor had actual notice of the order and is in privity with, aided and abetted, or acted in concert with the named party in acts constituting a violation of the order. The Bootery v. Cumberland Creek Props., 271 Ga. 271, 272 (2) (517 SE2d 68) (1999). It is undisputed that Farmer had actual notice of the order and acted as Nancy Michelle Murphy’s representative when obtaining the affidavits from the children.
(b)      Failure to cooperate with the custody evaluator. 15 Appendix 1, Page 15 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals The trial court held Nancy Michelle Murphy in contempt after finding that she had not cooperated with the custody evaluator. The appellants argue that this judgment of contempt must be reversed because Nancy Michelle Murphy did not receive adequate notice and because the evidence does not support it.
(i) Notice.
     Nancy Michelle Murphy was entitled to reasonable notice related to the allegations of indirect contempt for violating the August 23, 2013 court order.
     For the reasons discussed in Division 6 (a) (1), supra, we conclude that she received such notice.
(ii) Sufficiency of the evidence.
The trial court sentenced Nancy Michelle Murphy to incarceration “until she compli[ed] with the August Order by signing the documents previously submitted to her by [the custody evaluator’s] office.”
     This was a civil contempt. See In the Interest of J. D., 316 Ga. App. at 21-22 (1) (“If the contemnor is imprisoned only until he performs a specified act, the purpose is remedial and hence the contempt is civil.”) (citations omitted).
     In civil contempt appeals, if there is any evidence from which the trial court could have concluded that its order had been violated, we are without 16 Appendix 1, Page 16 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals power to disturb the judgment absent an abuse of discretion.” In re Waitz, 255 Ga. App. at 842 (citation omitted).
     We hold that some evidence supported the conclusion that Nancy Michelle Murphy violated the August 23 order by refusing to cooperate with the custody evaluator. The August 23 order set an October 15, 2013 deadline for completion of the custody evaluation. John Murphy testified that he had done everything the custody evaluator required in order to begin the evaluation, yet the evaluation had not proceeded.
     It is not disputed that as of November 19, 2013, the date of the trial court’s contempt order, that evaluation had not occurred.
     And, in a response to the amended motion for contempt which she filed on October 22, 2013, Nancy Michelle Murphy expressly defied the August 23 order and declared herself justified in refusing to sign the documents that were a prerequisite to the custody evaluation.
     The trial court was therefore authorized to conclude that she had not signed those documents. See OCGA § 24-8-821 (“Without offering the same in evidence, either party may avail himself or herself of allegations or admissions made in the pleadings of the other.”).
     This is sufficient evidence to authorize the trial court to conclude that Nancy Michelle Murphy violated the August 23 order by refusing to cooperate with the 17 Appendix 1, Page 17 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals custody evaluator. See Edwards v. Edwards, 254 Ga. App. 849, 854 (563 SE2d 888) (2002) (a person who simply ignores a court order that she believes is erroneous “does so at [her] own peril and must assume the risk of being held in contempt”) (citation and punctuation omitted).
(c)      Nancy Michelle Murphy’s failure to appear at the hearing. We agree with the appellants that the trial court erred in holding Farmer and King in contempt because of Nancy Michelle Murphy’s failure to appear at the contempt hearing.
      Absent a properly served subpoena or court order requiring a party to appear in person, a party may choose not to be present at the trial of the case and to be represented solely by counsel.
     This rule accords with the long-established principle that there is full power on the part of the counsel to represent the client, and it is just the same as if the client were there in person. In re Estate of Coutermarsh, 325 Ga. App. 288, 290 (1) (752 SE2d 448) (2013) (citations and punctuation omitted). See also Masonry Standards v. UPS Truck Leasing, 257 Ga. 743, 743-744 (363 SE2d 553) (1988) (trial court erred in sanctioning defendant for failing to appear in person at trial).
     John Murphy has pointed to nothing that required Nancy Michelle Murphy to appear in person at the 18 Appendix 1, Page 18 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals contempt hearing.
     And because Nancy Michelle Murphy was not required to appear in person, Farmer and King could not be held in contempt for her failure to appear. Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Doyle, P. J., and Boggs, J., concur. 19 Appendix 1, Pagge 19 of 19 Opinion of Court of Appeals Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta, December 04, 2014.
I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.
, Clerk.

 Court of Appeals of Georgia.

MURPHY v. MURPHY.

No. A13A0206.

Decided: July 12, 2013

     Nancy Michelle Murphy appeals an interlocutory order denying her motion to recuse the trial court judge in this change-of-custody case. Because we lack jurisdiction, we dismiss the appeal.

     Nancy Murphy and John Murphy were divorced in 2006. In 2012, John Murphy filed this action, seeking to modify the child custody provisions of the parties’ divorce decree.

      The case was assigned to Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. Nancy Murphy moved to disqualify Judge Baldwin. Judge Baldwin denied the motion, and Nancy Murphy filed a notice of appeal. The case remains pending below.
     “This [c]ourt has a duty to inquire into its jurisdiction to entertain each appeal.” (Citation omitted.) Hammonds v. Parks, 319 Ga.App. 792, 793(2), 735 S.E.2d 801 (2012). Under the version of OCGA § 5–6–34(a)(11) in effect when Nancy Murphy filed her notice of appeal, a party could file a direct appeal from “[a]ll judgments or orders in child custody cases including, but not limited to, awarding or refusing to change child custody․” See generally Collins v. Davis, 318 Ga.App. 265, 268–269 & n. 17(1), 733 S.E.2d 798 (2012) (holding that clear and unambiguous language of former OCGA § 5–6–34(a)(11) authorized direct appeal of any order in proceeding in which child’s legal custody, physical custody or visitation was an issue, and noting that it was for legislature to narrow scope of this right of direct appeal).
     Such orders were no longer subject to the interlocutory appeal procedures of OCGA § 5–6–34(b) or the discretionary appeal procedures of OCGA § 5–6–35(a)(2). See Taylor v. Curl, 298 Ga.App. 45, 679 S.E.2d 80 (2009).
    Effective May 6, 2013, however, the legislature amended OCGA § 5–6–34(a)(11) to provide that a party can file a direct appeal from “[a]ll judgments or orders in child custody cases awarding, refusing to change, or modifying child custody․” SB 204 §§ 1, 2 (2013).
     The uncodified preamble to the amendment states that its purpose is “to limit the scope of judgments or orders in child custody cases which are subject to direct appeal.”
     And although laws that affect substantive rights apply prospectively only, procedural laws, which prescribe the methods of enforcement of rights, duties, and obligations, apply retroactively. Nathans v. Diamond, 282 Ga. 804, 808–809(2), 654 S.E.2d 121 (2007). “[W]here a statute governs only procedure of the courts ․ it is to be given retroactive effect absent an expressed contrary intention.” Polito v. Holland, 258 Ga. 54, 55(2), 365 S.E.2d 273 (1988).
     Nancy Murphy filed her notice of appeal from the order denying her motion to recuse. That order does not award, refuse to change, or modify child custody.
     Consequently, the order is not appealable under OCGA § 5–6–34(a)(11), we lack jurisdiction, and the appeal must be dismissed. See Stevens v. State, 292 Ga. 218, 734 S.E.2d 743 (2012) (dismissing direct appeals from trial court’s denial of the defendants’ motions to dismiss the indictment due to an alleged constitutional speedy trial violation because eight days before, the Supreme Court had determined that such orders were no longer directly appealable but had to follow the interlocutory application procedures).
     To the extent that Nancy Murphy argues that we have jurisdiction over her appeal because orders denying motions to recuse are directly appealable under the collateral order doctrine, we disagree.
     The Georgia Supreme Court has held that a party who wants to appeal a pretrial ruling on a recusal motion has the option to seek an interlocutory appeal or to appeal directly after an adverse final judgment See White v. Lumpkin, 272 Ga. 398, 529 S.E.2d 879 (2000); Chandler v. Davis, 269 Ga. 727, 728, 504 S.E.2d 440 (1998).
     We, too, have held that the appeal of an interlocutory order denying a motion to recuse “requires compliance with the interlocutory appeal provisions of OCGA § 5–6–34(b).” (Citation omitted.) Ellis v. Stanford, 256 Ga.App. 294, 295(2), 568 S.E.2d 157 (2002). See also Rolleston v. Glynn County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 213 Ga.App. 552, 553, 445 S.E.2d 345 (1994); In re Booker, 186 Ga.App. 614, 367 S.E.2d 850 (1988).
     In fact, the interlocutory appeal provision of OCGA § 5–6–34(b) explicitly provides that:
     Where the trial judge in rendering an order, decision, or judgment, not otherwise subject to direct appeal, including but not limited to the denial of a defendant’s motion to recuse in a criminal case, certifies within ten days of entry thereof that the order, decision, or judgment is of such importance to the case that immediate review should be had, the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals may thereupon, in their respective discretions, permit an appeal to be taken from the order, decision, or judgment if application is made thereto within ten days after such certificate is granted.(Emphasis supplied.)
     Nonetheless, in Braddy v. State, 316 Ga.App. 292, 729 S.E.2d 461 (2012), without acknowledging the prior cases or the language of OCGA § 5–6–34(b), we held that an order denying a motion to recuse met the requirements for application of the collateral order doctrine because the ruling concern[ed] a matter wholly unrelated to the basic issues to be decided in the [underlying] case.
     Whether the trial judge could properly preside over the case would be unresolved if review had to await final judgment.
     Finally, the order resolve[d] the matter completely and nothing remain[ed] in the underlying case to affect it.Id. at 293(1), 729 S.E.2d 461.
     This holding misapplied the collateral order doctrine and directly conflicted with OCGA § 5–6–34(b)‘s explicit inclusion of “the denial of a defendant’s motion to recuse in a criminal case” in the category of orders needing a certificate of immediate review, thereby rendering the provision meaningless.
     In Scroggins v. Edmondson, 250 Ga. 430, 431–432(1)(c), 297 S.E.2d 469 (1982), our Supreme Court adopted the test from Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949), for determining whether an order falls within the collateral order doctrine.
      Under that test, the collateral order doctrine applies if the order
(1)      completely and conclusively decides the issue on appeal such that nothing in the underlying action can affect it;
(2)      resolves an issue that is substantially separate from the basic issues in the complaint; and
(3)      might result in the loss of an important right if review had to await final judgment, making the order effectively unreviewable on appeal. See Scroggins, 250 Ga. at 432(1), 297 S.E.2d 469(c).
     Braddy misapplied the “effectively unreviewable” prong of the test.In Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Risjord, 449 U.S. 368, 101 S.Ct. 669, 66 L.Ed.2d 571 (1981), the United States Supreme Court stressed the stringency of the “effectively unreviewable” prong of the Cohen test:
     “To be appealable as a final collateral order, the challenged order must constitute a complete, formal, and, in the trial court, final rejection, of a claimed right where denial of immediate review would render impossible any review whatsoever.” (Emphasis supplied; citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 376.
     In Braddy, we held that this prong was satisfied because “[w]hether the trial judge could properly preside over the case would be unresolved if review had to await final judgment.” Braddy, 316 Ga.App. at 293(1), 729 S.E.2d 461.
     But orders denying motions to recuse may be reviewed and relief afforded after the entry of final judgment. In Johnson v. State, 278 Ga. 344, 349(3), 602 S.E.2d 623 (2004), for example, the Supreme Court reversed a defendant’s convictions for felony murder and related crimes because the trial court should have granted her motion to recuse. In Gillis v. City of Waycross, 247 Ga.App. 119, 122, 543 S.E.2d 423 (2000), an appeal of a final judgment entered after a three-day trial, we remanded the case so that a different judge could consider the plaintiffs’ motion to recuse.
      Because review after entry of final judgment of orders denying motions to recuse can protect parties’ interests adequately, such orders are not appealable as collateral orders.
     And to hold otherwise ignores the explicit language of OCGA § 5–6–34(b). We therefore overrule Braddy, 316 Ga.App. at 292, 729 S.E.2d 461.
     Other courts that have considered the issue generally have held that the collateral order exception to the final judgment rule does not encompass an order denying a motion to recuse because the parties’ interests can be protected adequately in an appeal from a final judgment. See, e.g., In re Martinez–Catala, 129 F.3d 213, 217(II) (1st Cir.1997); In re Corrugated Container Antitrust Litigation, 614 F.2d 958, 960–961(I) (5th Cir.1980); State of Florida v. Countrywide Truck Ins. Agency, 270 Neb. 454, 703 N.W.2d 905 (Neb.2005); State v. Forte, 150 Vt. 654, 553 A.2d 564, 565 (Vt.1988); Kreig v. Krieg, 743 A.2d 509, 511 & n. 4 (Pa.Super.1999).
     In other words, because recusal questions are fully reviewable on appeal from a final judgment, the collateral order doctrine does not apply.
Appeal dismissed.
McFADDEN, Judge.PHIPPS, C.J., ANDREWS, P.J., BARNES, P.J., ELLINGTON, P.J., DOYLE, P.J., MILLER, DILLARD, BOGGS, RAY, BRANCH and McMILLIAN, JJ., concur.

– See more at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-court-of-appeals/1638666.html#sthash.3tJZiiOs.dpuf

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF TROUP COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA

Nancy Michelle Murphy,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Civil Action No. 15-CV0109

     Nan Freeman and Freeman Reporting, Inc., Defendants [Only two Defendants remaining after Fulton Superior Court transfer] The Summary Judgment should be Denied and the Demand for a Jury Trial by twelve persons should be Granted Nancy Michelle Murphy’s Response to the Uniform Superior Court Rule 6.5 Theories of Recovery and Statement of Material Facts of Nan Freeman and Freeman Reporting, Inc.

     This case involves Nan Freeman, who is an official court reporter engaging in illegal conduct. Nancy Michelle Murphy (or “Michelle Murphy”) responds here to the Uniform Superior Court Rule 6.5, purported Theory of Recovery and purported Statement of Material Facts of Nan Freeman and Freeman Reporting, Inc. (or, “Nan Freeman,” collectively or individually).

       A substantial portion of Nan Freeman’s Uniform Superior Court Rule 6.5 purported Statement of Material Facts reflects the vindictiveness of those opposing Michelle Murphy for exposing the illegal conduct of Judge Baldwin and those, such as Nan Freeman, who attempted to conceal the illegal conduct of Judge Baldwin.

     This is to state that Nan Freeman is assisted by persons attempting to support the illegal conduct of Judge Baldwin, who have either benefited from the conduct of Judge Baldwin, or who seek to obtain future benefit derived from supporting Judge Baldwin and/or financial benefits derived from John Harold Murphy and Renee L. Haugerud.

     The information contained in the March 14, 2014 Motion to Disqualify Nan Freeman in Murphy v. Murphy, in the Superior Court of Coweta County, Civil Action No. 12V-413 (or, “Murphy v. Murphy”) is incorporated and made a part of this introduction, as Attachment 7.

      Nan Freeman’s Motion for Summary Judgment attempts to demean Michelle Murphy and to use the tactics of John Harold Murphy and Judge Baldwin in an attempt to defend Nan Freeman’s illegal conduct and the illegal conduct of Judge Baldwin in not adhering to the Uniform Superior Court Rule 3.1 mandated case management plan.

     Nan Freeman’s Motion for Summary Judgment identifies, as much as anything, the bias of Nan Freeman and that the illegal conduct of Nan Freeman was not that of an innocent court reporter who made a few errors, but that of a person engaging in a pattern of illegal conduct allowing her to obtain illegal compensation and job security by protecting the conduct of Judge Baldwin,  whose judicial authority should have been vacated by the regulatory authorities.

     The e-mails copied and exchanged among those working in Judge Baldwin’s office and Nan Freeman using either the nickname, “Nanny” or “Nan” do not depict Nan Freeman as an independent, unbiased official court report covering matters relating to Judge Baldwin.

     These exchanges, produced in discovery after the deposition of Nan Freeman, are attached to the Affidavit of Kenneth Gordon as “Exhibit D,” and are incorporated here.

     When Judge Baldwin eventually recused himself after twenty or more attempts by Michelle Murphy to disqualify him by all legal means, Judge Baldwin obtained a position for Nan Freeman, as an official court reporter with the newly appointed Coweta Judicial Circuit Superior Court Judge W. Travis Sakrison, the son-in-law of Congressman Lynn Westmoreland.

     The recusal Orders of the judges in the Coweta Judicial Circuit in Murphy v. Murphy and the replacement judge are included as Attachment 8.

     No separate response is required to the Theory of Recovery of Nan Freeman and Freeman Reporting, Inc. (or, “Nan Freeman”, collectively or individually )

     The response of Michelle Murphy to Nan Freeman’s purported Statement of Rule 6.5 Facts Memorandum of Law is incorporated in the Introduction to the Response to Nan Freeman’s Theory of Recovery.

      Just as a heads up — counsel for Nan Freeman filed her motion for summary judgment before Michelle Murphy’s First Amended Complaint was filed and therefore Nan Freeman’s issues in her current motion for summary have become stale and mostly legally immaterial before the allotted time for Michelle Murphy to respond.

     An official court reporter, as was and is Nan Freeman, cannot legally design a template, as she did around 1996, and use it in each of her official court reporting’s contractual fulfilments until she is caught producing illegal transcripts with that template in 2014 and then creditably urge the defense of “mistake” — the law burdens Nan Freeman, as a condition of qualifying and being compensated, as an official court reporter, both to learn and to comply with the legally permissible fees and the legal requirements for the preparation of transcripts pursuant to the Fee Schedule mandated by the Judicial Council of Georgia and OCGA § 15-14- 5.

     Returning compensation which was illegally taken does not absolve one of the consequences of violating the law. Nan Freeman held a position of trust that required both her competence and integrity that she breached to the detriment of Michelle Murphy, that consumed Michelle Murphy’s financial resources and created an enhanced level of prejudice against Michelle Murphy’s effort to obtain custody of J. M. and T. M., her children.

     It is relevant to understand that Judge Baldwin was the exclusive trier of fact in Murphy v. Murphy.

     Michelle Murphy could not obtain a jury trial in that case The fees and the conditions upon which an official court reporter in the State of Georgia can obtain compensation is mandated by the Judicial Council of Georgia.

     Nan Freeman was required by law to charge only the Judicial Council of Georgia authorized fees to persons who wished, or were required, to purchase transcripts from her in her capacity as an official court reporter for the Coweta Judicial Circuit.

     The fees follow that were allowable for Nan Freeman to charge for legally prepared transcripts in the Superior Court of Coweta County case of Murphy v Murphy.

     Nan Freeman did not comply with the certificate requirements, which were legally imposed upon her by the OCGA § 15-14-5, Duty to transcribe statute — Nan Freeman used an abbreviated, incomplete version of the required certificate. OCGA § 15-14-5. Duty to transcribe; certificate.

     It shall be the duty of each court reporter to transcribe the evidence and other proceedings of which he has taken notes as provided by law whenever requested so to do by counsel for any party to such case and upon being paid the legal fees for such transcripts.

     The reporter, upon delivering the transcript to such counsel, shall affix thereto a certificate signed by him reciting that the transcript is true, complete, and correct.

     Subject only to the right of the trial judge to change or require the correction of the transcript, the transcript so certified shall  be presumed to be true, complete, and correct. emphasis supplied

     Nan Freeman, as a part and parcel of her habitual violations of the laws of Georgia, did not provide Michelle Murphy’s transcripts with an OCGA § 5-14-5 required certificate containing the certification that the transcript is “true, complete and correct” as required by OCGA § 5-14-5 — — The transcripts provided and paid for by Michelle Murphy were not true, complete or correct. Nan Freeman has never provided to Michelle Murphy, or other litigants, the required certificate that is an indication of the pattern of her illegal conduct.

     The habitual violations of the OCGA § 15-14-5 requirements and the authorized fees is relevant to identify that Nan Freeman did not just make a onetime error, but instead engaged in a pattern of illegal conduct, including overcharging and not including the required certificate.

     Nan Freeman was therefore not entitled to any compensation, as she prepared no transcript meeting the OCGA § 15-14-5 requirements. If she had complied, the following fees, with which she also did not comply, govern.

     Nan Freeman, by using a template that consistently produced a transcript that did not comply with OCGA § 15-14-5, and using a template that consistently allowed her to collect more compensation than she was permitted to receive under the law, engaged in illegal conduct and actionable fraud, negligent misrepresentation of facts, theft by taking, breach of contract, unjust enrichment and conversion.

     The laws of Georgia do not deprive Michelle Murphy from obtaining damages from an official court reporter who engaged in the illegal conduct in which Nan Freeman engaged.

Procedural Background

Michelle Murphy, through counsel, first, informally and very politely, sought the audio recording of the May 27, 2014 proceedings from Nan Freeman, the official court reporter in Murphy v. Murphy— counsel approached Nan Freeman while she was still sitting at her court reporting station.

     The audio recordings were initially sought by counsel to provide to regulatory authorities to report the Code of Judicial Conduct violations by Judge Baldwin that had just occurred.

     The report of the conduct of Judge Baldwin was appropriate, as his violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct were prevalent on several earlier occasions, but none were as monstrous as Judge Baldwin’s mental blowout on May 27, 2014.

    The audio was relevant to obtaining the removal of Judge Baldwin from Murphy v. Murphy.

     Nan Freeman initially refused the literal begging of counsel to purchase the audio recording for Michelle Murphy’s use — counsel then, to no avail, sought the audio recording with a Georgia Open Records Act request to Troup County, Coweta County and Nan Freeman.

     The Open Records Act request is Plaintiff’s Exhibit 6 to the Deposition of Nan Freeman, and is Attachment 6 to this response. Counsel sought assistance from the Board of Court Reporting, with first an informal request for help, followed by a formal complaint.

     Counsel for Michelle Murphy was refused assistance in obtaining the audio recordings for Michelle Murphy until after an action was filed against the Board of Court Reporting, Nan Freeman and Freeman Reporting, Inc., that, with other efforts and concessions, resulted in Michelle Murphy obtaining the audio recordings.

     It was a review of the audio recording that supported the illegal conduct of Nan Freeman.

     Nan Freeman, over an extended period of time, thought to have begun on, or before, 1996, engaged in illegal court reporting that counsel for Michelle Murphy discovered and documented at the initial cost of in excess of $10,000.

     The Answer of Nan Freeman to the original complaint against her by Michelle Murphy is included as Attachment 1.

      That Answer, as well as the complete record of the original case, are now in the records of the Superior Court of Troup County and are relied upon in support of this response. The litigious nature of Nan Freeman in not fulfilling her contract with Michelle Murphy, by engaging in false, demeaning depictions of Michelle Murphy, in this Motion for Summary Judgment and elsewhere, qualifies Nan Freeman’s breach of contract for an award of attorney fees and punitive damages.

     A video recording and official copy of the transcript and video deposition of Nan Freeman are in the record of the Superior Court of Troup County.

      Nan Freeman’s attorney attached a copy of that transcript, without Exhibits, of Nan Freeman’s deposition to Nan Freeman’s motion for summary judgment.

     It is relevant to distinguish between the stringent requirements for an official court reporter to receive compensation, from the requirements of a court reporter, who, for example, reports at depositions.

     In order to obtain the audio recordings of the May 27, 2014 hearing and to have transcribed omitted portions of the transcripts that were thought available with the audio recordings, the Georgia Open Records Act requests were filed by counsel for Michelle Murphy. See Attachment 6 hereto, and Exhibit 6 to the deposition of Nan Freeman includes the Georgia Open Records Act requests to the Counties of Troup and Coweta, and to Nan Freeman.

      After the Board of Court Reporting members were dismissed as defendants from the Superior Court of Fulton County portion of this case, Nan Freeman, on her motion, was successful in having the case transferred to the Superior Court of Troup County.

     The original complaint, upon which the motion for summary judgment relies, was amended before the response Michelle Murphy to this motion for summary judgment was due.

     The Complaint against Nan Freeman contains issues that are embedded within each of the causes of action that affects the damages that should be awarded against Nan Freeman.

     The embedded issues in each cause of action are

(1)      the proportion of the tortious conduct by Nan Freeman that can be attributed to her violation of protections provided to litigants by the Code of Judicial Conduct, OCGA §15-14-5, the Uniform Superior Court Rules, the Constitutional provisions of the United States and the State of Georgia equivalent, First Amendment, Equal Protection, Due Process protections, statutes, decisional law, Georgia Code of Professional Conduct, the Court Reporter Code of Professional Ethics (or, collectively, or separately, “LAW*”).

     Nan Freeman’s intentional participation in the illegal conduct of Judge Baldwin in order to deprive Michelle Murphy and her children of their protections under the LAW* by Nan Freeman’s reckless and wanton disregard of consequences, evinced an intention to inflict injury upon Michelle Murphy —

(2)      the proportion of Nan Freeman’s tortious conduct that is attributed to her intent to obtain illegal financial and employment benefits for herself —

(3)      the proportion of Nan Freeman’s tortious wrongdoing that is attributed to her fraud and negligent misrepresentation; and —

(4)      the damages caused to Michelle Murphy as the result of Nan Freeman’s illegal and unethical conduct that included Nan Freeman’s participation in attempting to secret and otherwise participate in the illegal conduct and other violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct by Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. Response to the Individual Statement of Purported Facts relied upon by Nan Freeman in support of her motion for summary judgment. [The purported statement of fact by Nan Freeman is first quoted in an italicized font, then the response follows.]

     Response to Nan Freeman’s Purported Statement of Material Facts for Summary Judgment Page 12 of 28 1.

     Since 2012, Ms. Freeman has served as the court reporter for Chief Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. of the Coweta County Superior Court. Dep. of Nan Freeman at 8:19-9:12. A copy of the transcript of Ms. Freeman’ s Deposition is attached to the Affidavit of Kenneth Lamar Gordon (“Gordon Affidavit”) as Exhibit A. Response to No. 1

     Nan Freeman has been an official court reporter in the Coweta Judicial Circuit since approximately 1999, and a court reporter since approximately 1996 (Freeman Dep. p. 8).

     During that time, she has been the official court reporter first for Judge Keeble, then Judge Baldwin, and, now, the newly appointed Judge W. Travis Sakrison. At all times excepting August 13, 2013, when another reporter, Alice Moore, was assigned to the case for that one hearing, Nan Freeman was the official court reporter during the Murphy v. Murphy case.

     The official transcript of the deposition of Nan Freeman is filed in the Superior Court of Troup County.

     Counsel for Nan Freeman did not attach the exhibits to the deposition of Nan Freeman, which are relevant to the testimony contained in the transcript.

     The exhibits are attached to the official transcript filed with the Clerk of the Superior Court of Troup County. 2.

     From April 2012 until February 2015, (other than a brief period of time in which the case had been transferred to another judge) Judge Baldwin presided over child custody litigation between Plaintiff and her ex-husband, John Murphy (the “Child Custody Litigation”) See Murphy v. Murphy, No. 2012-cv-413 (Ga. Super. Ct., Coweta Cnty. filed Apr. 11, 2012). Response to No. 2

     After Michelle Murphy filed extensive challenges to the absence of a Uniform Superior Court Rule 3.1 case management plan with disqualification motions and otherwise in the Superior Court of Coweta County, a Rule 3.1 mandated case Response to Nan Freeman’s Purported Statement of Material Facts for Summary Judgment Page 13 of 28 management plan was implemented by the Coweta Judicial Circuit.

     Under that plan, Judge Dennis Blackmon was assigned the Murphy v. Murphy case, as confirmed by the Clerk of the Superior Court of Coweta County. Judge Baldwin, through a process that did not comply with the LAW*, obtained the case from Judge Blackmon.

     There were continuous pleas to the jurisdiction of Judge Baldwin presiding after Judge Blackmon’s Rule 3.1 case management plan assignment. The Murphy v. Murphy case was a modification of custody, or in the Alternative, Parenting Time of John Harold Murphy that also involved a modification of child support.

     John Harold Murphy initiated the litigation that resulted in Counterclaims against John Harold Murphy and a Third Party Complaint against Renee L. Haugerud, his spouse, who is a hedge fund operator. At that time, the case in the Superior Court of Coweta County was styled as follows.

     John Harold Murphy, Plaintiff vs. Civil Action No. 12V-413 Nancy Michelle Murphy, Defendant/Third Party Plaintiff vs. A Jury Trial is Requested on the Child Support Issues, the Counterclaim and the Third Party Complaint Renee Haugerud, Third Party Defendant The hedge fund operator, third party defendant was dismissed by Judge Baldwin without allowing a hearing.

     Judge Baldwin refused counsel for Michelle Response to Nan Freeman’s Purported Statement of Material Facts for Summary Judgment Page 14 of 28 Murphy the right to depose Renee L. Haugerud or to call her as a witness at any time, despite numerous requests. 3.

     On April 1, 2014, Judge Baldwin issued an Order in the Child Custody Litigation (a) requiring Plaintiff to submit to a psychological examination pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-35;

(b)      setting a compliance hearing for May 27, 2014; and

(c)      warning Plaintiff that the issue of temporary custody of the children would be considered at the compliance hearing, if necessary.

     A copy of the April 1, 2014 Order in the Child Custody Litigation is attached to the Gordon Affidavit as Exhibit B. Response to No. 3

     On April 1, 2014, Judge Baldwin filed an Order in Murphy v Murphy, that is incorporated as Attachment 2.

     The Attachment is the representation of the designation of the content of the Order, as Michelle Murphy is opposed to the characterization of the litigation and the characterization of the Order contained in the No. 3 statement of purported fact of Nan Freeman.

4.      On May 27, 2014, Judge Baldwin conducted the compliance hearing in the Child Custody Litigation.

     Following Plaintiff’s admission on the stand that she had failed to comply with the Rule 35 psychological examination, Judge Baldwin awarded temporary custody of the children to Plaintiff’s ex-husband, John Murphy. Response to No. 4 Judge Baldwin, on May 27, 2014 did not conduct a hearing that provided Michelle Murphy her Due Process rights, as Judge Baldwin presided at a proceeding that violated the Code of Judicial Conduct, as evidenced by his recusal. Attachment 8, p. 1 is incorporated here.

     On May 27, 2014, Judge Baldwin commenced what was scheduled to be a hearing in the case of Murphy v. Murphy.

     Judge Baldwin would not allow any of Michelle Murphy’s witnesses to testify and would not even allow direct examination of Michelle Murphy by her counsel, while Judge Baldwin, in attempting to examine Michelle Murphy, violated the Code of Judicial Conduct as well as the protections that the law provided to Michelle Murphy.

     Judge Baldwin abruptly refused to allow Michelle Murphy even to explain her answers to questions that he posed, or questions posed by opposing counsel. Judge Baldwin apparently predetermined that he was going to use his judicial authority to abuse Michelle Murphy. Judge Baldwin, by illegal and unethical conduct, attempted to and did prevent Michelle Murphy from presenting her justifiable defense.

     Judge Baldwin would not allow Michelle Murphy, through her testimony, or through her witnesses’ testimony, to present her defenses.

     The characterization of the litigation and the purpose of the proceeding is inaccurate, and is accurately explained in the Affidavit of Michelle Murphy, Attachment 3.

     Nan Freeman’s illegal conduct deprived Michelle Murphy of a verbatim transcription or even a complete and accurate audio version of the May 27, 2014 proceeding, explained in the First Amended Complaint against Nan Freeman as follows.

     Nan Freeman, intentionally or through negligence engaged in a deceptive physical appearance at the May 27, 2014 proceeding that Response to Nan Freeman’s Purported Statement of Material Facts for Summary Judgment Page 16 of 28 gave Michelle Murphy and her counsel the appearance that she was fulfilling her legal obligations in the courtroom, as an official court reporter under contract to Michelle Murphy, including being located at her reporting station with her equipment, that was a scheme or an artifice to defraud Michelle Murphy and thereby her counsel and the appellate courts and all other courts.

       On May 27, 2014, Nan Freeman failed to take down, audio record, accurately and completely transcribe Judge Baldwin’s Order and assurance to Michelle Murphy, her children and her counsel that the children would be allowed to testify at the May 27, 2014 proceeding, and, thereby, deceptively engaged in actionable fraud and/or alternatively, negligent misrepresentation conduct, creating damages sought in the First Amended Complaint against Nan Freeman by Michelle Murphy. See, Affidavit of Millard Farmer attached to this Response.

     At the time of the May 27, 2014 proceeding, Nan Freeman was a person known to Michelle Murphy and her counsel as the official court reporter who was assigned to the case as the official reporter whom Michelle Murphy, through her counsel, contracted to report and transcribe the proceeding on May 27, 2014.

     Nan Freeman, as a part of her fraud and/or alternatively, negligent misrepresentation conduct, requested that Michelle Murphy make payment to her for work which Nan Freeman deceptively failed to perform while appearing to perform as required by the Board of Response to Nan Freeman’s Purported Statement of Material Facts for Summary Judgment Page 17 of 28 Court Reporting Rules and Regulations.

     Nan Freeman charged, and Michelle Murphy paid for pages of the transcript that did not meet the legal requirements of being page eligible to be included in the fee charged and collected by Nan Freeman.

     In addition to not recording and transcribing the first part of the proceedings, while deceptively appearing to be recording the court proceedings, Nan Freeman, as a part of her fraud and/or alternatively, negligent misrepresentation, provided Michelle Murphy, opposing counsel and the Court a certificate stating that the transcript of the May 27, 2014 proceedings provided to the parties, which Nan Freeman was compensated to produce, was a “true” record of the proceedings. (Freeman Dep., Exhibit 5)

     Not only was the certificate not legal, but Nan Freeman had illegally charged for ineligible pages and omitted portions of the proceedings.

     Nan Freeman, who personally transcribed the transcript from a recording that she produced, (Freeman Dep. p. 7) as a part of her fraud and/or alternatively, negligent misrepresentation conduct, in addition to omitting the beginning of the proceeding, omitted the four pages of Judge Baldwin’s massive temper tantrum at the end of the proceeding that no human in attendance could forget.

     Nan Freeman engaged in fraud and/or alternatively, negligent misrepresentation conduct by attempting to have Judge Baldwin use his authority as the presiding Judge to influence counsel for Michelle Murphy not to bring an action against Nan Freeman that ultimately provided counsel for Michelle Murphy the information to learn of a substantial portion of the fraud and/or alternatively negligent misrepresentation conduct of Nan Freeman, much of which was verified during the deposition of Nan Freeman, where she continued to conceal her fraud and/or alternatively negligent misrepresentation, by first making false statements and frequently feigning that she did not remember.

5.       After issuing this ruling, Judge Baldwin stated ”that’s the end of this hearing today” and left the bench. Compl., Attach. 7, at 41. Response to No. 5 Purported Statement 5 is deceptive, as it attempts to imply the end of the proceeding. Instead, Judge Baldwin stood up, but did not leave the bench, and immediately was engaged by counsel and responded with his monstrous temper tantrum, contained in the omitted pages of the “true record” transcript involving the “Blame Yourself,” “Blame Yourself,” Blame Yourself,” of Judge Baldwin that is included in the Addendum, accompanied with the “indicating” comment and the statement of Larry King to Judge Baldwin that is also included in the Addendum to the May 27, 2014 transcript of Nan Freeman. (Attachment 4)

     Even if Judge Baldwin accosted counsel, as he had during the monstrous temper tantrum, after a hearing, and Nan Freeman had the recorded audio of that conduct, she was equally required to transcribe the conduct of Judge Baldwin in order that the relevance of the conduct could be weighed by the regulatory authorities and an appellate court.

     Purported Statement 5 of Nan Freeman mischaracterizes the type of deceptive conduct in which Nan Freeman engaged when she took money that did not belongto her for preparation of numerous transcripts. See, OCGA §15-14-5; Court Reporters’ Fee Schedule of the Judicial Council of Georgia. It also raises the issue of what conduct and testimony was omitted from the transcripts of other litigants for whom she was contracted to provide transcripts.

6.      Despite Judge Baldwin having ended the hearing, one of Plaintiff’s attorneys in the Child Custody Litigation continued to argue, prompting Judge Baldwin to return to the courtroom and direct Ms. Freeman to “[s]top taking down.” Compl., Attach. 8, at 4.

      Response to No. 6 Purported Statement 6 continues to mischaracterize the litigation and the conduct of counsel for Michelle Murphy, and the location of Judge Baldwin in the courtroom.

     At a point in time, at the end of the proceeding’s omitted pages of the certified as “true” transcript, Judge Baldwin, while remaining in the courtroom, did direct Nan Freeman to stop taking down the statements of counsel to Judge Baldwin.

      This occurred at the very end, after the omissions of Nan Freeman that she, after being caught, included in the Addendum. Attachment 4, p. 4. 

     On June 5, 2014, Judge Baldwin entered an Order in the Child Custody Litigation regarding his award of temporary custody of the children to Plaintiff’s ex-husband. A copy of the June 5, 2014 Order in the Child Custody Litigation is attached to the Gordon Affidavit as Exhibit C. Response to No. 7 The June 5, 2014 Order in Murphy v. Murphy is attached to the Gordon Affidavit as Exhibit C.

     There are problems with the veracity of the content of Orders of Judge Baldwin. It is the opinion of counsel that the false statements contained in the Orders of Judge Baldwin are most predictably derived from persons other than Judge Baldwin. Counsel for Michelle Murphy observed that Michael Williams Warner, a young Glover & Davis lawyer, made a false swearing to the Magistrate Court of Coweta County that other Glover & Davis counsel acquiesced in Michael William Warner’s using.

     This case against Nan Freeman does not include the illegal conduct of persons other than Nan Freeman, although the illegal conduct of persons other than Nan Freeman is identified, as Nan Freeman attempts to demean Michelle Murphy and her counsel.

     Having observed the legal ability of Judge Baldwin during this litigation, counsel for Michelle Murphy has the opinion that Judge Baldwin did not write the June 5, 2014 Order, but that a person undisclosed to counsel for Michelle Murphy, either presented the Order to Judge Baldwin’s law clerk, or to Judge Baldwin for Judge Baldwin’s signature.

     The June 5, 2014 Order contains false statements not supported by evidence that comports with Due Process requirements, or obtained while Judge Baldwin was conducting a proceeding within the requirements of the Code of Judicial Conduct.

     Nan Freeman, upon their request, earlier provided the Glover & Davis lawyers a copy of the last portion of her transcript, which she certified as “true” and which she filed with the Court that did not include the Addendum. It was that early provided portion of the transcript that was used for the drafter of the June 5, 2014 Order signed by Judge Baldwin, most likely, again, without him reading the Order before he signed it.

      The Addendum was not produced by Nan Freeman until June 11, 2014. See Attachment

9.      Judge Baldwin has signed Orders prepared by the Glover & Davis lawyers in the Murphy v. Murphy case without reading them on at least two other occasions during that litigation. This comports with Judge Baldwin’s signing without invoices presented by Nan Freeman to authorize payment by the Counties for her services as official court reporters, without checking to see that she is in compliance with the law. (Freeman Dep. pp. 34-35)

8.      At the request of Plaintiff’s attorneys in the Child Custody Litigation, Ms. Freeman prepared and filed an “Addendum” to the transcript of the May 27, 2014 hearing.

     The “Addendum” included the additional statements made by Plaintiff’s counsel after Judge Baldwin had terminated the hearing. Compl., Attach. 8. Response to No. 8 Nan Freeman, initially in her purported statement mischaracterizes the litigation issues in Murphy v. Murphy, most likely as counsel for Nan Freeman and those opposing Michelle Murphy wish to continue concealing the fact that Nan Freeman assisted Judge Baldwin in attempting to conceal his misconduct.

      The statements by Larry King and Millard Farmer toward the end of the proceeding that are included in the Addendum were made before Judge Baldwin terminated the hearing. Judge Baldwin did not terminate the hearing until the end of the Addendum.

     A copy of the May 27, 2014 Addendum, as provided to us by Nan Freeman, is included as Attachment 4.

9.      On June 10, 2014, one of Plaintiff’s lawyers in the Child Custody Litigation sent an Open Records Request to Ms. Freeman seeking, inter alia, the audio recording of the May 27 hearing. Compl., Attach.

5.       Response to No. 9 Again, Nan Freeman, initially in her purported statement mischaracterizes the litigation issues in Murphy v. Murphy. Attachment 6 and Exhibit 6 to the deposition of Nan Freeman contain the Georgia Open Records Act request sent to the Counties of Troup and Coweta and to Nan Freeman. The audio recordings were sought.

10.      On June 26, 2014, Ms. Freeman and Judge Baldwin forwarded CDs of the audio recording of the May 27 hearing to Plaintiff’s counsel. Gordon Aff., Exhibit D, at 16. Response to No. 10 The events relating to obtaining the audio disk forwarded on June 26, 2014 occurred as follows. On June 18, 2014 Nan Freeman communicated that she would file a copy of the audio recording in the Clerk of Court’s file. Exhibit D, p. 18 to Affidavit of Kenneth Gordon.

       On June 19, 2014 Judge Baldwin sent a letter to Millard Farmer; the copy of this letter which Nan Freeman provided to counsel contains on the right side of the page a note in the handwriting of Nan Freeman as follows, “This email is not altogether accurate, but it of course is what he sent to MF.” Exhibit D, p. 25 to Affidavit of Kenneth Gordon.

     On June 24, 2014, The Board of Court Reporting dismissed the Complaint that was filed for Michelle Murphy against Nan Freeman. Attachment 5 On June 25, 2014, after the dismissal of the Complaint by the Board of Court Reporting, Michelle Murphy filed the civil action against Nan Freeman, et. al. that included as defendants members of the Board of Court Reporting in the Superior Court of Fulton County.

     On June 26, 2014, the CD containing the audio recording of the May 27, 2015 proceeding was forwarded to counsel for Michelle Murphy.

11.       In March 2014, Plaintiff filed a grievance with the Board of Court Reporting challenging Ms. Freeman’s refusal to provide an audio recording of an earlier hearing. Plaintiff alleges that she later amended her grievance to include allegations that Ms. Freeman overcharged for certain transcripts due to the number of spaces per line in the transcripts. The Board of Court Reporting has not issued a decision on Plaintiff’s complaint. Compl. 1.3.1, 1.4.9. Response to No. 11 The Board of Court Reporting had issued a decision on June 24, 2014, as described above in Response to

10.       Attachment 5. Response to Nan Freeman’s Purported Statement of Material Facts for Summary Judgment Page 24 of 28 12.

     Before Plaintiff raised the “spaces per line” issue, Ms. Freeman was not aware of any error in the number of spaces per line in her transcripts. Ms. Freeman testified that, when she initially set up the word processing program for her court reporting software, she “remember[ed] counting spaces, “but that “at some point,” the spaces per line in her transcript “inadvertently [ ] changed from 63 to 61,”possibly a result of changes in the different versions of Microsoft Word. Freeman Dep. (Gordon Aff. Exhibit A) at 31:2-8. Response to No. 12 Nan Freeman does not create a defense by maintaining that she did not know the law — in fact as an official court reporter, Nan Freeman concedes both her liability and her absence of understanding of her computer program.

13.      As soon as Ms. Freeman learned of the “spaces per line” issue, she immediately corrected her transcript program and recalculated the cost of Plaintiff’s transcripts to determine if the error had resulted in any overcharges. Ms. Freeman determined that, over the entirety of the Child Custody Litigation, the spaces per line issue had resulted in only $45 of overcharges to Plaintiff.

      Freeman Dep. at 28:21-29:24, 31:4-9, 33:5-9, 86:24-87:7. Response to No. 13 An official court reporter, as Nan Freeman, cannot personally design a template, as she did around 1996, and use it in each of her official court reporter’s contractual fulfilments until she is caught in 2014 and then legally urge the defense of mistake — the law burdens Nan Freeman, as a condition of qualifying and being compensated, as an official court reporter, to both learn and comply  with the legally permissible fees and the legal requirements for the preparation of transcripts that qualify for the fees legally obtainable as an official court reporter.

     Nan Freeman stated at her deposition that she produced her transcripts and did not have an assistant do her transcriptions. (Freeman Dep. p.6) Returning compensation illegally taken does not absolve one of the consequence of violating the law.

14.      Shortly after Ms. Freeman’s deposition, Mrs. Freeman’ s attorney, Ken Gordon, tendered Plaintiff a check for $50 to cover any overcharge.

     Gordon Aff.ii7, Exhibit E. Response to No. 14 Nan Freeman’s check in the amount of $50 to cover any overcharge did not cover the liabilities of Nan Freeman.

     For further response, the response to purported Statement 13 is incorporated and included here.

     The fees and the conditions upon which an official court reporter in the State of Georgia can obtain compensation is mandated by the Judicial Council of Georgia.

     Nan Freeman was required by law to charge only the Judicial Counsel of Georgia authorized fees to persons whom wished, or were required to purchase transcripts from her in her capacity as an official court reporter for the Coweta Judicial.

     The fees follow that were allowable for Nan Freeman to charge for legally prepared transcripts in the Superior Court of Coweta County case of John Harold Murphy v. Michelle Murphy, and related Counterclaim, Third Party action Civil Action No. 12V-413 (or, “Murphy v Murphy.”)

     Nan Freeman did not comply with the certificate requirements legally imposed upon her by the OCGA § 15-14-5, Duty to transcribe statute — Nan Freeman used an abbreviated, incomplete version of the required certificate.

OCGA § 15-14-5.

     Duty to transcribe; certificate. It shall be the duty of each court reporter to transcribe the evidence and other proceedings of which he has taken notes as provided by law whenever requested so to do by counsel for any party to such case and upon being paid the legal fees for such transcripts. The reporter, upon delivering the transcript to such counsel, shall affix thereto a certificate signed by him reciting that the transcript is true, complete, and correct.

     Subject only to the right of the trial judge to change or require the correction of the transcript, the transcript so certified shall be presumed to be true, complete, and correct. [emphasis supplied]

     Nan Freeman, as a part and parcel of her habitual violations of the laws of Georgia, did not provide Michelle Murphy’s transcripts with an OCGA § 5-14-5 required certificate containing the certification that the transcript is “true, complete and correct. . ” as required by OCGA § 5-14-5 — — The transcripts provided and paid for by Michelle Murphy was not true or complete or correct.

     Nan Freeman has never provided to Michelle Murphy, or other litigants, the required certificate that is an indication of the pattern of her illegal conduct.

     The habitual violations of the OCGA § 15-14-5 requirements and the authorized fees is relevant to identify that Nan Freeman did not just make an one time error,

Read the rest of this document at

http://freejackandthomas.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/b50410-Resp-to-Freemans-Rule-6.5-Statement-Material-Facts-w-Atts.pdf

 Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

Author of this blog, Dedicated to the Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America, and our Children Who Want to Come Home, and Especially to My Little Julian, is not a lawyer, attorney, or legal practitioner, therefore, no information contained herein this post and/or blog could be (mis)construed as “legal advice.”  Anyone who exercises he/r rights, and private property sometimes called “child” for deceptive, possibly malicious or retaliatory, and profiteering/privateering and in the “best interests” . . . of the “state” Texas General and other Funds at one’s own peril, risk, and/ or self-fulfillment.  The choice is yours.

  • CENSORSHIP IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE America, the real, real one,   THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the uS Constitution and  Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, uS Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
    • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
      • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement/demand, then contact Author of this blog immediately as fair notice and due diligence requires so that Author shall act lawfully and reasonably with expedience pursuant to any supplemental knowledge.

Elonis v. United States: US Supreme Court Makes a Statement on UN-Threat and Free Speech


US Supreme Court Makes a Statement

on UN-Threats and Free Speech

Elonis v. United States, No. 13-983, 575 U.S. ___ (June 1, 2015)

Question 

Does a conviction of threatening another person under 18 U. S. C. §875(c) require proof of the defendant’s subjective intent to threaten?

 The US Supreme Court appears to have taken one small step toward restoring the real America’s (US)Constitution and “incorporated” Bill of Rights as ratified and directly applied to the people through the Fourteenth Amendment when, on June 01, 2015, in an 8-1 ruling, which this real mommy distinguishes sharply from a “recommendation,” Chief Justice John Roberts shot down procedurally absurd facial interpretations that landed appellant-plaintiff, Anthony Elonis, in jail on criminal charges. ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which SCALIA, KENNEDY, GINSBURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. ALITO, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. The reversal and remand to the Third Circuit challenges Judges Aldisert, Scirica, and Hardiman’s previous ruling which Anthony Elonis appealed via Writ of Certiorari 

The US High Court aimed to resolve a Circuit Court split on whether or not  a conviction for threatening another person in interstate communications, here, on Facebook, require proof of the defendant’s subjective intent to threaten and, if not, does the First Amendment prevent a conviction based only on a showing that a reasonable person would regard the statement as threatening?

Hopefully, this decision rife with First Amendment US Constitutional  free speech import, though the perhaps strategically manufactured or maneuvered political or ideological case went out of its way to avoid its own ruling on a case that ironically stemmed from an interstate Facebook post sends the message to the most prudent inferior and state court district jurists and panelists, over zealous committees to include CPS Cluster “family ‘civil'” and juvenile courts and collaborative, unified “joint public-private” NGO’s, foreign jurisdictions, corporations, for profit “non-for-profit” lobbyists, judicial campaign donors, and affiliated agencies and state bar and district and county clerks and court recorders/reporters’ international associations, and let us not forget the American Inns of Family Court, that form–procedure–must never be elevated over substance.

 The Facts 

In May 2010, Anthony Elonis’s wife of seven years left him, taking their two kids with her.7 The following October, Elonis was fired from his job at Dorney Park & Wildwater Kingdom, an amusement park in Allentown, Pennsylvania, because of a photograph he had posted on Facebook taken during his office’s Halloween party.8 The photo showed Elonis in a costume, holding a knife to a coworker’s throat with the caption, “I wish.”

His boss saw the post and fired him that same day.10 Two days after he was fired, Elonis took to Facebook. He first posted about his former employer, Dorney Park,11 imagining the fear his former coworkers must feel not knowing whether he still had keys to the gates.

He also posted about his estranged wife: “[i]f I only knew then what I know now, I would have smothered your ass with a pillow, dumped your body in the back seat, dropped you off in Toad Creek, and made it look like a rape and murder.” He posted more about his wife in comments on her sister’s status updates.

For example, when his wife’s sister posted about going Halloween costume shopping with his children, Elonis commented, “Tell [my son] he should dress up as matricide for Halloween. I don’t know what his costume would entail though. Maybe [my wife’s] head on a stick?”15

He also posted in October 2010:16

“There’s one way to love you but a thousand ways to kill you. I’m not going to rest until your body is a mess, soaked in blood and dying from all the little cuts. Hurry up and die, bitch, so I can bust this nut all over your corpse from atop your shallow grave.

I used to be a nice guy but then you became a slut. Guess it’s not your fault you liked your daddy raped you.

So hurry up and die, bitch, so I can forgive you.17

As a result of these statements, a state court issued Elonis’s wife a restraining order against him on November 4, 2010.18

In response, Elonis posted again on November 7, this time an adaptation of the Whitest Kids U’ Know sketch “It’s Illegal to Say. . .”:19

Did you know that it’s illegal for me to say I want to kill my wife?

It’s illegal. It’s indirect criminal contempt.

It’s one of the only sentences that I’m not allowed to say.

Now it was okay for me to say it right then because I was just telling you that it’s illegal for me to say I want to kill my wife.

I’m not actually saying it. I’m just letting you know that it’s illegal for me to say that.

It’s kind of like a public service. I’m letting you know so that you don’t accidently go out and say something like that.

Um, what’s interesting is that it’s very illegal to say I really, really think someone out there should kill my wife.

That’s illegal. Very, very illegal.

But not illegal to say with a mortar launcher.”

The Ruling 

The jury was instructed that the Government need prove only that a reasonable person would regard Elonis’s communications as threats, and that was error. Federal criminal liability generally does not turn solely on the results of an act without considering the defendant’s mental state. That understanding “took deep and early root in American soil” and Congress left it intact here: Under Section 875(c), “wrongdoing must be conscious to be criminal.” Morissette, 342 U. S., at 252.

There is no dispute that the mental state requirement in Section 875(c) is satisfied if the defendant transmits a communication for the purpose of issuing a threat, or with knowledge that the communication will be viewed as a threat. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 25, 56.   The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Watch a short video by clicking on the following link,

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/01/politics/supreme-court-elonis-vs-u-s-free-speech/

Link to

 
 

Regarding perhaps strategic plants and cases,  Divorce in Connecticut blogger, Catharine Sloper wrote an interesting piece regarding the case of Edward/”Ted” Taupier who appears to be a lighting rod for controversy.  I highly recommend the read at http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/search/label/TED%20TAUPIER.

Re-blogged from divorce in connecticut

by:  Catharine Sloper

Monday, June 8, 2015

U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISION MAY HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON TED TAUPIER CASE!

 According to Michelle Tuccitto Sullo of “The CT Law Tribune”:
 
“A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the justices threw out a man’s conviction for making threatening comments about his wife on Facebook is already having an impact in Connecticut.
 
Closing arguments in the trial of a man accused of threatening a family court judge via email had been scheduled for June 2. However, in light of the June 1 ruling in Elonis v. United States, Middletown Superior Court Judge David Gold granted a continuance in the Connecticut case to June 23.
 
Torrington attorney Rachel Baird, who represents Edward Taupier, of Cromwell, said the continuance will give her an opportunity to file a brief on how the national ruling impacts her client’s case.
 
Taupier, 50, faces charges of threatening, disorderly conduct and breach of peace in connection with comments he allegedly made in an August 2014 email about Judge Elizabeth Bozzuto, the state’s chief administrative judge for family matters.
 
 
“It is my position that the Elonis case will have a tremendous impact on Taupier’s case,” Baird said. The high court ruling states that “there must be a showing that a person intentionally made a statement to threaten, not that they made a statement and a person felt threatened.”
 
“Otherwise, people will have to be very careful about what they say, because someone might take it the wrong way,” Baird said.
 
Baird said her brief will cover the issue of what the prosecution must prove about her clients mental state in order to convict him of threatening. She said the prosecution must show that Taupier intended to threaten the judge and wasn’t just being reckless with his words…”

Read more:

http://www.ctlawtribune.com/id=1202728420037/Man-Accused-of-Threatening-Conn-Judge-Cites-New-Supreme-Court-Ruling-in-Defense#ixzz3cRitFw1v

 

Elonis v. United States, No. 13-983, 575 U.S. ___ (June 1, 2015).

Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court.

Federal law makes it a crime to transmit in interstate commerce “any communication containing any threat . . . to injure the person of another.” 18 U.S. C. §875(c). Petitioner was convicted of violating this provision under instructions that required the jury to find that he communicated what a reasonable person would regard as a threat. The question is whether the statute also requires that the defendant be aware of the threatening nature of the communication, and—if not—whether the First Amendment requires such a showing.

I

A

Anthony Douglas Elonis was an active user of the social networking Web site Facebook.… In May 2010, Elonis’s wife of nearly seven years left him, taking with her their two young children. Elonis began “listening to more violent music” and posting self-styled “rap” lyrics inspired by the music. … The lyrics Elonis posted [on Facebook] … included graphically violent language and imagery. This material was often interspersed with disclaimers that the lyrics were “fictitious,” with no intentional “resemblance to real persons.” [App.] 331, 329. Elonis posted an explanation to another Facebook user that “I’m doing this for me. My writing is therapeutic.” Id., at 329; see also id., at 205 (testifying that it “helps me to deal with the pain”).

Elonis’s co-workers and friends viewed the posts in a different light.…

B

A grand jury indicted Elonis for making threats to injure patrons and employees [at his former place of employment], his estranged wife, police officers, a kindergarten class, and an FBI agent, all in violation of 18 U.S. C. §875(c). … In the District Court, Elonis moved to dismiss the indictment for failing to allege that he had intended to threaten anyone. The District Court denied the motion, holding that Third Circuit precedent required only that Elonis “intentionally made the communication, not that he intended to make a threat.” … At trial, Elonis testified that his posts emulated the rap lyrics of the well-known performer Eminem, some of which involve fantasies about killing his ex-wife. … In Elonis’s view, he had posted “nothing . . . that hasn’t been said already.” … The Government presented as witnesses Elonis’s wife and co-workers, all of whom said they felt afraid and viewed Elonis’s posts as serious threats. …

Elonis requested a jury instruction that “the government must prove that he intended to communicate a true threat.” Id., at 21. See also id., at 267–269, 303. The District Court denied that request. The jury instructions instead informed the jury that

“A statement is a true threat when a defendant intentionally makes a statement in a context or under such circumstances wherein a reasonable person would foresee that the statement would be interpreted by those to whom the maker communicates the statement as a serious expression of an intention to inflict bodily injury or take the life of an individual.” Id., at 301.

The Government’s closing argument emphasized that it was irrelevant whether Elonis intended the postings to be threats—“it doesn’t matter what he thinks.” Id., at 286. A jury convicted Elonis on four of the five counts against him….

Elonis renewed his challenge to the jury instructions in the Court of Appeals, contending that the jury should have been required to find that he intended his posts to be threats. The Court of Appeals disagreed, holding that the intent required by Section 875(c) is only the intent to communicate words that the defendant understands, and that a reasonable person would view as a threat. 730 F. 3d 321, 332 (CA3 2013).

We granted certiorari. 573 U.S. ___ (2014).

II

A

An individual who “transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another” is guilty of a felony and faces up to five years’ imprisonment. 18 U.S. C. §875(c). This statute requires that a communication be transmitted and that the communication contain a threat. It does not specify that the defendant must have any mental state with respect to these elements. In particular, it does not indicate whether the defendant must intend that his communication contain a threat.

….

B

The fact that the statute does not specify any required mental state, however, does not mean that none exists. We have repeatedly held that “mere omission from a criminal enactment of any mention of criminal intent” should not be read “as dispensing with it.” Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, 250 (1952). This rule of construction reflects the basic principle that “wrongdoing must be conscious to be criminal.”Id., at 252. … Although there are exceptions, the “general rule” is that a guilty mind is “a necessary element in the indictment and proof of every crime.” United States v. Balint, 258 U.S. 250, 251 (1922). We therefore generally “interpret[] criminal statutes to include broadly applicable scienter requirements, even where the statute by its terms does not contain them.” United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc., 513 U.S. 64, 70 (1994).

….

When interpreting federal criminal statutes that are silent on the required mental state, we read into the statute “only that mens rea which is necessary to separate wrongful conduct from ‘otherwise innocent conduct.’” Carter v. United States, 530 U.S. 255, 269 (2000) (quoting X-Citement Video, 513 U.S., at 72). In some cases, a general requirement that a defendant act knowingly is itself an adequate safeguard. … In other instances, however, requiring only that the defendant act knowingly “would fail to protect the innocent actor.”   …

C

Section 875(c), as noted, requires proof that a communication was transmitted and that it contained a threat. The “presumption in favor of a scienter requirement should apply to each of the statutory elements that criminalize otherwise innocent conduct.” X-Citement Video, 513 U.S., at 72 (emphasis added). The parties agree that a defendant under Section 875(c) must know that he is transmitting a communication. But communicating something is not what makes the conduct “wrongful.” Here “the crucial element separating legal innocence from wrongful conduct” is the threatening nature of the communication. Id., at 73. The mental state requirement must therefore apply to the fact that the communication contains a threat.

Elonis’s conviction, however, was premised solely on how his posts would be understood by a reasonable person. Such a “reasonable person” standard is a familiar feature of civil liability in tort law, but is inconsistent with “the conventional requirement for criminal conduct— awareness of some wrongdoing.”Staples [v. United States], 511 U.S. [600,] 606–607 [(1994)] (quoting United States v. Dotterweich, 320 U.S. 277, 281 (1943); emphasis added). Having liability turn on whether a “reasonable person” regards the communication as a threat—regardless of what the defendant thinks— “reduces culpability on the all-important element of the crime to negligence,” Jeffries, 692 F. 3d, at 484 (Sutton, J., dubitante), and we “have long been reluctant to infer that a negligence standard was intended in criminal statutes,” Rogers v. United States, 422 U.S. 35, 47 (1975) (Marshall, J., concurring) (citing Morissette, 342 U.S. 246). See 1 C. Torcia, Wharton’s Criminal Law §27, pp. 171–172 (15th ed. 1993); Cochran v. United States, 157 U.S. 286, 294 (1895) (defendant could face “liability in a civil action for negligence, but he could only be held criminally for an evil intent actually existing in his mind”). Under these principles, “what [Elonis] thinks” does matter. App. 286.

….

*     *     *

In light of the foregoing, Elonis’s conviction cannot stand. The jury was instructed that the Government need prove only that a reasonable person would regard Elonis’s communications as threats, and that was error. Federal criminal liability generally does not turn solely on the results of an act without considering the defendant’s mental state. That understanding “took deep and early root in American soil” and Congress left it intact here: Under Section 875(c), “wrongdoing must be conscious to be criminal.” Morissette, 342 U.S., at 252.

There is no dispute that the mental state requirement in Section 875(c) is satisfied if the defendant transmits a communication for the purpose of issuing a threat, or with knowledge that the communication will be viewed as a threat. … In response to a question at oral argument, Elonis stated that a finding of recklessness would not be sufficient. … Neither Elonis nor the Government has briefed or argued that point, and we accordingly decline to address it. See Department of Treasury, IRS v. FLRA, 494 U.S. 922, 933 (1990) (this Court is “poorly situated” to address an argument the Court of Appeals did not consider, the parties did not brief, and counsel addressed in “only the most cursory fashion at oral argument”). Given our disposition, it is not necessary to consider any First Amendment issues.

Both Justice Alito and Justice Thomas complain about our not deciding whether recklessness suffices for liability under Section 875(c). … Justice Alito contends that each party “argued” this issue, post, at 2, but they did not address it at all until oral argument, and even then only briefly. …

Justice Alito also suggests that we have not clarified confusion in the lower courts. That is wrong. Our holding makes clear that negligence is not sufficient to support a conviction under Section 875(c), contrary to the view of nine Courts of Appeals. Pet. for Cert. 17. There was and is no circuit conflict over the question Justice Alito and Justice Thomas would have us decide—whether recklessness suffices for liability under Section 875(c). No Court of Appeals has even addressed that question. We think that is more than sufficient “justification,” … for us to decline to be the first appellate tribunal to do so.

….

The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

Justice Alito, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

In Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803), the Court famously proclaimed: “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” Today, the Court announces: It is emphatically the prerogative of this Court to say only what the law is not.

The Court’s disposition of this case is certain to cause confusion and serious problems. Attorneys and judges need to know which mental state is required for conviction under 18 U.S. C. §875(c), an important criminal statute. This case squarely presents that issue, but the Court provides only a partial answer. The Court holds that the jury instructions in this case were defective because they required only negligence in conveying a threat. But the Court refuses to explain what type of intent was necessary. Did the jury need to find that Elonis had the purpose of conveying a true threat? Was it enough if he knew that his words conveyed such a threat? Would recklessness suffice? The Court declines to say. Attorneys and judges are left to guess.

….

I

….

… In my view, the term “threat” in §875(c) can fairly be defined as a statement that is reasonably interpreted as “an expression of an intention to inflict evil, injury, or damage on another.” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 2382 (1976). Conviction under §875(c) demands proof that the defendant’s transmission was in fact a threat, i.e., that it is reasonable to interpret the transmission as an expression of an intent to harm another. In addition, it must be shown that the defendant was at least reckless as to whether the transmission met that requirement.

Why is recklessness enough? My analysis of the mens rea issue follows the same track as the Court’s, as far as it goes. I agree with the Court that we should presume that criminal statutes require some sort ofmens rea for conviction. See ante, at 9–13. To be sure, this presumption marks a departure from the way in which we generally interpret statutes. We “ordinarily resist reading words or elements into a statute that do not appear on its face.” Bates v. United States, 522 U.S. 23, 29 (1997). But this step is justified by a well-established pattern in our criminal laws. “For several centuries (at least since 1600) the different common law crimes have been so defined as to require, for guilt, that the defendant’s acts or omissions be accompanied by one or more of the various types of fault (intention, knowledge, recklessness or—more rarely— negligence).” 1 W. LaFave, Substantive Criminal Law §5.5, p. 381 (2003). Based on these “background rules of the common law, in which the requirement of some mens rea for a crime is firmly embedded,” we require “some indication of congressional intent, express or implied, . . . to dispense withmens rea as an element of a crime.” Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600, 605–606 (1994).

For a similar reason, I agree with the Court that we should presume that an offense like that created by §875(c) requires more than negligence with respect to a critical element like the one at issue here. …

Once we have passed negligence, however, no further presumptions are defensible. In the hierarchy of mental states that may be required as a condition for criminal liability, the mens rea just above negligence is recklessness. Negligence requires only that the defendant “should [have] be[en] aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk,” ALI, Model Penal Code §2.02(2)(d), p. 226 (1985), while recklessness exists “when a person disregards a risk of harm of which he is aware,” Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994); Model Penal Code §2.02(2)(c). And when Congress does not specify a mens rea in a criminal statute, we have no justification for inferring that anything more than recklessness is needed. It is quite unusual for us to interpret a statute to contain a requirement that is nowhere set out in the text. Once we have reached recklessness, we have gone as far as we can without stepping over the line that separates interpretation from amendment.

There can be no real dispute that recklessness regarding a risk of serious harm is wrongful conduct. In a wide variety of contexts, we have described reckless conduct as morally culpable. See, e.g., Farmer, supra, at 835–836 (deliberate indifference to an inmate’s harm); Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64, 75 (1964) (criminal libel); New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 279–280 (1964) (civil libel). Indeed, this Court has held that “reckless disregard for human life” may justify the death penalty. Tison v. Arizona, 481 U.S. 137, 157 (1987). Someone who acts recklessly with respect to conveying a threat necessarily grasps that he is not engaged in innocent conduct. He is not merely careless. He is aware that others could regard his statements as a threat, but he delivers them anyway.

Accordingly, I would hold that a defendant may be convicted under §875(c) if he or she consciously disregards the risk that the communication transmitted will be interpreted as a true threat. Nothing in the Court’s noncommittal opinion prevents lower courts from adopting that standard.

II

There remains the question whether interpreting §875(c) to require no more than recklessness with respect to the element at issue here would violate the First Amendment. Elonis contends that it would. I would reject that argument.

It is settled that the Constitution does not protect true threats. See Virginia v. Black, 538 U.S. 343, 359–360 (2003); R.A.V. v. St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377, 388 (1992); Watts [v. United States], 394 U.S. [705,] 707–708 [(1969) (per curiam)]. And there are good reasons for that rule: True threats inflict great harm and have little if any social value. A threat may cause serious emotional stress for the person threatened and those who care about that person, and a threat may lead to a violent confrontation. It is true that a communication containing a threat may include other statements that have value and are entitled to protection. But that does not justify constitutional protection for the threat itself.

….

It can be argued that §875(c), if not limited to threats made with the intent to harm, will chill statements that do not qualify as true threats, e.g., statements that may be literally threatening but are plainly not meant to be taken seriously. We have sometimes cautioned that it is necessary to “exten[d] a measure of strategic protection” to otherwise unprotected false statements of fact in order to ensure enough “‘breathing space’” for protected speech. Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 342 (1974) (quoting NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415, 433 (1963)). A similar argument might be made with respect to threats. But we have also held that the law provides adequate breathing space when it requires proof that false statements were made with reckless disregard of their falsity. See New York Times, 376 U.S., at 279–280 (civil liability);Garrison, 379 U.S., at 74–75 (criminal liability). Requiring proof of recklessness is similarly sufficient here.

III

Finally, because the jury instructions in this case did not require proof of recklessness, I would vacate the judgment below and remand for the Court of Appeals to decide in the first instance whether Elonis’s conviction could be upheld under a recklessness standard.

….

Justice Thomas, dissenting.

We granted certiorari to resolve a conflict in the lower courts over the appropriate mental state for threat prosecutions under 18 U.S. C. §875(c). Save two, every Circuit to have considered the issue—11 in total—has held that this provision demands proof only of general intent, which here requires no more than that a defendant knew he transmitted a communication, knew the words used in that communication, and understood the ordinary meaning of those words in the relevant context. The outliers are the Ninth and Tenth Circuits, which have concluded that proof of an intent to threaten was necessary for conviction. Adopting the minority position, Elonis urges us to hold that §875(c) and the First Amendment require proof of an intent to threaten. The Government in turn advocates a general-intent approach.

Rather than resolve the conflict, the Court casts aside the approach used in nine Circuits and leaves nothing in its place. Lower courts are thus left to guess at the appropriate mental state for §875(c). All they know after today’s decision is that a requirement of general intent will not do. But they can safely infer that a majority of this Court would not adopt an intent-to-threaten requirement, as the opinion carefully leaves open the possibility that recklessness may be enough. See ante, at 16–17.

This failure to decide throws everyone from appellate judges to everyday Facebook users into a state of uncertainty. This uncertainty could have been avoided had we simply adhered to the background rule of the common law favoring general intent. Although I am sympathetic to my colleagues’ policy concerns about the risks associated with threat prosecutions, the answer to such fears is not to discard our traditional approach to state-of-mind requirements in criminal law. Because the Court of Appeals properly applied the general-intent standard, and because the communications transmitted by Elonis were “true threats” unprotected by the First Amendment, I would affirm the judgment below.

….

I

A

….

Our default rule in favor of general intent applies with full force to criminal statutes addressing speech. Well over 100 years ago, this Court considered a conviction under a federal obscenity statute that punished anyone “‘who shall knowingly deposit, or cause to be deposited, for mailing or delivery,’” any “‘obscene, lewd, or lascivious book, pamphlet, picture, paper, writing, print, or other publication of an indecent character.’” Rosen v. United States, 161 U.S. 29, 30 (1896) (quoting Rev. Stat. §3893). In that case, as here, the defendant argued that, even if “he may have had . . . actual knowledge or notice of [the paper’s] contents” when he put it in the mail, he could not “be convicted of the offence . . . unless he knew or believed that such paper could be properly or justly characterized as obscene, lewd, and lascivious.” 161 U.S., at 41. The Court rejected that theory, concluding that if the material was actually obscene and “deposited in the mail by one who knew or had notice at the time of its contents, the offence is complete, although the defendant himself did not regard the paper as one that the statute forbade to be carried in the mails.” Ibid. As the Court explained, “Congress did not intend that the question as to the character of the paper should depend upon the opinion or belief of the person who, with knowledge or notice of [the paper’s] contents, assumed the responsibility of putting it in the mails of the United States,” because “[e]very one who uses the mails of the United States for carrying papers or publications must take notice of . . . what must be deemed obscene, lewd, and lascivious.” Id., at 41–42.

….

B

Applying ordinary rules of statutory construction, I would read §875(c) to require proof of general intent. To “know the facts that make his conduct illegal” under §875(c), see Staples, 511 U.S., at 605, a defendant must know that he transmitted a communication in interstate or foreign commerce that contained a threat. Knowing that the communication contains a “threat”—a serious expression of an intention to engage in unlawful physical violence—does not, however, require knowing that a jury will conclude that the communication contains a threat as a matter of law. Instead, like one who mails an “obscene” publication and is prosecuted under the federal obscenity statute, a defendant prosecuted under §875(c) must know only the words used in that communication, along with their ordinary meaning in context.

….

C

The majority refuses to apply these ordinary background principles. Instead, it casts my application of general intent as a negligence standard disfavored in the criminal law. Ante, at 13–16. But that characterization misses the mark. Requiring general intent in this context is not the same as requiring mere negligence. Like the mental-state requirements adopted in many of the cases cited by the Court, general intent under §875(c) prevents a defendant from being convicted on the basis of any fact beyond his awareness. See, e.g., United States v. XCitement Video, Inc., 513 U.S. 64, 73 (1994) (knowledge of age of persons depicted in explicit materials); Staples, supra, at 614–615 (knowledge of firing capability of weapon); Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, 270– 271 (1952) (knowledge that property belonged to another). In other words, the defendant must know—not merely be reckless or negligent with respect to the fact—that he is committing the acts that constitute the actus reus of the offense.

But general intent requires no mental state (not even a negligent one) concerning the “fact” that certain words meet the legal definition of a threat. That approach is particularly appropriate where, as here, that legal status is determined by a jury’s application of the legal standard of a “threat” to the contents of a communication. And convicting a defendant despite his ignorance of the legal— or objective—status of his conduct does not mean that he is being punished for negligent conduct. …

II

In light of my conclusion that Elonis was properly convicted under the requirements of §875(c), I must address his argument that his threatening posts were nevertheless protected by the First Amendment.

A

Elonis does not contend that threats are constitutionally protected speech, nor could he: “From 1791 to the present, . . . our society . . . has permitted restrictions upon the content of speech in a few limited areas,” true threats being one of them. R.A.V. v. St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377, 382– 383 (1992); see id., at 388. Instead, Elonis claims that only intentional threats fall within this particular historical exception.

If it were clear that intentional threats alone have been punished in our Nation since 1791, I would be inclined to agree. But that is the not the case. Although the Federal Government apparently did not get into the business of regulating threats until 1917, the States have been doing so since the late 18th and early 19th centuries. [Citations omitted.] And that practice continued even after the States amended their constitutions to include speech protections similar to those in the First Amendment. [Citations omitted.] State practice thus provides at least some evidence of the original meaning of the phrase “freedom of speech” in the First Amendment. [Citation omitted.]

….

… In short, there is good reason to believe that States bound by their own Constitutions to protect freedom of speech long ago enacted general-intent threat statutes.

….

Elonis also insists that our precedents require a mental state of intent when it comes to threat prosecutions under §875(c), primarily relying on Watts, 394 U.S. 705, and Virginia v. Black, 538 U.S. 343 (2003). Neither of those decisions, however, addresses whether the First Amendment requires a particular mental state for threat prosecutions.

As Elonis admits, Watts expressly declined to address the mental state required under the First Amendment for a “true threat.” See 394 U.S., at 707–708. True, the Court in Watts noted “grave doubts” about Raganksy [v. United States, 253 F. 643 (7th Cir. 1918)]’s construction of “willfully” in the presidential threats statute. 394 U.S., at 707–708. But “grave doubts” do not make a holding, and that stray statement in Watts is entitled to no precedential force. If anything, Watts continued the long tradition of focusing on objective criteria in evaluating the mental requirement. See ibid.

….

In addition to requiring a departure from our precedents, adopting Elonis’ view would make threats one of the most protected categories of unprotected speech, thereby sowing tension throughout our First Amendment doctrine. We generally have not required a heightened mental state under the First Amendment for historically unprotected categories of speech. For instance, the Court has indicated that a legislature may constitutionally prohibit “‘fighting words,’ those personally abusive epithets which, when addressed to the ordinary citizen, are, as a matter of common knowledge, inherently likely to provoke violent reaction,” Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 20 (1971)—without proof of an intent to provoke a violent reaction. Because the definition of “fighting words” turns on how the “ordinary citizen” would react to the language, ibid., this Court has observed that a defendant may be guilty of a breach of the peace if he “makes statements likely to provoke violence and disturbance of good order, even though no such eventuality be intended,” and that the punishment of such statements “as a criminal act would raise no question under [the Constitution],” Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 309–310 (1940); see alsoChaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568, 572– 573 (1942) (rejecting a First Amendment challenge to a general-intent construction of a state statute punishing “‘fighting’ words”); State v. Chaplinsky, 91 N. H. 310, 318, 18 A. 2d 754, 758 (1941) (“[T]he only intent required for conviction . . . was an intent to speak the words”). The Court has similarly held that a defendant may be convicted of mailing obscenity under the First Amendment without proof that he knew the materials were legally obscene. Hamling [v. United States], 418 U.S. [87,] 120–124 [(1974)]. And our precedents allow liability in tort for false statements about private persons on matters of private concern even if the speaker acted negligently with respect to the falsity of those statements. See Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767, 770, 773–775 (1986). I see no reason why we should give threats pride of place among unprotected speech.

….

words, the defendant must know—not merely be reckless or negligent with respect to the fact—that he is committing the acts that constitute the actus reus of the offense.

But general intent requires no mental state (not even a negligent one) concerning the “fact” that certain words meet the legal definition of a threat. That approach is particularly appropriate where, as here, that legal status is determined by a jury’s application of the legal standard of a “threat” to the contents of a communication. And convicting a defendant despite his ignorance of the legal— or objective—status of his conduct does not mean that he is being punished for negligent conduct. …

II

In light of my conclusion that Elonis was properly convicted under the requirements of §875(c), I must address his argument that his threatening posts were nevertheless protected by the First Amendment.

A

Elonis does not contend that threats are constitutionally protected speech, nor could he: “From 1791 to the present, . . . our society . . . has permitted restrictions upon the content of speech in a few limited areas,” true threats being one of them. R.A.V. v. St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377, 382– 383 (1992); see id., at 388. Instead, Elonis claims that only intentional threats fall within this particular historical exception.

If it were clear that intentional threats alone have been punished in our Nation since 1791, I would be inclined to agree. But that is the not the case. Although the Federal Government apparently did not get into the business of regulating threats until 1917, the States have been doing so since the late 18th and early 19th centuries. [Citations omitted.] And that practice continued even after the States amended their constitutions to include speech protections similar to those in the First Amendment. [Citations omitted.] State practice thus provides at least some evidence of the original meaning of the phrase “freedom of speech” in the First Amendm

I respectfully dissent.

Read Full Opinion

NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321 .

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Syllabus

elonis v. united states

certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the third circuit

No. 13–983. Argued December 1, 2014—Decided June 1, 2015

After his wife left him, petitioner Anthony Douglas Elonis, under the pseudonym “Tone Dougie,” used the social networking Web site Facebook to post self-styled rap lyrics containing graphically violent language and imagery concerning his wife, co-workers, a kindergarten class, and state and federal law enforcement. These posts were often interspersed with disclaimers that the lyrics were “fictitious” and not intended to depict real persons, and with statements that Elonis was exercising his First Amendment rights. Many who knew him saw his posts as threatening, however, including his boss, who fired him for threatening co-workers, and his wife, who sought and was granted a state court protection-from-abuse order against him.

When Elonis’s former employer informed the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the posts, the agency began monitoring Elonis’s Face-book activity and eventually arrested him. He was charged with five counts of violating 18 U. S. C. §875(c), which makes it a federal crime to transmit in interstate commerce “any communication containing any threat . . . to injure the person of another.” At trial, Elonis requested a jury instruction that the Government was required to prove that he intended to communicate a “true threat.” Instead, the District Court told the jury that Elonis could be found guilty if a reasonable person would foresee that his statements would be interpreted as a threat. Elonis was convicted on four of the five counts and renewed his jury instruction challenge on appeal. The Third Circuit affirmed, holding that Section 875(c) requires only the intent to communicate words that the defendant understands, and that a reasonable person would view as a threat.

Held: The Third Circuit’s instruction, requiring only negligence with respect to the communication of a threat, is not sufficient to support a conviction under Section 875(c). Pp. 7–17.

(a) Section 875(c) does not indicate whether the defendant must intend that the communication contain a threat, and the parties can show no indication of a particular mental state requirement in the statute’s text. Elonis claims that the word “threat,” by definition, conveys the intent to inflict harm. But common definitions of “threat” speak to what the statement conveys—not to the author’s mental state. The Government argues that the express “intent to extort” requirements in neighboring Sections 875(b) and (d) should preclude courts from implying an unexpressed “intent to threaten” requirement in Section 875(c). The most that can be concluded from such a comparison, however, is that Congress did not mean to confine Section 875(c) to crimes of extortion, not that it meant to exclude a mental state requirement. Pp. 7–9.

(b) The Court does not regard “mere omission from a criminal enactment of any mention of criminal intent” as dispensing with such a requirement. Morissette v. United States, 342 U. S. 246 . This rule of construction reflects the basic principle that “wrongdoing must be conscious to be criminal,” and that a defendant must be “blameworthy in mind” before he can be found guilty. Id., at 252. The “general rule” is that a guilty mind is “a necessary element in the indictment and proof of every crime.” United States v. Balint, 258 U. S. 250 . Thus, criminal statutes are generally interpreted “to include broadly applicable scienter requirements, even where the statute . . . does not contain them.” United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc., 513 U. S. 64 . This does not mean that a defendant must know that his conduct is illegal, but a defendant must have knowledge of “the facts that make his conduct fit the definition of the offense.” Staples v. United States, 511 U. S. 600 , n. 3. Federal criminal statutes that are silent on the required mental state should be read to include “only that mens reawhich is necessary to separate” wrongful from innocent conduct. Carter v. United States, 530 U. S. 255 . In some cases, a general requirement that a defendant act knowingly is sufficient, but where such a requirement “would fail to protect the innocent actor,” the statute “would need to be read to require . . . specific intent.” Ibid. Pp. 9–13.

(c) The “presumption in favor of a scienter requirement should apply to each of the statutory elements that criminalize otherwise innocent conduct.” X-Citement Video, 513 U. S., at 72. In the context of Section 875(c), that requires proof that a communication was transmitted and that it contained a threat. And because “the crucial element separating legal innocence from wrongful conduct,” id., at 73, is the threatening nature of the communication, the mental state requirement must apply to the fact that the communication contains a threat. Elonis’s conviction was premised solely on how his posts would be viewed by a reasonable person, a standard feature of civil liability in tort law inconsistent with the conventional criminal conduct requirement of “awareness of some wrongdoing,” Staples, 511 U. S., at 606–607. This Court “ha[s] long been reluctant to infer that a negligence standard was intended in criminal statutes.” Rogers v. United States, 422 U. S. 35 (Marshall, J., concurring). And the Government fails to show that the instructions in this case required more than a mental state of negligence. Hamling v. United States, 418 U. S. 87 , distinguished. Section 875(c)’s mental state requirement is satisfied if the defendant transmits a communication for the purpose of issuing a threat or with knowledge that the communication will be viewed as a threat. The Court declines to address whether a mental state of recklessness would also suffice. Given the disposition here, it is unnecessary to consider any First Amendment issues. Pp. 13–17.

730 F. 3d. 321, reversed and remanded.

Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

Author of this blog, Dedicated to the Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America, and our Children Who Want to Come Home, and Especially to My Little Julian, is not a lawyer, attorney, or legal practitioner, therefore, no information contained herein this post and/or blog could be (mis)construed as “legal advice.”  Anyone who exercises he/r rights, and private property sometimes called “child” for deceptive, possibly malicious or retaliatory, and profiteering/privateering and in the “best interests” . . . of the “state” Texas General and other Funds at one’s own peril, risk, and/ or self-fulfillment.  The choice is yours.”

  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the uS Constitution and  Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, uS Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement/demand, then contact Author of this blog immediately as fair notice and due diligence requires so that Author shall act lawfully and reasonably with expedience pursuant to any supplemental knowledge.

Robin’s Story, and also for Matthew, Laura, and Christopher|Rockwall/Dallas, Texas


Sixteen Years Without Children and Life to Go

Robin Karr’s Story, and also for Laura, Matthew, and brother, Christopher Karr, who will not be silenced, that you shall come home to your Real Mommy who Refuses and Refused Offer of Silence–No Con tract, Judges!

Robin Karr.Rockwall.TX.Judge Cynthia Kent.any relation to federal impeached judge Samuel Kent who my sons paternal aunt was law clerk for.Supervised_Visit_Police_Station.242215910_std

Robin Karr with Baby Laura and Matthew Duckworth near Rockwall, Texas (near Fort Worth/Dallas, Texas)

Robin Carr.Rockwall.Tx.family court fraud and abuse.me-matthew-and-laura-2004-150x150

JUSTICE.WALL OF SHAME.NJCOURTCORRUPTION.DEREK SYPHRETT

 

JUDGE CYNTHIA KENT.SMITH COUNTY TX.TYLER.KIDNAPPER OF ROBIN KARR'S CHILDREN NEAR ROCKWALL TX SIXTEEN YEARS NO CONTACT

 Judge Cynthia (Stevens) Kent, ret., 114th court

Tyler, Texas

(SMITH COUNTY)

 Judge Sue Pirtle,

 NOT PICTURED FOR FEAR OR COWARDICE LEST S/HE, TOO, SHALL BE JUDGED BY GOD ALMIGHTY

Former Judge Sitting by Assignment (Visiting Judge)

State of Texas

January 2000 – Present (15 years 4 months)State of Texas (Region I)

Family, Civil, Criminal

DID WE HAVE THE SAME JUDGE, OR

JUST THE SAME FRAUDULENT FAMILY COURT R.I.C.O.

COURT CON?

 

The haunting melody of the nostalgic voice of the untimely, tragically gone, but not forgotten songstress, Karen Carpenter’s recording of “Yesterday Once More” is the soundtrack for the paralyzing feeling that what all of us mommies  who are still  reading  so strongly knew we were surely “imagining,” but could not be, the rote rehearsal style routine practice and patterned protocol and procedure suborned and commissions pre-packaged, pre-priced, pre-screened, pre-determined outcomes, the levels funding based kidnappings of our sweet little healthy, happy, adoptable children by the family courts in Texas, below:

Judge Cynthia Kent Grants Custody to an Abuser

 

January 5, 2000
Judge Cynthia Kent
c/o Elaine Holmes

RE: Cause No. 1-98-435 (382nd District Court, Rockwall County, Texas)
IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF EDWARD NEIL DUCKWORTH AND
ROBIN LEE DUCKWORTH AND THE INTEREST OF MATTHEW NAKAI
DUCKWORTH AND LAURA DANIELLE DUCKWORTH MINOR CHILDREN

Dear Judge Kent,

I am the co-founder of Children And Loving Parents (CALP)-a chartered non-profit organization located near Rockwall Texas. I am writing in an effort, to appeal to your knowledge, your wisdom, your faith, and your conscious. I am writing on behalf of Robin Duckworth, however, I am not writing at her request. This letter serves two purposes:

1) To serve as evidence in the Duckworth file that CALP is very concerned about the integrity of both the judicial system’s actions and the actions of CASA and CPS in Robin’s case, and;

2) to bring to surface a few facts that you may have never known at the time you rendered your verdict.

We believe that the Duckworth case has been filled with trickery, deceit, mockery, and cruelty -none of which are desirable attributes for our legal and judicial systems.

I am sure that you agree. Unfortunately, the one’s who have suffered are the innocent children and their grieving mother.

We attended many of the hearings regarding this case, including the last part of the final hearing that you presided over. I couldn’t help but notice your references to family and the importance of parents in the lives of their children.

Without a doubt, CALP agrees with you- if the parent is a safe and good influence upon the children. Yet, we are perplexed and saddened at the many successful attempts to thwart Robin Duckworth’s good intentions.

Even worse, we are upset that he court system has not recognized these ‘tricks’ used by Ed Duckworth and his attorney to intentionally make Robin’s life miserable.

My question is this. What would you do as a mother to protect your children if you thought they were living in an unstable and unsafe environment?

Even a stubborn, proud, ‘never ask for help’ man would humble himself to ask every available person for help – again and again. You and I probably wouldn’t do this for ourselves, but we would for our children. Isn’t this exactly what Robin has done? Is this so wrong?

At what point did Robin act so inappropriate that she deserved to have her children kept from her. Did she break the law? No. (She was put in jail for crying and not leaving the courtroom when Judge Pirtle and Trish Verde refused to advise her as to when she could have her next visitation. Is this really ‘irrational’ when a mother hasn’t seen or held her children in a very long time?

By the way, why was she arrested for criminal trespass when there were still many other people in the courthouse? Why weren’t the other people that were present arrested for trespassing?)

Does Robin have a history of running away with the children? No. Does she have a history of hurting the children? No. Does she have a history of disobeying the courts? No. (Ed’s attorney stated that Robin had told the Kentucky court that she would not abide by the visitation decree from her first marriage. She may or may not have said that .. but, what did she do? She abided by the visitation decree very well. She even notified, in writing, the Kentucky court within 2 weeks of when she moved to Houston. We are in possession of that letter. Unbelievably, Judge Pirtle did not allow that letter to be submitted into evidence.)

Now let’s compare the history of Ed and Robin. Robin graduated high school and college with honors. Ed barely passed high school. After almost 6 years in college he dropped out with a GP A below 2.0. Who held a job and supported the family?

Robin did. She worked at Dillard’s and excelled as a departmental manager. Ed failed to hold a job, including one stint as a car salesman. When they moved to Kentucky, Robin continued working at another clothing store. Ed attempted a gig as a local police officer, however he quit when faced with being tired for shooting and killing a chained dog.

While living in Kentucky Ed filed for divorce. In his affidavit to the court Ed stated Robin should be named the fit and proper caretaker of the children! He never alleged Robin of being unfit in any way as a mother.

However, wanting to salvage their marriage, Robin replied to the court that she did not believe their marriage to be beyond repair. (Wouldn’t anyone that takes their vows before God in a serious manner do all they could to save the marriage? Robin did – Ed didn’t.) Just think if Robin had given up as easily as Ed had, she would be the managing conservator of Matthew and Laura at this time.

Instead, Ed, his attorney, and the Texas judicial system have raked Robin over the coals and treated her like a criminally insane parent. Robin has always been the reliable provider for the children, yet she has been punished and ridiculed for her faith.

The reason: Supposedly she said something to Ed on a tape that was later played to Melody East, an unlicensed social worker with CASA. Melody East then recommended to Judge Pirtle that Robin have only supervised visitation because she expressed ‘alarming’ religious beliefs and had made ‘alarming’ remarks.

One such remark was, “I hope God takes your lives if you continue to harm the children.” How did this statement start ridiculous allegations that Robin might harm her children?

Personally, I also wish that God would remove all child abusers from the earth. Does this make me a danger to children? No. It doesn’t make Robin a danger to her children either.

Also, Melody East never completed the social study. She never interviewed Robin’s mother or Robin’s other references. Incredulously Melody never spoke to the number one witness Christopher Karr. Christopher is Robin’s son from her first marriage.

Christopher witnessed Earnest Duckworth’s (Ed’s father) verbal, mental and physical abuse first hand. In fact, Christopher had written several letters to friends about the abuse well before Robin moved out of the Duckworth house.

Wouldn’t these letters be undeniable evidence that abuse was taking place? Wouldn’t Christopher’s testimony have been the most important evidence in this case?

Yet, Melody East never spoke to Christopher or Robin’s other witnesses. In addition, Judge Pirtle would not allow Christopher’s letters into evidence.

Even mare appalling- Robin’s witnesses were never allowed to testify. All of her witnesses came to trial on Feb. 26, 1999. Robin had at least 4 witnesses including her mother, one cousin, Christopher, and a close friend from Houston who had known Robin and Ed when they lived there. Robin’s witnesses traveled a combined distance of almost 3000 miles.

Unbelievably, Judge Pirtle made no offer to let Robin’s witnesses testify since they had come such a great distance. Instead, Judge Pirtle allowed Ed’s attorney, Charles Schuerenburg, to ask questions (stall for time) to Melody East, Tish Verde, and others. Judge Pirtle knew that Robin could not afford to fly her witnesses down a second time.

We believe that Judge Pirtle knowingly and purposefully hindered Robin’s right to a fair trial by not giving her witnesses the opportunity to testify. Judge Pirtle even scheduled the second half of the trial nearly two weeks away, instead of the following Monday, insuring that Robin’s witnesses would not testify.

In addition, sanctions were imposed against Robin and her attorney for filing a supposedly ‘frivolous’ report to CPS and requesting a Protective Order concerning abuse that Robin felt had occurred at the hands of Ed’s father. (Perhaps, Judge Kent, you were not knowledgeable of all the facts when you sanctioned Robin. That is what we hope.)

Doesn’t state law require that a person must report confirmed or suspected abuse to a child?

Mr. Duckworth’s attorney tried to make Robin look like a liar, because she didn’t report the abuse at the time it happened. Instead, he stated that she was now conveniently making it up since there was a battle for the children. How absurd!

The facts show that Robin and Ed were living in the home of Mr. Duckworth at that believe they can protect their children until they can develop an escape plan away from the abuse. Once again, the facts show that Robin moved back to Kentucky shortly after the abuse.

Doesn’t the fact that every time Robin saw her children with substantial bruises (I have pictures.) and reoccurring sickness during each visitation also give cause for concern, suspicion and reporting?

Doesn’t the fact that the two children have been to the doctor and/or hospital 31 times in 10 months give rise to concern and suspicion? Doesn’t the fact that she witnessed abuse while living with Ed’s parents cause concern?

Doesn’t the fact that Christopher, Robin’s oldest son, wrote letters concerning the abuse to friends before the court case started (I have copies) give cause for concern and suspicion?

Doesn’t the fact that Christopher also signed an affidavit confirming the abuse give cause for concern and suspicion?

Betty Hable, director of the Ombudsman’s office, has even confirmed that CPS has concerns that the paternal grandfather was physically abusive toward Matthew.

We are very troubled that you fined and penalized Robin for reporting suspected abuse when she was faced with disobeying the law if she didn’t report her suspicions! We are even more upset with the fact that Robin is reprimanded from making any other allegations of suspected or confirmed abuse. I ask, is this justice?

How could this happen? How did Robin get fined for doing what is right? I know we all make mistakes. I’m willing to admit that I do. I hope that you too are willing to admit that you made a mistake in your judgements against Robin. I hope even more that you will do all you can in your judicial authority to correct this wrong and make it right. Robin is not an insane mother making improper allegations. She is a protective, caring, loving mother that wants to see her children in a safe, nurturing environment. Once again I ask. what would you do .. not as a judge – but as a Christian and a mother?

Now Robin faces yet another obstacle – meeting the demands of a visitation decree that is both confusing and extremely burdensome. In your judgement you stated that you believed Robin had a medical problem that required medication. Then, being sure of your evaluation, you based the decree upon Robin seeing a psychiatrist and taking the medicine that they would prescribe her. But what was to happen when Robin’s nationally acclaimed psychiatrist did not find Robin to be in need of medication- but only finds her to be severely depressed due to missing her children (a natural response for a concerned, loving mother)?

In addition, you required Robin to line up a psychiatrist within a month. Finding a psychologist is relatively easy but a psychiatrist can take months! (My wife and I have been searching for a psychiatrist to evaluate our daughter’s ADHD. The shortest waiting list we found was 5 months!)

It took Robin a month to line up her psychiatrist. ‘This automatically made her miss the first date (July 1) you had based her visitation rights upon.

However, since acquiring a psychiatrist she has tried to do everything stated concerning her psychiatric evaluations.

However, Ed’s attorney has written a letter stating that they will seek to have her thrown in jail for not following the order. In addition. Robin has not been able to afford trips to Texas to see her children.

She has another son that she must take care of. His father has not been paying child support, which makes things even more difficult for Robin. With the psychiatrist and expenses she has been forced to rely only upon phone calls to stay in her children’s lives.

But this has been made even more difficult due to the fact that Ed will not answer the phone and has turned off his answering machine – all in an effort to distance Robin’s children from her.

However, through all of this, Robin saved enough money to buy birthday and Christmas gifts and a plane ticket to Dallas during November. Once again, Robin did everything she thought she was supposed to do according to the visitation decree.

She sent letters to Ed and the District Clerk. by Nov. 1, 1999, concerning her psychiatric evaluation(s) so that she could see her children on Nov. 13·14.

She sent all letters certified mail. She took 4 days off work to come to Rockwall to see her children, even though Ed’s attorney, Charles Schuerenberg, threatened to get a bench warrant for her arrest if she came to Rockwall.

Despite all this, she still came to see her babies. If that’s not true love I don’t know what is. Upon arriving in Rockwall, Robin gave my wife and I a notarized statement to act as the competent adults to pick up the children -just as stated in the decree. We felt this would
definitely be better for the children since it would avoid any possible conflicts between Ed and Robin. Upon arriving at Ed’s house, Ed absolutely refused to hand over the children.

Ed then ran back into his house and called the police. When the police arrived Ed fabricated a lie and told the officers that he had spoken to Robin’s psychiatrist the day before and that her psychiatrist was sending a second letter forbidding Robin to see the children! We then asked the officers to ask Ed if he would allow Robin to see the children for a supervised visitation the next day.

The officers told my wife and I that Ed made it clear to them that he would never let Robin see the children again no matter what! The officers then advised us that we needed to keep a good paper trail of what had occurred. We were then told that Robin needed to go to the police station and file “Interference with Child Custody”, which is what she did.

Robin was never allowed to see her babies. Can you believe she has never been allowed to celebrate either of Laura’s birthdays? She has never celebrated Christmas with her either.

How discouraged would this make you feel as a mother? Yet, Robin somehow finds the courage and desire to hang in there. Robin loves and misses her children deeply.
Now Robin’s good intentions are once again being turned against her. Charles Schuerenberg has written Robin to threaten her again. He is using the visitation decree that he wrote, against her.

He stated that he intends to have her thrown in jail. I believe this is revenge for Robin filing “Interference with Child Custody” against Ed. What Ed did was wrong and downright mean!

Robin came 1200 miles to see her children, hold them, love them, and give them gifts.
Your honor, please listen to your heart on this matter. Robin is really doing her best. If shemoves here from Kentucky, her older son can’t see his dad. Either way, she gets slammed.

So she does her best. You even stated in your final words of the hearing that the order periods of possession would “be subject to very definitely financial ability.”

This tells me that you were trying to recognize Robin’s peril in paying for psychiatric sessions, making expensive trips to Texas, taking off from work, and juggling all the issues.

We are asking that you reconsider your order. We don’t believe that you ever meant to say Robin could not see her children in November if she didn’t get every psychiatric report completed in July.

It seems to us that you were saying Robin’s visitations were to be based upon her complying with her psychiatrist’s orders then submitting that compliancy letter from the psychiatrist before she attempted visitation.

If your order were interpreted in any other way then Robin’s inability to see a psychiatrist by July 1, 1999 would prohibit her from ever seeing her children again.

I do not believe that you is what you intended. However, Ed’s attorney is trying to have Robin thrown in jail based upon his manipulation of the visitation decree.

Robin had no choice but to file “Interference with Child Custody” against Ed. His actions as dictated by Texas state law are a criminal act, not a civil act.

Therefore, Robin had aresponsibility to file a report even though she did not obtain leave of court to do so. Robin’s report to the Rockwall police was not merely a ‘complaint’ but was a witness’ statement to a felony crime. The police made the choice to ask the D.A. ‘s office to bring charges against Ed.

We hope and pray that you will see things the same and not allow your instinct as a mother, a Christian, and a parent, to be clouded by your judicial experience in today’s corrupt society.

Sincerely,
Derek S.
Co-Founder and V.P.

Read also, http://janiemcqueen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Judgee-Pirtle-Wanted-for-Kidnapping.pdf

1.     Click on the link below to read mother and author, Robin Karr’s provocative case supported by strong evidence against, generally, but not limited to, “‘state’ of Texas,” and also on behalf of all maternally deprived mothers and children, being natural (wo)man and individuals,

http://www.motherswithoutcustodyworld.com

2.     Click on the link below to read Kentucky Senator Virgil Moore’s scathing letter against and addressed to, among other public officials, “state” and local Texas and social services and county officials on behalf of parents Doug and Kathie Harliss and their “business or commercial assets,”

http://www.motherswithoutcustodyworld.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/Kentuky_State_Senator_Letter_about_Texas_Taking_Children.250130237.pdf\

Mothers Without Custody World

Laura Turns Sweet 16

 

 

Robin Karr.precious Laura found.on facebook

Robin Karr’s Baby Laura, Sixteen Years Later, Found Picture on Facebook.com

Dear Laura, will you ever know how much your real Mommy, Robin Karr, loved, adored, and missed you every second of every minute of every day and painful, agonizing, most likely sleepless nights?  How could you?

Dear Robin, will you ever know what your little girl felt or the pain she felt without you?

How could she?

I I pray and hope with all ;my heart and real mommy of little Julian’s soul that you, Laura have come home to Mommy, whatever age.

From one to another mother whose child bought and sold  just shall surely find them out.

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

Author of this blog, Dedicated to the Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America, and our Children Who Want to Come Home, and Especially to My Little Julian, is not a lawyer, attorney, or legal practitioner, therefore, no information contained herein this post and/or blog could be (mis)construed as “legal advice.”  Anyone who exercises he/r rights, and private property sometimes called “child” for deceptive, possibly malicious or retaliatory, and profiteering/privateering and in the “best interests” . . . of the “state” Texas General and other Funds at one’s own peril, risk, and/ or self-fulfillment.  The choice is yours.

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN THE THIS REPUBLIC USA, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the uS Constitution and  Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, uS Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement/demand, then contact Author of this blog immediately as fair notice and due diligence requires so that Author shall act lawfully and reasonably with expedience pursuant to any supplemental knowledge.

Rare Victory – Protective Mom Finally Wins Protection for Daughter!| Nelly and Noulenns’ Story


Real Mommy Nelly with daughter, Nouenn

 

 

Rare Victory – Protective Mom Finally Wins

Protection for Daughter!


8 Years and A Quarter Million Dollars Later – Nelly Gets Sole Custody

  HOPE FOR PROTECTIVE MOTHERS


On November 26th 2014, after 8 years of struggle both in the US and in France, the Quimper Family Court Judge gave me custody of my daughter, Noluenn, in France. Her father will be allowed to meet her 2 hours every two weeks in a supervised setting in Quimper, but right now, his visitations are suspended.”


Protective Mom, Nelly

Nelly and Noluenn’s story fits the Pattern of most Court Licensed Abuse cases: Child discloses sexual abuse; evidence disregarded; biased judge finds mom to be alienating; judge grants father full custody.

But Nelly fled the U.S. to France after which the biased and corrupt CLA Judge issued an arrest warrant.

Fortunately this story has a happy ending.

Congratulations to Nelly and Noluenn who are both safe in France!

Nelly, Never Without her Daughter

To read the English version, click on the first link below, or otherwise cut-and-paste into your browser or enter manually.

http://mothersoflostchildren.org/2014/11/after-american-court-fails-mother-france-provides-justice/

En Francaise,
http://www.letelegramme.fr/bretagne/enfance-nelly-jamais-sans-sa-fille-27-05-2014-10184147.php

See also, case of actress Kelly Rutherford’s case in which children have been taken to France by wealthy father, a case recently taken on by lawyer Wendy Murphy:

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/gossip-girl-kelly-rutherford-takes-deported-kids-battle/story?id=24960793

Image result for kelly Rutherford caseImage result for kelly Rutherford caseImage result for kelly Rutherford case

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

Author of this blog, Dedicated to the Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America, and our Children Who Want to Come Home, and Especially to My Little Julian, is not a lawyer, attorney, or legal practitioner, therefore, no information contained herein this post and/or blog could be (mis)construed as “legal advice.”  Anyone who exercises he/r rights, and private property sometimes called “child” for deceptive, possibly malicious or retaliatory, and profiteering/privateering and in the “best interests” . . . of the “state” Texas General and other Funds at one’s own peril, risk, and/ or self-fulfillment.  The choice is yours.

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN THE THIS REPUBLIC USA, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the uS Constitution and  Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, uS Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement/demand, then contact Author of this blog immediately as fair notice and due diligence requires so that Author shall act lawfully and reasonably with expedience pursuant to any supplemental knowledge.

THE NEW ALANNA KRAUSE CASE| Nuszen, Gabrielle, v. Nuszen, Jack, et al. in the US Southern District of Texas, Houston Division


UPDATE: HANNAH NUSZEN(“H.N.,”)  

Transported to Solacium

New Haven Residential Treatment Center in

Utah . . .

to be Silenced, at Best

  1. Christina Wanies-Guirgis
    Texas Bar No. 24084772
    9555 W. Sam Houston Pkwy S., Suite 130
    Houston, Texas 77099
    Tel: (832) 582-8331
    Fax: (832) 379-7490
    Christinaw@waniesguirgispllc.com

       Thomas M. Burton via pro hac vice
        Utah Bar No. 00518
       California Bar No. 035856
       P.O. Box 1619
       Salt Lake City, Utah 84110
       Tel: (801) 918-1656
       Thomasburtonlaw@aol.com

     ATTORNEYS FOR GABRIELLE NUSZEN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
IN AND FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
______________________________________________________________

GABRIELLE NUSZEN, an individual and Guardian ad Litem for her minor sisters,

H.N., K.N., D.N. and Z.N., Minors,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

JACK NUSZEN; SHANNON ORAND NUSZEN; KAREN GOLLAHER; JAY BEVAN; GUARDIANS OF HOPE, a Texas Corporation; NORMA WILLCOCKSON; DOE DEFENDANTS I through X, inclusive; and DOE DEFENDANTS XI through XX, inclusive.

Defendants.

Case No. _________________________

COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY,

FALSE IMPRISONMENT;

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS;

NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS;

INVASION OF PRIVACY;

NEGLIGENCE; BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY;

STRICT LIABILITY OF CARRIER;

CHILD ABUSE;

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF;

HABEAS CORPUS

JURY DEMANDED

     COME NOW, the Plaintiffs, GABRIELLE NUSZEN individually and as Guardian ad Litem for her minor sisters, H.N., K.N., D.N. and Z.N.

NATURE OF THE CASE

     This is a case brought by all five daughters of Defendant, JACK NUSZEN (hereinafter “JACK”), their physically and emotionally abusive biological father, seeking protection from him notwithstanding physical custody that Harris County has negligently bestowed upon him in defiance of medical reports of serious and repetitive physical and emotional abuse that he has visited upon them. JACK has been able to buy immunity from prosecution for child abuse in the family courts of Harris County, and has defied a Harris County custody order with impunity. Harris County agencies charged with protecting the Plaintiffs from JACK suffer from extreme laxity of duty and neglect of care, forcing the Plaintiffs to resort to this Court to protect their freedom and their constitutional rights.

PARTIES

1.      Plaintiff, GABRIELLE NUSZEN, (hereinafter “Gabrielle”), is a citizen of the State of [CONFIDENTIAL].
2.      Plaintiff H.N. has been held captive against her will and without her consent at several Utah licensed residential treatment centers — Aspen Assessment Center in Syracuse, Utah and New Haven Academy in Saratoga Springs, Utah for over a year, and has thus been forced to become a citizen of Utah.
3.      Plaintiffs, K.N., D.N. and Z.N., are minor citizens of the State of Texas, who have endured years of physical and emotional abuse at the hands of the Defendants, particularly JACK and SHANNON (referenced to below).
4.      Defendant, JACK NUSZEN, is the biological father of Gabrielle Nuszen and her minor sisters, H.N, K.N., D.N., and Z.N., and is a citizen of Texas.
5.      Defendant, SHANNON ORAND NUSZEN, is the wife of JACK and step-mother of Gabrielle and her minor sisters, H.N, K.N., D.N., and Z.N., and is a citizen of Texas.
6.         Defendant, KAREN GOLLAHER, is a psychologist appointed by the Harris County District Court and has failed and refused to protect any and all of the Plaintiffs.
7.       Defendant, JAY BEVAN, is a therapist appointed by Harris County and has failed and refused to protect any and all of the Plaintiffs.
8.        Defendant, GUARDIANS OF HOPE, is a Texas corporation that is an escort service that JACK paid to       take H.N. from her school and transport her across State lines from Texas to Utah to leave her stranded against   her will and without her consent.
9.       Defendant, NORMA WILLCOCKSON, is a Texas resident who owns and operates Guardians of Hope.
10.     Doe Defendants I through X are citizens of the State of Texas and employees of Harris County, Texas or   affiliated with it who, at all times material, were acting within the course and scope of their employment, or   authorization, as agents for the other named Defendants.
11.      Doe Defendants XI through XX were government agencies having regulatory powers and responsibilities   over the safety of the Plaintiffs, and the employees of said agencies, who at all times material were acting either within the course and scope of their employment and authorization, or else as individuals, but in either case as agents for the other named Defendants.

JURISDICTION

12.      Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to: (a) 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), (b), and (c); and (d) .  The    amount in controversy exceeds the sum of Seventy Five Thousand Dollars.

VENUE

13.      Venue is appropriate in this Court pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a), (b) and (c).

FACTS

14.      After Miriam Nuszen divorced JACK he thereafter manipulated Harris County into giving him primary custody of all five of his daughters.
15.      In that position JACK promoted, by a frequent and consistent pattern of false representations and suppressions of fact, that Miriam was afflicted with several levels of mental and emotional illness that adversely affected each and all of the Plaintiff children. He many times reported her and the children to The Department of Child and Family Services as part of a strategy to have them removed from their home with her, and to be placed with him for eventual shipment out of state in further retribution for the divorce.
16.      JACK established a pattern and practice of telling Harris County psychologists, counselors, judges, attorneys, police officers, and any and all other officials having anything to do with child care that Miriam was an inept and incompetent mother psychologically unfit to raise his daughters.

          Contrary to fact, Miriam is a brilliant health care industry employee whom each and all of the daughters      dearly love and wish to be with.
17.      Miriam filed a police report, on or about two years ago, alleging that JACK threatened to kill her and their children. However, the Court refused to listen to such evidence and testimony, and failed to take such a report into consideration in rendering the custody order. In fact, JACK has sexually and physically abused Miriam during the course of their marriage, as well as abuse the children on repeated occasions.
18.      JACK, however, is a sociopathic liar and abuser of his children. For this reason, he hired Defendant NORMA WILLCOCKSON, and her escort service to remove H.N. without warning and against her will and consent from her Texas high school where she was a very excellent student of sound character.
19.      JACK sent H.N. to Island View Academy in Syracuse, Utah.

See Exhibit A:

     Humana Provider Demographic Report Rendering Provider Name with Address. Island View’s philosophy is to deprive its participants of all contact with the outside world, to treat them with rudeness and hostility, and to punish them for disobedience by deprivation and physical abuse. Island View has been and continues to be the subject of much litigation and controversy over its mistreatment of the captive children under its supervision and control.

     The tuition costs are enormous for a program run by amateurs who have no concept of proper health care administration or behavior. It has received much notoriety and adverse comment on survivor sites for its maltreatment of adolescents kept captive in its care.
20.      The state of Utah licenses such places as “residential treatment centers,” but there is no transparency, no accountability and minimal regulation, mostly by low level social workers aided by minimum wage enforcers of mindless rules measured by forced behavior of mostly truants thrown together without discrimination about who needs what treatment and why.
21.      There was never any screening or adjudication that H.N. needed any type of behavior modification. H.N. was taken without warning and has been forced to survive at Island View Academy. It is now upon new information and belief that H.N. has been moved to New Haven Academy without anyone accounting for her welfare or condition, either physical or mental.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION: PERSONAL INJURY

22.       Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the foregoing paragraphs as if stated in full.
23.       JACK, as father and custodian of H.N., had a duty to protect her, care for her, and keep her safe. JACK, however, breached his duty:
     a.      By failing to notify H.N. that he was going to send her out of state to Utah to be confined for the indefinite future at Island View Academy.
     b.      By failing to obtain H.N.’s informed consent to be confined at Island View Academy.
     c.      By failing to inform himself that Island View Academy was not a school, but a rigorous and punitive behavior modification technique reformatory, to which H.N. was not accustomed, and by failing to have determined by an independent physician or psychologist that there was any legitimate need to send H.N. to Island View in Utah for such harsh treatment that typically in adolescents causes post-traumatic stress disorder.
   d.      By failing to understand that H.N. would be put in the company of many young women who were truant, addicted to drugs, promiscuous, convicted of criminal behavior, and that they were at Island View not for recreation, education, or counseling, but for severe behavior modification.
     e.      By failing to consider whether H.N’s association with such individuals needing severe obedience training, often by rough handling and rude treatment, and that she would be there as well as the others under the overall assumption that everyone enrolled was truant, defiant, drug addicted, and sexually active, would be an appropriate placement for H.N. who was none of the above, but who would be likely contaminated by those who were.
     f.      By making a placement that would deprive, for an indefinite period, H.N. of any association and communication with her mother and sisters whom she dearly loves.
     g.      By instructing Island View Academy to prohibit H.N’s mother from having any contact with H.N., and not informing H.N. that she had not been abandoned by her mother and sisters, and that their not contacting her was due to their father’s prohibition carried out by the academies.
     h.      By keeping H.N. separate from her sisters with whom she has had no contact whatsoever for over a year.
24.      Miriam Blank, H.N.’s mother, along with her sisters, had a close, warm and loving relationship with H.N. As a proximate result of the described separation, JACK deliberately damaged and harmed H.N., her sisters and their mother.
25.      JACK’s conduct was malicious, wanton and in reckless disregard of H.N.’s health, safety and welfare, by reason of which she and her sisters are entitled to recover punitive damages.
26.      Plaintiffs pray that this Court order JACK to release H.N. from Island View Academy or New Haven Academy or wherever else he is hiding her, and return her to her sister and Guardian ad Litem, Gabrielle, in [CONFIDENTIAL].

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION: FALSE IMPRISONMENT

27.      Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the foregoing paragraphs as if stated in full.
28.      H.N. learned upon arrival at Island View Academy that its operation was designed to imprison her against her will and without her consent, and that she had no recourse by communicating with her mother to free her from the benighted treatment to which she was hopelessly subject. She sought to leave the program, but Island View restrained her from any contact with the outside world, and refused her request to return to her mother.
29.      JACK’s confinement of H.N. at Island View in Utah wrongfully violated the Texas custody order that governed his care and keeping of H.N. He knew that his daughter, H.N., was of an age where she had federal and state constitutional rights to due process and a liberty interest not to be unlawfully confined by any parent, with or without custody, in a punitive, isolated, foreign venue with no recourse or contact with family members or legal assistance to gain release. JACK also knew full well that Island View, in keeping H.N. captive and isolated, would cause H.N. to suffer severe emotional distress due to the punitive treatment she would receive and the absence from her mother and the Plaintiffs that she would suffer.
30.      JACK’s conduct was malicious, wanton and in reckless disregard of H.N.’s health, safety and welfare, by reason of which she is entitled to recover punitive damages against him.
31.      Plaintiffs pray for judgment as hereafter stated.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION: INTENTIONAL INFLICTION
OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

32.      Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the foregoing paragraphs as if stated in full.
33.      JACK’s sordid history of physically hurting H.N. and locking her away from family, friends, teachers, coaches, and home without warning, and in a brusque, public, humiliating manner, as if she were a person severely mentally ill or highly truant, caused her grievous mental and emotional distress.
34.      JACK’s conduct was outrageous, malicious, wanton and in reckless disregard of H.N.’s health, safety and welfare, by reason of which she is entitled to recover punitive damages.
35.      Plaintiffs pray for judgment as hereafter stated.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION: NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

36.      Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the foregoing paragraphs as if stated in full.
37.      JACK had a duty to safeguard H.N. from demented hazing, denigration, isolation, confinement, and deprivation at his sole pleasure, and also not to inflict emotional distress on her sisters by depriving each and all of them from having contact with H.N. and she with them.
38.      JACK violated his duty to H.N. and her sisters by keeping them not only apart, but also in secret silence from each other, and their mother.
39.      JACK’s conduct was in reckless disregard of H.N.’s and her sisters’ health, safety and welfare, by reason of which Plaintiffs are entitled to recover punitive damages.
40.      Plaintiffs pray for judgment as hereafter stated.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION: INVASION OF PRIVACY

41.      Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the foregoing paragraphs as if stated in full.
42.      By having H.N. suddenly taken in broad daylight from her high school and in front of her peers by an escort service, and put in a Utah punitive behavior modification program totally isolated and silenced from all contact with family and friends, JACK cast H.N. in a false light as having done something so horribly wrong so that she was not fit to be trusted in normal society, including her own family.

43.      JACK’s conduct has caused Plaintiffs great mental and emotional distress.
44.      JACK’s conduct was malicious, wanton and in reckless disregard of H.N. and her sisters’ health, safety                 and welfare, by reason of which the Plaintiffs are entitled to recover punitive damages.
45.      Plaintiffs pray for judgment as hereafter stated.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION: NEGLIGENCE

46.        Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the foregoing paragraphs as if stated in full.

47.       JACK had a father’s duty to treat her with dignity, respect, and tenderness. He, however, negligently conceived, supervised, maintained and controlled H.N.’s negligent imprisonment at Island View Academy and New Haven Academy in the particulars set out above.

48.      JACK’s conduct proximately caused personal injury and emotional distress to H.N. for all of 2014, and there is every indication, unless this Court intervenes, that he will continue to keep her away from the Plaintiffs and her mother until her majority two years hence.

49.       JACK’s conduct is in reckless disregard of H.N.’s health, safety and welfare, by reason of which Plaintiffs are entitled to recover punitive damages.

50.      Plaintiffs pray for judgment as hereafter stated.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION: BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY

51.      Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the foregoing paragraphs as if stated in full.
52.      By enrolling H.N. at Island View Academy and New Haven Academy in Utah, JACK cavalierly transferred his fiduciary duty as custodian of H.N. to surrogate strangers of no known merit in a foreign state who would, in turn, take H.N. into an unknown isolated, inhospitable and unforgiving area in a captive situation. JACK signed a power of attorney, giving custody of H.N. to Aspen and New Haven, which is evidenced in the contract between JACK and the residential treatment centers.
53.      Island View and New Haven breached their transferred fiduciary duties as surrogates to act in H.N.’s best interest, which proximately caused H.N. to sustain great pain, suffering, bodily injury and feelings of abandonment, and the Plaintiffs to suffer grievous mental and emotional distress over the needless suffering and isolation of their sister.
54.      The conduct of JACK in abandoning his duties under Title 5, Section 151.001(a)(2) and (3) of the Texas Family Code in favor of unknown Utah surrogates of no merit and dubious reputation was malicious, wanton and in reckless disregard of his fiduciary duty to care for H.N.’s health, safety and welfare, by reason of which Plaintiffs are entitled to recover both general and punitive damages against JACK, their father, for splitting them up and sending H.N. away, never to be seen or heard from again, a likely destiny for the remaining younger sisters unless this Court intervenes to prevent such a prospect.
55. Plaintiffs pray for judgment as hereafter stated.

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION: STRICT LIABILITY OF CARRIER

56. Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the foregoing paragraphs as if stated in full.
57.      JACK, in hiring NORMA WILLCOCKSON, to transport H.N. from Houston, Texas into Syracuse, Utah had a duty to use utmost care and diligence for H.N’s safe carriage, and was under the obligations to provide everything necessary for that purpose and to exercise to that end a reasonable degree of skill.
58.      For the reasons above stated, NORMA WILLCOCKSON failed to use utmost care
and diligence for the safe carriage of H.N., but followed JACK’s instructions to take H.N., whose mother also had custody, from her to an undisclosed location, and to take her suddenly without warning, and against her will and without her consent, knowing full well that such transport had to do with minors who have constitutional rights not to be kidnapped by one parent from another, both of whom have custodial rights and duties to be with their children, and they with them.
59.      NORMA WILLCOCKSON does this transporting of young people across state lines as a lucrative business without checking to see whether or not the transportation is regulated by interstate compact, and knows that her cargo is going to be confined in lock-down captivity without due process or any way to escape.
60.      The conduct of NORMA WILLCOCKSON was in reckless disregard of H.N.’s, health, safety and welfare, by reason of which both H.N. and her sisters are entitled to recover punitive damages.
61.      Plaintiffs pray for judgment as hereafter stated.

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION: CHILD ABUSE

62.      Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the foregoing paragraphs as if stated in full.
63.      JACK, while having the care, custody and control of H.N., isolated her from her mother in an unfamiliar area of the Utah desert at Island View and New Haven academies, and did so in order to:
a.      Subject H.N. to conditions and circumstances likely to produce great bodily and emotional harm;
b.      Cause her to suffer, and negligently allowed to be inflicted upon her unjustifiable physical pain and mental suffering;
c.      Cause or permit her to be injured; and
d.      Cause or permit her to be placed in such a situation that her health would be endangered.
64.      Before H.N. was sent to Utah, JACK physically abused both H.N., Gabrielle, and all of her sisters as their individual affidavits will show. Gabrielle has endured abuse from her father; as noted in a physician’s statement regarding Gabrielle’s injury in 2010, “dad hit…in face…abrasion to inside of bottom lip.[Gabrielle] has bruise to lower back and 2 fingerprint marks to L. [left] side of neck. [Gabrielle] states dad held her under water…”

See Exhibit B: Physician’s Statement Regarding Injury to Gabrielle Nuszen;

see also Exhibit C: Gabrielle Nuszen’s Affidavit, dated September 29, 2013; also see Exhibit D: Physician’s Statement Regarding Injury to Kayla Nuszen.
65.      JACK’s cruel and reckless conduct toward these choice young girls is inexcusable and warrants this Court’s removal of JACK’s custody of and contact with his children hereinafter and forever.
66.      This Court has a duty to order a complete independent psychological assessment of JACK in order to ascertain whether or not he is a sociopath, in addition to having a narcissistic personality disorder or other mental health defects that need treatment, supervision and restraint from contact with his children.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

     WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follows:
1.      A Writ of Habeas Corpus producing H.N. before this Court to be examined as to her present circumstances and as to whether or not she has the right to be released from Island View, Aspen, or New Haven in Utah and returned to her sister, Gabrielle, in [CONFIDENTIAL].
2.      Injunctive relief in the form of an Order enjoining further possession of H.N. by any aforesaid venue in Utah, and immediately releasing H.N. and transferring legal and physical custody to her sister, Gabrielle, so that she may provide for H.N.’s education at legitimate schools in the State of [CONFIDENTIAL] or elsewhere, before H.N. falls further behind academically.
3.      General damages according to proof, but in no event lower than $100,000.
4.      Punitive damages according to proof.
5.      Costs of suit.
6.      Such other and further relief that the Court deems just.
Dated: March 12, 2015

Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Thomas M. Burton