Kevinpatrick Brady shared a link. 7 hours ago near Rochester, NY
Holy smokes and sakes alive.
I’ve been trying for nearly two [2] decades to enunciate to my fellow Americans and future generations, the ghastly circumstances under which I fell into a life altering abyss; a labyrinth of abusive, arbitrary government and no win litigation vortex which essentially raped me of every fundamental right of society I though I had. It then abandoned me.
Once I believed in the great American Experiment; the myth that we are all endowed with certain ‘inalienable’ rights that would be instantly recognized, respected and enforced by our honorable, ‘independent’ third branch of government. Today our third branch acts BOLDLY similar to the Third Reich.
PEOPLE! I am NOT just crying wolf. This aint your founding fathers America anymore. If you think ‘it cant happen here, or it won’t happen to me or my children’ I am sorry to report that you are whistling past the graveyard.
This documentary [July 2013] by fellow citizen Larken Rose enunciates contemporary America infinitely better than I’ve been able to do. If the last fifteen [15] minutes [‘Oath Keepers’ ] don’t scare the bejesus out of you then you are indeed one of the sheeple who believe ‘it cant happen here, or it won’t happen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx7XG-Ohx-A
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Attorney General Kathleen Kane uses the Chewbacca Defense
In an amazing demonstration, in the Motion To Dismiss filed by Randall Henzes on behalf of Attorney General Kathleen Kane of Pennsylvania, they utilize THE CHEWBACCA DEFENSE - "a technique so advanced nobody understands it."
THE CHEWBACCA DEFENSE
To think this kind of farce is going on in courtrooms across the United States is demonstrative of why the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct was filed. The AGs cannot lawfully address the issues of judicial misconduct, and the resulting crime... so they stick their heads up their asses and act like those reporting it and suffering from it are crazy. Ever fearful of the ABSOLUTE DESTRUCTION which befalls anyone who addresses the crime. Those who violate Rule 1.6 and are disbarred and destroyed. It is a career, and life ending act.
That's why it could only be lawfully filed by NON-lawyers.... and after they had been robbed of everything, including their constitutional rights while ignored by every level of law enforcement. Destroyed and terrorized until they HAD to find the resolution... their only escape.
Everything about the Motion To Dismiss is "horseshit". It would be funny except that it is not.
Every citation is irrelevant. It does not make sense.
Every reference is irrelevant. It does not make sense.
Every footnote is incorrect. It does not make sense.
It is a clear representation of THE CHEWBACCA DEFENSE. They will continue on with such incredible inanity until exhaustion is the cause for dismissal.
They don't give a fuck that people's lives are being destroyed while they play their joke. The suggestion that I suffered through 8 years of terror and injustice just so I could play with them is twisted. Kathleen Kane, you, Tom Corbett and Linda Kelly never answered your phone when people called you to do your job. You have permitted the people to be terrorized for long enough. WE FOUND THE EXIT. LET US FREE.
Kathleen Kane won't even take calls emails or any form of contact to address or discuss the Federal filing. Remarkable, that she hasn't reviewed her office phone records and see the hundreds of calls from me over the last 8 years.
The insult of having to respond to deliberate error and improper citation. This is really the best they could do? NO. IT IS ALL THEY CAN DO. THEY HAVE NO LAW TO TO USE AGAINST ME FOR POINTING OUT THEIR ACTIONS WHICH UNDERMINED THE CONSTITUTION. THEIR DELIBERATE AND INTENTIONAL LACK OF RELEVANCE IS FRIGHTENING.
The retaliatory actions against the Plaintiffs has never subsided. The damage to property, cars, homes, constant daily harassment by phone, after 8 years, Terance Healy would rather have committed suicide. But, he's not capable so he lives to be terrorized another day. Emotionally, physically, mentally exhausted. The methods of terror being exposed weekly in the newspapers that he has experienced personally for the last 8 years while under the Rules which allow judicial terrorism.
I suggest people start attaching the entire Rule 1.6 Challenge to their 1983 Abuse of Judicial Power Complaints. That is the script they are running to excuse judicial crimes. When you attach the Rule 1.6 challenge to your 1983 complaint, they can't follow their usual script because they can't address your loss of constitutionally protected rights... not without revealing the judicial crimes... and that would violate Rule 1.6 if they did so.
1.) Why did no one from Pennsylvania prosecute Judge Ciavarella when he threw 5000 children in jail?
2.) Why was the one judge who spoke out against Judge Ciavarella removed from the Bench? Ask Judge Ann Lokuta.
3.) Why was Ann Lokuta not permitted to return to the bench after Judge Ciavarella went to prison?
The answer is simple, Rule 1.6 prevented it. Lawfully requiring the Attorney General of the state to ignore the crime and participate in concealing it from Federal Authorities.
4) Why do you think Jerry Sandusky was permitted to rape and molest children on the campus of Penn State University?
Find the act of judicial misconduct, and you will find the crime, the conspiracy and the state-wide cover-up... BECAUSE IT IS MANDATED BY LAW.
THE CHEWBACCA DEFENSE
...ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense! Why would a Wookiee, an 8-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of 2-foot-tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending the [Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania], and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must [dismiss]! The defense rests. |
To think this kind of farce is going on in courtrooms across the United States is demonstrative of why the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct was filed. The AGs cannot lawfully address the issues of judicial misconduct, and the resulting crime... so they stick their heads up their asses and act like those reporting it and suffering from it are crazy. Ever fearful of the ABSOLUTE DESTRUCTION which befalls anyone who addresses the crime. Those who violate Rule 1.6 and are disbarred and destroyed. It is a career, and life ending act.
That's why it could only be lawfully filed by NON-lawyers.... and after they had been robbed of everything, including their constitutional rights while ignored by every level of law enforcement. Destroyed and terrorized until they HAD to find the resolution... their only escape.
Everything about the Motion To Dismiss is "horseshit". It would be funny except that it is not.
Every citation is irrelevant. It does not make sense.
Every reference is irrelevant. It does not make sense.
Every footnote is incorrect. It does not make sense.
It is a clear representation of THE CHEWBACCA DEFENSE. They will continue on with such incredible inanity until exhaustion is the cause for dismissal.
They don't give a fuck that people's lives are being destroyed while they play their joke. The suggestion that I suffered through 8 years of terror and injustice just so I could play with them is twisted. Kathleen Kane, you, Tom Corbett and Linda Kelly never answered your phone when people called you to do your job. You have permitted the people to be terrorized for long enough. WE FOUND THE EXIT. LET US FREE.
Kathleen Kane won't even take calls emails or any form of contact to address or discuss the Federal filing. Remarkable, that she hasn't reviewed her office phone records and see the hundreds of calls from me over the last 8 years.
The insult of having to respond to deliberate error and improper citation. This is really the best they could do? NO. IT IS ALL THEY CAN DO. THEY HAVE NO LAW TO TO USE AGAINST ME FOR POINTING OUT THEIR ACTIONS WHICH UNDERMINED THE CONSTITUTION. THEIR DELIBERATE AND INTENTIONAL LACK OF RELEVANCE IS FRIGHTENING.
The retaliatory actions against the Plaintiffs has never subsided. The damage to property, cars, homes, constant daily harassment by phone, after 8 years, Terance Healy would rather have committed suicide. But, he's not capable so he lives to be terrorized another day. Emotionally, physically, mentally exhausted. The methods of terror being exposed weekly in the newspapers that he has experienced personally for the last 8 years while under the Rules which allow judicial terrorism.
| Call off the private investigators who stalk and repeatedly tamper with my 80 year old mother's car. The flat tires are not even annoying or funny. The lack of coordination is demonstrated by the failure to know which tire is affected. When tires were rotated, the problem didn't rotate. MORE THAN ONCE! Devices attached to the house are available for retrieval. The water company can't explain your devices. The chips are cancer inducing, yet the bio bonding glue is worse. It is very caustic and the topical affect is life threatening. The sonic noise interferes with my mother's hearing aids. It is causing her ears to be constantly infected. But there's no stopping the terror. |
I suggest people start attaching the entire Rule 1.6 Challenge to their 1983 Abuse of Judicial Power Complaints. That is the script they are running to excuse judicial crimes. When you attach the Rule 1.6 challenge to your 1983 complaint, they can't follow their usual script because they can't address your loss of constitutionally protected rights... not without revealing the judicial crimes... and that would violate Rule 1.6 if they did so.
ASK YOURSELF...
1.) Why did no one from Pennsylvania prosecute Judge Ciavarella when he threw 5000 children in jail?
2.) Why was the one judge who spoke out against Judge Ciavarella removed from the Bench? Ask Judge Ann Lokuta.
3.) Why was Ann Lokuta not permitted to return to the bench after Judge Ciavarella went to prison?
The answer is simple, Rule 1.6 prevented it. Lawfully requiring the Attorney General of the state to ignore the crime and participate in concealing it from Federal Authorities.
4) Why do you think Jerry Sandusky was permitted to rape and molest children on the campus of Penn State University?
Find the act of judicial misconduct, and you will find the crime, the conspiracy and the state-wide cover-up... BECAUSE IT IS MANDATED BY LAW.
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Resurrect Justice
Lawyers undermined our founding documents.
The country is clueless to the occurrence, but fully aware of the effect.
Yet, they do nothing. They point to problems, but never a solution. They can't comprehend that it was made unlawful to end injustice - NO MATTER HOW BLATANT.
They made it lawful to ignore corruption. They made it mandatory to ignore injustice.
And when the cause was exposed the SILENCE became deafening.
The Solution is THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE OF RULE 1.6 OF THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.
The only guaranteed way to make a lawyer stop talking... deliver a copy.
The only guaranteed way to end further injustice in the courts... deliver a copy.
It's not going to get better until it is stopped. It is not going to stop until it is exposed.
EXPOSE INJUSTICE. Serve up a copy of the Challenge. JUSTICE IS COMING.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ChallengeRule1.6/
The country is clueless to the occurrence, but fully aware of the effect.
Yet, they do nothing. They point to problems, but never a solution. They can't comprehend that it was made unlawful to end injustice - NO MATTER HOW BLATANT.
They made it lawful to ignore corruption. They made it mandatory to ignore injustice.
And when the cause was exposed the SILENCE became deafening.
The Solution is THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE OF RULE 1.6 OF THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.
The only guaranteed way to make a lawyer stop talking... deliver a copy.
The only guaranteed way to end further injustice in the courts... deliver a copy.
It's not going to get better until it is stopped. It is not going to stop until it is exposed.
EXPOSE INJUSTICE. Serve up a copy of the Challenge. JUSTICE IS COMING.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ChallengeRule1.6/
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Remember, all I am offering is the truth. Nothing more.
a) See how deep the rabbit hole goes.
b) The story ends. You wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe.
Rule 1.6 - the world pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
| Rule 1.6 prevents lawful action by law enforcement to prosecute crimes by judges. How many judges have ever been prosecuted by a state for judicial misconduct? How many states stopped judicial misconduct from continuing? In Pennsylvania alone, the situation is clear. This isn't attacking judicial immunity for errors in judgment. This is criminal actions and terror which is reported and goes unaddressed, unprosecuted, and unstopped. Cash for Kids is the most blatant in memory. But it seems the concept that everyone looked the other way was acceptable. WHY did they think their actions were lawful? Because Rule 1.6 made it not only lawful, but MANDATORY. |
Monday, September 23, 2013
Rule 1.6 - "No, that's just ...." Extend the deadline - indefinitely.
What? Rule 1.6? That's not...? That's just...? Huh? Oh it's about...
All of the reasons that you would NEVER look at Rule 1.6...
Reasons you should ignore Rule 1.6...
Move along... it doesn't concern you. UNTIL IT DOES.
Rule 1.6 hides as a rule regarding Attorney-Client privilege.
Attorney-Client privilege builds trust based on the acceptance of concealing fraud and lies... even when the lies and fraud are presented in the court as truth.
Rule 1.6 is a smokescreen. A catch all which can be twisted as needed. The scripts are published. Everything about it is smoke and mirrors. Everything about it is wrong.
Rule 1.6 prevents lawful action by law enforcement to prosecute crimes by judges. How many judges have ever been prosecuted by a state for judicial misconduct? How many states stopped judicial misconduct from continuing? In Pennsylvania alone, the situation is clear. This isn;t attacking judicial immunity for errors in judgment. This is criminal actions and terror which is reported and goes unaddressed, unproscecuted, and unstopped. Cash for Kids is the most blatant in memory. But it seems the concept that everyone looked the other way was acceptable. WHY did they think their actions were lawful? Because Rule 1.6 made it not only lawful, but MANDATORY.
Attorney General Tom Corbett did nothing. Attorney General Linda Kelly did nothing. Attoenry General Kathleen Kane has been provided the opportunity to explain the failures of her predecessors. The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 which has been served to AG Kane and the Attorneys General of the untied States provides the opportunity to end the lawful dismissal of criminal actions by the judiciary. BUT, it exposes the Rule which caused the inability to prosecute law. It exposes the organization behind the Rule adopted and enacted in every US state.
The American Bar Association.
Now, we have a much bigger problem. Treason? Sedition? RICO organization? With lawyers in every level of government who MUST follow their Rule 1.6 or face the consequences for breaking it. Violate Rule 1.6 and you are ruined, disbarred, and attacked. Any lawyer who dares to sp[eak out against a judge is not only ruined. They are destroyed. The penalties for violating Rule 1.6 are as extreme as if you were a victim of it's destructive effect on justice.
The opportunity to lawfully address it was lawfully laid upon the Federal Bench in Philadelphia on August 8, 2013 by two pro se litigants who lawfuilly had standing, a lawful cause for relief, a court record to lawfully correlate their loss of rights and the sense to lawfully present the matter as a constitutional challenge lawfully permitting them to lawfully address the unconstitutional law in every state.
The Defendant AGs who could not lawfully respond to the Challenge... did the only lawful thing they could think of without mentioning any of the issues. They cannot address the issues lawfully, because any action which addresses the issues would be construed as violating Rule 1.6.
With the other AGs hiding in silence and WITHOUT ANY BASIS for the request, AG Kathleen Kane requested an extension in the deadline.
Judge O'Neill extended the deadline INDEFINITELY.
All of the reasons that you would NEVER look at Rule 1.6...
Reasons you should ignore Rule 1.6...
Move along... it doesn't concern you. UNTIL IT DOES.
Rule 1.6 hides as a rule regarding Attorney-Client privilege.
Attorney-Client privilege builds trust based on the acceptance of concealing fraud and lies... even when the lies and fraud are presented in the court as truth.
Rule 1.6 is a smokescreen. A catch all which can be twisted as needed. The scripts are published. Everything about it is smoke and mirrors. Everything about it is wrong.
Rule 1.6 prevents lawful action by law enforcement to prosecute crimes by judges. How many judges have ever been prosecuted by a state for judicial misconduct? How many states stopped judicial misconduct from continuing? In Pennsylvania alone, the situation is clear. This isn;t attacking judicial immunity for errors in judgment. This is criminal actions and terror which is reported and goes unaddressed, unproscecuted, and unstopped. Cash for Kids is the most blatant in memory. But it seems the concept that everyone looked the other way was acceptable. WHY did they think their actions were lawful? Because Rule 1.6 made it not only lawful, but MANDATORY.
Attorney General Tom Corbett did nothing. Attorney General Linda Kelly did nothing. Attoenry General Kathleen Kane has been provided the opportunity to explain the failures of her predecessors. The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 which has been served to AG Kane and the Attorneys General of the untied States provides the opportunity to end the lawful dismissal of criminal actions by the judiciary. BUT, it exposes the Rule which caused the inability to prosecute law. It exposes the organization behind the Rule adopted and enacted in every US state.
The American Bar Association.
Now, we have a much bigger problem. Treason? Sedition? RICO organization? With lawyers in every level of government who MUST follow their Rule 1.6 or face the consequences for breaking it. Violate Rule 1.6 and you are ruined, disbarred, and attacked. Any lawyer who dares to sp[eak out against a judge is not only ruined. They are destroyed. The penalties for violating Rule 1.6 are as extreme as if you were a victim of it's destructive effect on justice.
The opportunity to lawfully address it was lawfully laid upon the Federal Bench in Philadelphia on August 8, 2013 by two pro se litigants who lawfuilly had standing, a lawful cause for relief, a court record to lawfully correlate their loss of rights and the sense to lawfully present the matter as a constitutional challenge lawfully permitting them to lawfully address the unconstitutional law in every state.
The Defendant AGs who could not lawfully respond to the Challenge... did the only lawful thing they could think of without mentioning any of the issues. They cannot address the issues lawfully, because any action which addresses the issues would be construed as violating Rule 1.6.
With the other AGs hiding in silence and WITHOUT ANY BASIS for the request, AG Kathleen Kane requested an extension in the deadline.
Judge O'Neill extended the deadline INDEFINITELY.
INDEFINITELY.
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Kids for Cash
Kids for Cash happened because Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct prevented lawful action. With all of the injustice, there is one thing which it seems no one bothered to do. Point to the cause and present a solution. The Constitutional Challenge to Rule 1.6 is the solution which ends lawful injustice.
The story behind Rule 1.6 is more frightening... it was deliberate. it was intentional. It was executed by the American Bar Association.
When you consider the holocaust, people often indicate the world learned important lessons. It seems the American Bar Association learned how to do it better - pulling this off under the noses of 300 million Americans and enacting a law in every US State - - severe punishment to any lawyer who revealed it.
When thirteen-year-old Matthew appeared in front of Judge Mark Ciavarella for throwing a piece of steak at his mother’s boyfriend, he was sentenced to seven weeks at PA Child Care, a private, for-profit juvenile detention center in northeastern Pennsylvania. Angelia was fourteen when she and a friend scrawled “Vote for Michael Jackson” on five stop signs. Charged with vandalism and defacing public property, Angelia was sent by Ciavarella to PA Child Care without her epilepsy medication and suffered a grand mal seizure her second night. Fifteen-year-old Charlie, arrested for unknowingly purchasing a stolen motorbike, was convicted of a felony and sent to PA Child Care for six weeks.
Matthew, Angelia, and Charlie are just three children among the thousands who appeared in Ciavarella’s courtroom between 2003 and 2008 and were sent away—often with no attorney present and after only cursory hearings—to a detention facility in which, it later came to light, Ciavarella had a personal financial stake. As Kids for Cash reveals, this miscarriage of justice underscores a multitude of problems with our juvenile justice system, which too often criminalizes standard adolescent behavior, treats adolescents more harshly than if they were adults, and denies them their most fundamental constitutional rights.
William Ecenbarger, a Pulitzer Prize and George Polk Award–winning investigative journalist who covered the case for the Philadelphia Inquirer, now gives us the first book-length account of this shocking story. In the tradition of true-crime legal thrillers from The Executioner’s Song to A Civil Action, Ecenbarger exposes a deeply corrupt and broken system that ruined the lives of many children and ultimately led to the judge’s conviction on charges of racketeering, fraud, tax violations, money laundering, extortion, and bribery. Fastidiously researched and utterly propulsive, Kids for Cash takes us deep inside a profoundly flawed legal system, revealing the twisted and haunting realities of America’s juvenile justice system.
Review
"A harrowing tale, lucidly told by a journalist with a good eye for detail. . . . [Kids for Cash reveals] the deep gap between cherished ideals and harsh reality in a country addicted to incarceration." —The New York Times Book Review
"The story is incredible: Thousands of children wrongfully sentenced to juvenile detention centers, many without legal representation and after cursory hearings, by two rogue judges in northern Pennsylvania who received millions of dollars in bribes from the private institutions’ owners. . . . William Ecenbarger, a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist, has brought this stunning story to book form in a deeply researched, compelling tale." —The Boston Globe
"The worst stain (so far) on Pennsylvania, a state with more than its share of stains, is that of the Luzerne County judges who sent thousands of children to private prisons in exchange for millions of dollars in kickbacks. . . . Bill Ecenbarger offers a detail-packed, sickening account of the scandal and its impact. Anyone caring about courts, justice or children should read it." —The Philadelphia Inquirer
"If only this were fiction. William Ecenbarger deserves our gratitude for shining the brightest of spotlights on a tragic, scandalous situation that brought pain and devastation to the lives of countless children and their families. Kids for Cash demands the attention of everyone who cares about justice." —Bob Herbert, Distinguished Senior Fellow at Demos and former New York Times Op-Ed columnist
"A chilling account of how two Pennsylvania judges traded children's freedom for personal profit while the rest of the Commonwealth looked the other way. Parents will tuck their children in a bit tighter after reading this true-crime heart-stopper." —Nell Bernstein, award-winning journalist and author of All Alone in the World: Children of the Incarcerated
"William Ecenbarger exposes Pennsylvania’s recent juvenile justice disgrace wherein thousands of youth were illegally sentenced to a private detention facility in exchange for millions in kickbacks for the judges who sentenced them. His heartfelt, articulate outrage raises disturbing and critical questions about the destructive power of greed in our criminal justice system, and the legal and social systems that support it through silent acquiescence."—Tara Herivel, attorney, author and co-editor of Prison Profiteers: Who Makes Money from Mass Incarceration and Prison Nation: The Warehousing of America's Poor
"A gripping and inspirational 'must read' for anyone concerned about the health and well-being of children." —Liz Ryan, President and CEO of Campaign for Youth Justice
"A gripping story of judicial incompetence, a system that ignored it, and the thousands of kids scarred for life—a story that begs for juvenile justice reform across America." —Steven C. Teske, Chief Judge, Juvenile Court of Clayton County, GA, author of Reform Juvenile Justice Now
"An unimaginable story of abuse, greed, and corruption that also reveals the broader problems with our society's failure to protect some of its most vulnerable, powerless, and at-risk members—a critically important book." —Bryan Stevenson, founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, New York University Professor of Clinical Law
"This exposé of judicial indiscretion, greed, and money laundering reads like a thriller. The setting is the Luzerne County, PA, juvenile court system between 2003 and 2008, when two judges mishandled the criminal cases of thousands of children. After presenting a rather unflattering history of the region, citing a ‘culture of corruption,’ Pulitzer Prize—winning journalist [William] Ecenbarger describes the background and criminal activities that form the heart of the case. The book is based on 200 interviews and reflects the author’s insider knowledge of the scandal, which he covered for the Philadelphia Enquirer. . . . A solid, shocking work of investigative journalism, recommended for civic-minded general readers and students of juvenile justice issues."
—Library Journal
The story behind Rule 1.6 is more frightening... it was deliberate. it was intentional. It was executed by the American Bar Association.
When you consider the holocaust, people often indicate the world learned important lessons. It seems the American Bar Association learned how to do it better - pulling this off under the noses of 300 million Americans and enacting a law in every US State - - severe punishment to any lawyer who revealed it.
When thirteen-year-old Matthew appeared in front of Judge Mark Ciavarella for throwing a piece of steak at his mother’s boyfriend, he was sentenced to seven weeks at PA Child Care, a private, for-profit juvenile detention center in northeastern Pennsylvania. Angelia was fourteen when she and a friend scrawled “Vote for Michael Jackson” on five stop signs. Charged with vandalism and defacing public property, Angelia was sent by Ciavarella to PA Child Care without her epilepsy medication and suffered a grand mal seizure her second night. Fifteen-year-old Charlie, arrested for unknowingly purchasing a stolen motorbike, was convicted of a felony and sent to PA Child Care for six weeks.
Matthew, Angelia, and Charlie are just three children among the thousands who appeared in Ciavarella’s courtroom between 2003 and 2008 and were sent away—often with no attorney present and after only cursory hearings—to a detention facility in which, it later came to light, Ciavarella had a personal financial stake. As Kids for Cash reveals, this miscarriage of justice underscores a multitude of problems with our juvenile justice system, which too often criminalizes standard adolescent behavior, treats adolescents more harshly than if they were adults, and denies them their most fundamental constitutional rights.
William Ecenbarger, a Pulitzer Prize and George Polk Award–winning investigative journalist who covered the case for the Philadelphia Inquirer, now gives us the first book-length account of this shocking story. In the tradition of true-crime legal thrillers from The Executioner’s Song to A Civil Action, Ecenbarger exposes a deeply corrupt and broken system that ruined the lives of many children and ultimately led to the judge’s conviction on charges of racketeering, fraud, tax violations, money laundering, extortion, and bribery. Fastidiously researched and utterly propulsive, Kids for Cash takes us deep inside a profoundly flawed legal system, revealing the twisted and haunting realities of America’s juvenile justice system.
Review
"A harrowing tale, lucidly told by a journalist with a good eye for detail. . . . [Kids for Cash reveals] the deep gap between cherished ideals and harsh reality in a country addicted to incarceration." —The New York Times Book Review
"The story is incredible: Thousands of children wrongfully sentenced to juvenile detention centers, many without legal representation and after cursory hearings, by two rogue judges in northern Pennsylvania who received millions of dollars in bribes from the private institutions’ owners. . . . William Ecenbarger, a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist, has brought this stunning story to book form in a deeply researched, compelling tale." —The Boston Globe
"The worst stain (so far) on Pennsylvania, a state with more than its share of stains, is that of the Luzerne County judges who sent thousands of children to private prisons in exchange for millions of dollars in kickbacks. . . . Bill Ecenbarger offers a detail-packed, sickening account of the scandal and its impact. Anyone caring about courts, justice or children should read it." —The Philadelphia Inquirer
"If only this were fiction. William Ecenbarger deserves our gratitude for shining the brightest of spotlights on a tragic, scandalous situation that brought pain and devastation to the lives of countless children and their families. Kids for Cash demands the attention of everyone who cares about justice." —Bob Herbert, Distinguished Senior Fellow at Demos and former New York Times Op-Ed columnist
"A chilling account of how two Pennsylvania judges traded children's freedom for personal profit while the rest of the Commonwealth looked the other way. Parents will tuck their children in a bit tighter after reading this true-crime heart-stopper." —Nell Bernstein, award-winning journalist and author of All Alone in the World: Children of the Incarcerated
"William Ecenbarger exposes Pennsylvania’s recent juvenile justice disgrace wherein thousands of youth were illegally sentenced to a private detention facility in exchange for millions in kickbacks for the judges who sentenced them. His heartfelt, articulate outrage raises disturbing and critical questions about the destructive power of greed in our criminal justice system, and the legal and social systems that support it through silent acquiescence."—Tara Herivel, attorney, author and co-editor of Prison Profiteers: Who Makes Money from Mass Incarceration and Prison Nation: The Warehousing of America's Poor
"A gripping and inspirational 'must read' for anyone concerned about the health and well-being of children." —Liz Ryan, President and CEO of Campaign for Youth Justice
"A gripping story of judicial incompetence, a system that ignored it, and the thousands of kids scarred for life—a story that begs for juvenile justice reform across America." —Steven C. Teske, Chief Judge, Juvenile Court of Clayton County, GA, author of Reform Juvenile Justice Now
"An unimaginable story of abuse, greed, and corruption that also reveals the broader problems with our society's failure to protect some of its most vulnerable, powerless, and at-risk members—a critically important book." —Bryan Stevenson, founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, New York University Professor of Clinical Law
"This exposé of judicial indiscretion, greed, and money laundering reads like a thriller. The setting is the Luzerne County, PA, juvenile court system between 2003 and 2008, when two judges mishandled the criminal cases of thousands of children. After presenting a rather unflattering history of the region, citing a ‘culture of corruption,’ Pulitzer Prize—winning journalist [William] Ecenbarger describes the background and criminal activities that form the heart of the case. The book is based on 200 interviews and reflects the author’s insider knowledge of the scandal, which he covered for the Philadelphia Enquirer. . . . A solid, shocking work of investigative journalism, recommended for civic-minded general readers and students of juvenile justice issues."
—Library Journal
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Sen. Tom Coburn: We need a constitutional convention to take back our country
Senator, the problem is that there was no lawful way to approach the crisis the country is facing.
Until 2 guys from suburban Philadelphia found the law which enabled the crisis and prevented resolution, and THEY COULD ADDRESS IT LAWFULLY. Once that law is declared by the court to be unconstitutional, a nullity, justice will be resurrected.
Pay attention to how many times you have been told about lack of jurisdiction. Rule 1.6 prevented lawful action.
"We have agencies that are rife with fraud and programs that are rife with fraud, and Congress has not done anything about it, they have agreed not to do anything about it. I think we're working too well together." Sen. Tom Coburn
We need a constitutional convention to take back our country
Senator Tom Coburn does not know that there can be no convention, because the lawyers can't repair the damage they have done. Not until we get this Rule out of the way. Anyone in the government who mentions the issues which subvert the Constitution is likely NOT a lawyer. The lawyers know that is CONFIDENTIAL, and the punishment for talking is brutal.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/sen.-tom-coburn-we-need-a-constitutional-convention-to-take-back-our-country/article/2534671
Until 2 guys from suburban Philadelphia found the law which enabled the crisis and prevented resolution, and THEY COULD ADDRESS IT LAWFULLY. Once that law is declared by the court to be unconstitutional, a nullity, justice will be resurrected.
Pay attention to how many times you have been told about lack of jurisdiction. Rule 1.6 prevented lawful action.
"We have agencies that are rife with fraud and programs that are rife with fraud, and Congress has not done anything about it, they have agreed not to do anything about it. I think we're working too well together." Sen. Tom Coburn
We need a constitutional convention to take back our country
Senator Tom Coburn does not know that there can be no convention, because the lawyers can't repair the damage they have done. Not until we get this Rule out of the way. Anyone in the government who mentions the issues which subvert the Constitution is likely NOT a lawyer. The lawyers know that is CONFIDENTIAL, and the punishment for talking is brutal.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/sen.-tom-coburn-we-need-a-constitutional-convention-to-take-back-our-country/article/2534671
Montgomery County Pennsylvania... perfect environment for a holocaust
When you consider what every level of Montgomery County Government, Judiciary, Law Enforcement and Administration has done and continues to do... you can only imagine them whispering that Hitler is "ONLY" going to kill one more person.
Then they would tell the State to ignore cries for help. Just "ONE' more.
Then they would tell the Federal Government to ignore cries for help. Just "ONE" more.
When you consider the evil that is STILL acting to suppress the truth of massive corruption and epic failure in Risa Ferman's District Attorneys, why is she not resigning? Why is she still terrorizing innocent people who expose her crimes? Why are people still believing a monster who threatens every level of life in the county? Why is no one stopping the terror of Risa Ferman?
You cannot hide behind Mission Kids. YOU ARE A MONSTER, MS FERMAN. YOUR CORRUPT MACHINE IS UNSTOPPABLE. BUT IT IS VISIBLE. NOW ON A NATIONAL LEVEL. A RULE WHICH ENABLED THE HOLOCAUST. A LAW WHICH ENABLED THE HOLOCAUST. A LAW IN EVERY STATE. COURTESY OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION.
Adolf Hitler had people making sure they didn't find out what he was doing. When it ended an entire planet was horrified and ashamed at what they had allowed to happen.
Rule 1.6 makes it lawful and legal and MANDATORY to ignore, suppress and conceal domestic terrorism... when it is organized by lawyers and judges.
It is not just the Constitution that finds that repugnant.
The least you can do is explain why this is the only second case of perjury ever prosecuted by Risa Ferman. All other perjury was protected by Rule 1.6 of the Code of Professional Conduct. AND... She didn't lie. Her truth exposed something beyond her imagination.
Then they would tell the State to ignore cries for help. Just "ONE' more.
Then they would tell the Federal Government to ignore cries for help. Just "ONE" more.
When you consider the evil that is STILL acting to suppress the truth of massive corruption and epic failure in Risa Ferman's District Attorneys, why is she not resigning? Why is she still terrorizing innocent people who expose her crimes? Why are people still believing a monster who threatens every level of life in the county? Why is no one stopping the terror of Risa Ferman?
You cannot hide behind Mission Kids. YOU ARE A MONSTER, MS FERMAN. YOUR CORRUPT MACHINE IS UNSTOPPABLE. BUT IT IS VISIBLE. NOW ON A NATIONAL LEVEL. A RULE WHICH ENABLED THE HOLOCAUST. A LAW WHICH ENABLED THE HOLOCAUST. A LAW IN EVERY STATE. COURTESY OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION.
Adolf Hitler had people making sure they didn't find out what he was doing. When it ended an entire planet was horrified and ashamed at what they had allowed to happen.
Rule 1.6 makes it lawful and legal and MANDATORY to ignore, suppress and conceal domestic terrorism... when it is organized by lawyers and judges.
It is not just the Constitution that finds that repugnant.
RELEASE GABRIELLE DREXLER. STOP THE TERROR.
The least you can do is explain why this is the only second case of perjury ever prosecuted by Risa Ferman. All other perjury was protected by Rule 1.6 of the Code of Professional Conduct. AND... She didn't lie. Her truth exposed something beyond her imagination.
Friday, September 20, 2013
And then what....
I have been asked what will happen if the Federal Court grants Attorney General Kathleen Kane's Motion to Dismiss.
The answer. Appeal.
Which continues in front of another Federal court. SCOTUS?
Rule 1.6 is a parasite that feeds on the integrity of the court. It craves the higher court. It fears only one thing - exposure.
So much effort is placed in concealing it's existence. The smokescreen of the way it is written. The ridiculous notion that keeping lies a secret builds trust between lawyer and client. It's even called CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION. Clearly, Rule 1.6 wants to be unknown.
There is only one method which prevents Rule 1.6 from consuming the integrity of the court.
In my case, it spread through 18 judges in Montgomery County. Only one (1) judge in my case in Montgomery County suffered no loss of integrity. He was also the one best positioned to KNOW what occurs when Rule 1.6 is involved in a matter.
He did NOTHING.
He was the only one who did NOT make it worse. No better. But uniquely, Judge Haaz is the only one who did not make it worse. Which was the best move for everyone involved. He suffered no loss of integrity - because he did not hold the hearing; he did not respond to letters; he ignored the case.
I keep thinking "First, do no further harm" best describes Judge Haaz handling of the case. Immediately. When the criteria for RULE 1.6 were presented in his court, Judge Haaz did nothing. The best he could do in the situation.
Judge Bertin did not go willingly into the corruption of my case. He could not make things better. Rule 1.6 prevents it.
Judge Carluccio delighted in the malice and destruction. Her intent was clear - suicide. When I could not oblige, the case was prevented from the Superior Court. A temporary situation waiting for the target to ... go away.
Judge Page thought he had integrity, even after being warned that each judge had sacrificed their integrity to protect the integrity of the prior judges. Ironically, his was the fastest, most informed and most blatantly visible loss of integrity.
The integrity of the Superior Court was about to be served. Salvaging the integrity of the Superior Court, and the Supreme Court of PA which was next could only be accomplished in a Federal Court with jurisdiction, standing and a cause for relief etc... no divorces... Yes, we had a constitutional complaint as soon as we find the law that caused everything. Rule 1.6 was clearly responsible.
Rule 1.6 is NOT a good thing. Look what it does to good people. Judicial integrity, ethics, morals sacrificed to conceal the injustice cause by Rule 1.6. No redeeming qualities. Rule 1.6 could cause a holocaust and avoid exposure. Kids for Cash in Luzerne County comes immediately to mind.
The only way to bring mandatory lawful injustice to an end is to face it as a nation. The current Attorneys General have the opportunity to act lawfully to address the situation. IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 1.6, THEY TAKE NO ACTION WHICH REVEALS MISCONDUCT AND CORRUPTION.
The recent decision and order by Judge Thomas O'Neill demonstrates an understanding of the situation. Yes, I noticed. Well played, your Honor.
When issuing the order to extend the deadline for AG Kane to respond, and further extending the deadline for the remaining responses to 30 days after his decision on AG Kane's motion, Judge O'Neill did not indicate a due date for AG Kane's response. An indefinite hold? It would do no further harm.
That thought is sincerely appreciated and respected.
Todd Krautheim and Terance Healy filed the Challenge on behalf of the United States of America and served it to the Attorneys General of the United States. All 56, because this state law is a national issue. Our cases are special only in that we survive. There are alot of Americans suffering under the injustice of Rule 1.6.
In the name of Thomas Ball of New Hampshire, I pray the court acts with all due haste. The efforts of the Attorneys General should be on what will happen once Rule 1.6 is declared unconstitutional, not on delaying the now inevitable resurrection of justice.
The problem has been discovered and identified and lawfully presented. Ordering AG Kane to provide her response sometime last year would immediately eliminate the injustice caused by Rule 1.6, by default, quietly, and with prevention to address the court. Rule 1.6 style. And the deadline for an appeal has passed. Thank You.
Let's fix this. Rule 1.6 does not affect every legal proceeding. Rule 1.6 should not affect ANY legal proceeding. Never again.
The answer. Appeal.
Which continues in front of another Federal court. SCOTUS?
Rule 1.6 is a parasite that feeds on the integrity of the court. It craves the higher court. It fears only one thing - exposure.
So much effort is placed in concealing it's existence. The smokescreen of the way it is written. The ridiculous notion that keeping lies a secret builds trust between lawyer and client. It's even called CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION. Clearly, Rule 1.6 wants to be unknown.
There is only one method which prevents Rule 1.6 from consuming the integrity of the court.
In my case, it spread through 18 judges in Montgomery County. Only one (1) judge in my case in Montgomery County suffered no loss of integrity. He was also the one best positioned to KNOW what occurs when Rule 1.6 is involved in a matter.
He did NOTHING.
He was the only one who did NOT make it worse. No better. But uniquely, Judge Haaz is the only one who did not make it worse. Which was the best move for everyone involved. He suffered no loss of integrity - because he did not hold the hearing; he did not respond to letters; he ignored the case.
I keep thinking "First, do no further harm" best describes Judge Haaz handling of the case. Immediately. When the criteria for RULE 1.6 were presented in his court, Judge Haaz did nothing. The best he could do in the situation.
Judge Bertin did not go willingly into the corruption of my case. He could not make things better. Rule 1.6 prevents it.
Judge Carluccio delighted in the malice and destruction. Her intent was clear - suicide. When I could not oblige, the case was prevented from the Superior Court. A temporary situation waiting for the target to ... go away.
Judge Page thought he had integrity, even after being warned that each judge had sacrificed their integrity to protect the integrity of the prior judges. Ironically, his was the fastest, most informed and most blatantly visible loss of integrity.
The integrity of the Superior Court was about to be served. Salvaging the integrity of the Superior Court, and the Supreme Court of PA which was next could only be accomplished in a Federal Court with jurisdiction, standing and a cause for relief etc... no divorces... Yes, we had a constitutional complaint as soon as we find the law that caused everything. Rule 1.6 was clearly responsible.
Rule 1.6 is NOT a good thing. Look what it does to good people. Judicial integrity, ethics, morals sacrificed to conceal the injustice cause by Rule 1.6. No redeeming qualities. Rule 1.6 could cause a holocaust and avoid exposure. Kids for Cash in Luzerne County comes immediately to mind.
The only way to bring mandatory lawful injustice to an end is to face it as a nation. The current Attorneys General have the opportunity to act lawfully to address the situation. IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 1.6, THEY TAKE NO ACTION WHICH REVEALS MISCONDUCT AND CORRUPTION.
The recent decision and order by Judge Thomas O'Neill demonstrates an understanding of the situation. Yes, I noticed. Well played, your Honor.
When issuing the order to extend the deadline for AG Kane to respond, and further extending the deadline for the remaining responses to 30 days after his decision on AG Kane's motion, Judge O'Neill did not indicate a due date for AG Kane's response. An indefinite hold? It would do no further harm.
That thought is sincerely appreciated and respected.
Todd Krautheim and Terance Healy filed the Challenge on behalf of the United States of America and served it to the Attorneys General of the United States. All 56, because this state law is a national issue. Our cases are special only in that we survive. There are alot of Americans suffering under the injustice of Rule 1.6.
In the name of Thomas Ball of New Hampshire, I pray the court acts with all due haste. The efforts of the Attorneys General should be on what will happen once Rule 1.6 is declared unconstitutional, not on delaying the now inevitable resurrection of justice.
The problem has been discovered and identified and lawfully presented. Ordering AG Kane to provide her response sometime last year would immediately eliminate the injustice caused by Rule 1.6, by default, quietly, and with prevention to address the court. Rule 1.6 style. And the deadline for an appeal has passed. Thank You.
Let's fix this. Rule 1.6 does not affect every legal proceeding. Rule 1.6 should not affect ANY legal proceeding. Never again.
The First... and the last victim
I spoke with an attorney representing one of the Attorney Generals the other day. I don't know if he was joking, or not, when he indicated over the course of his career with the AGs office he has never encountered a case where a person had lost their rights. I responded that he was likely correct because THEY DO NOT GET IN THE DOOR. I had tried for years to get the Attorney General to help in my situation the closest I got was the Consumer Form Letter. When every report was dismissed as beyond the realm of any possibility without ever meeting - how would he know a real one when it came along?
I told him that I had met many people who had lost their rights and had been able to recognize their stories and the loss of rights/liberties. I suggested we get together to review the circumstances which have occurred.
It got me thinking. How do you identify the victim of a loss of civil rights? I asked people who had been through the experience. Their responses were accurate, a few off-the-wall quips, all accurate. The first thing you must face. CRAZY. It's the word you are called (though you are not crazy). It's the word people say when you tell them about any experience. "They can't do that." "Well They Did!" "That's crazy." At which point there is no point in continuing that conversation. You cannot validate a situation which should NOT have occurred by throwing even more 'crazy' at it.
The second part is the dismissal - They can't do that. That's not right. You agree, BUT it did happen. People who witness the events confirm the experience. They realize and understand completely when they tell people about what they witnessed and they are told. 'That's crazy' "They can't do that."
No one is following the procedure. No one is following the law. No one explains their actions which are contrary to anything anyone believes, knows, or researches.
The third part was that no situation ever improved. Things just kept getting worse because every one acting against the expectation (and the law) was also acting as if it was you that did no understand... and they were not going to tell you. Nothing happened 'correctly'. No one helped. No one corrected their previous error.
I realized the answer to my question of how to identify the victim was in front of me every day and had been there for years. There was one message I needed to put out with every post to the web because it was exhausting AND DEMORALIZING to go through the "They Can't - They Did - That's Crazy" routine. The Header of the web site since it was started read:
"I am a sane man dealing with an absolutely insane situation. Every person in a position to help has acted improperly in direct violation of procedures and the law preventing the resolution of any matter… they each make the situation worse… NO ONE HELPS."
The statement describes accurately what identifies the victim.
As the call was ending, I again asked about meeting to review the case. The response: I will meet with you to discuss the case, ONLY IF YOU WILL AGREE TO DROP KATHLEEN KANE FROM THE MATTER. Umm. YES, that is crazy. It was repeated/confirmed that I heard correctly. A meeting could not provide any relief - whether he believed the evidence or not. The Constitutional Challenge was a necessity. Dropping Pennsylvania is ... He had to be joking. Yea.
In almost every situation since 2007, I have had to endure a diminishing remark, disrespect, further injustice, or a humiliation of some sort. The victim of a loss of his rights loses everything. The hopelessness brings many to their end. The American belief in justice is strong. The victim of injustice keeps going back knowing they will be delivered further injustice, BUT STILL BELIEVING IN JUSTICE.
There have been times where the only person in the courtroom who expects justice is the victim. Everyone else knows they are participating in the injustice against him. They know their testimony is lies and their evidence is fraud. And they will WIN... because Rule 1.6 mandates lies, fraud, lawlessness and injustice. Rule 1.6 rapes the integrity of the court and compels judges to perpetuate that loss of integrity.
Those who have stood up against Rule 1.6 have been disbarred. Ethics and morality have no place in a court where Rule 1.6 TRUMPS EVERYTHING. LAWFULLY TRUMPS EVERYTHING. My Constitution finds Rule 1.6 repugnant.
We won't be having that meeting. I do look forward to introducing myself.
I'll be the first victim he has seen. He will be so excited. I'll also be his last.
JUSTICE IS COMING.
I told him that I had met many people who had lost their rights and had been able to recognize their stories and the loss of rights/liberties. I suggested we get together to review the circumstances which have occurred.
It got me thinking. How do you identify the victim of a loss of civil rights? I asked people who had been through the experience. Their responses were accurate, a few off-the-wall quips, all accurate. The first thing you must face. CRAZY. It's the word you are called (though you are not crazy). It's the word people say when you tell them about any experience. "They can't do that." "Well They Did!" "That's crazy." At which point there is no point in continuing that conversation. You cannot validate a situation which should NOT have occurred by throwing even more 'crazy' at it.
The second part is the dismissal - They can't do that. That's not right. You agree, BUT it did happen. People who witness the events confirm the experience. They realize and understand completely when they tell people about what they witnessed and they are told. 'That's crazy' "They can't do that."
No one is following the procedure. No one is following the law. No one explains their actions which are contrary to anything anyone believes, knows, or researches.
The third part was that no situation ever improved. Things just kept getting worse because every one acting against the expectation (and the law) was also acting as if it was you that did no understand... and they were not going to tell you. Nothing happened 'correctly'. No one helped. No one corrected their previous error.
I realized the answer to my question of how to identify the victim was in front of me every day and had been there for years. There was one message I needed to put out with every post to the web because it was exhausting AND DEMORALIZING to go through the "They Can't - They Did - That's Crazy" routine. The Header of the web site since it was started read:
"I am a sane man dealing with an absolutely insane situation. Every person in a position to help has acted improperly in direct violation of procedures and the law preventing the resolution of any matter… they each make the situation worse… NO ONE HELPS."
The statement describes accurately what identifies the victim.
As the call was ending, I again asked about meeting to review the case. The response: I will meet with you to discuss the case, ONLY IF YOU WILL AGREE TO DROP KATHLEEN KANE FROM THE MATTER. Umm. YES, that is crazy. It was repeated/confirmed that I heard correctly. A meeting could not provide any relief - whether he believed the evidence or not. The Constitutional Challenge was a necessity. Dropping Pennsylvania is ... He had to be joking. Yea.
In almost every situation since 2007, I have had to endure a diminishing remark, disrespect, further injustice, or a humiliation of some sort. The victim of a loss of his rights loses everything. The hopelessness brings many to their end. The American belief in justice is strong. The victim of injustice keeps going back knowing they will be delivered further injustice, BUT STILL BELIEVING IN JUSTICE.
There have been times where the only person in the courtroom who expects justice is the victim. Everyone else knows they are participating in the injustice against him. They know their testimony is lies and their evidence is fraud. And they will WIN... because Rule 1.6 mandates lies, fraud, lawlessness and injustice. Rule 1.6 rapes the integrity of the court and compels judges to perpetuate that loss of integrity.
Those who have stood up against Rule 1.6 have been disbarred. Ethics and morality have no place in a court where Rule 1.6 TRUMPS EVERYTHING. LAWFULLY TRUMPS EVERYTHING. My Constitution finds Rule 1.6 repugnant.
We won't be having that meeting. I do look forward to introducing myself.
I'll be the first victim he has seen. He will be so excited. I'll also be his last.
JUSTICE IS COMING.
Monday, September 16, 2013
Constitution Day 2013
Celebrate the Constitution!
After years of unaddressable injustice, the Constitutional Challenge is poised to return civil rights, restore the integrity of the judiciary, improve the reputation of lawyers, and give the lawmaking legislature back their job... ALL OVER THE USA.
Celebrate the day and let your favorite judge or lawyer know about the challenge. They may have delivered the worst injustice imaginable, but they may have been forced to do that. Rule 1.6 mandates they take no action to reveal misconduct.
I've had 18 judges in my divorce. They took everything I had. Family, career, friends, car, home. They left me destitute, and homeless. They were determined to destroy me. And I kept returning to receive more injustice because they were never going to permit my survival. They obstructed justice and prevented appeals, and failed to send evidence and exhibits to the Superior Court. The judges clearly despised my perseverance.
Their corruption, misconduct and injustice was so blatant and obvious and their actions were so extremely deliberate and 'wrong' that they created a situation by which I was able to have standing for a constitutional challenge which will make sure that others don't ever go through what I have survived. I get my rights. Everyone gets their rights. They get the chance to restore their integrity... OR continue to deliver injustice without the protection of Rule 1.6.
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Challenge13-4614.pdf"]
After years of unaddressable injustice, the Constitutional Challenge is poised to return civil rights, restore the integrity of the judiciary, improve the reputation of lawyers, and give the lawmaking legislature back their job... ALL OVER THE USA.
Celebrate the day and let your favorite judge or lawyer know about the challenge. They may have delivered the worst injustice imaginable, but they may have been forced to do that. Rule 1.6 mandates they take no action to reveal misconduct.
I've had 18 judges in my divorce. They took everything I had. Family, career, friends, car, home. They left me destitute, and homeless. They were determined to destroy me. And I kept returning to receive more injustice because they were never going to permit my survival. They obstructed justice and prevented appeals, and failed to send evidence and exhibits to the Superior Court. The judges clearly despised my perseverance.
Their corruption, misconduct and injustice was so blatant and obvious and their actions were so extremely deliberate and 'wrong' that they created a situation by which I was able to have standing for a constitutional challenge which will make sure that others don't ever go through what I have survived. I get my rights. Everyone gets their rights. They get the chance to restore their integrity... OR continue to deliver injustice without the protection of Rule 1.6.
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Challenge13-4614.pdf"]
Gabrielle Drexler
I have been following the case of Gabrielle Drexler since her announcement on the local news.
I am currently trying to get some information to answer a couple of questions.
Her case was strategically positioned for success. Somehow that was completely undermined.
I believe the information which would have been exposed had she been given a hearing would have exposed something so much larger than the 'scorn' woman stories.
I want to find out the truth. I'll post my thoughts on it later. I am still gathering information.
One word on telling a lie to any court. DON'T EVER DO IT. The lawyers who lie under Rule 1.6 are protected.
If you join them, you won't have that protection. No matter what they tell you. Remember, they lie.
If you are not guilty, NEVER PLEAD GUILTY. That lie will affect your credibility for the rest of your life.
Look at the basic message. You cannot change that decision with any credibility.
I am currently trying to get some information to answer a couple of questions.
Her case was strategically positioned for success. Somehow that was completely undermined.
I believe the information which would have been exposed had she been given a hearing would have exposed something so much larger than the 'scorn' woman stories.
I want to find out the truth. I'll post my thoughts on it later. I am still gathering information.
One word on telling a lie to any court. DON'T EVER DO IT. The lawyers who lie under Rule 1.6 are protected.
If you join them, you won't have that protection. No matter what they tell you. Remember, they lie.
If you are not guilty, NEVER PLEAD GUILTY. That lie will affect your credibility for the rest of your life.
Look at the basic message. You cannot change that decision with any credibility.
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Reality vs. The Smokescreen
The Rule 1.6 debate waves the trust of attorney-client relationships as a badge of honor for the profession. It then authorizes and mandates a denial of justice to anyone who is affected by their inability to tell the truth.
Get this. It is unconstitutional, SO the lawyers must tell the truth to the court. The client must tell the truth to the court. So, if they are afraid of the truth being stated in court, they will lie and be exposed for their fraud.
Rule 1.6 is a ridiculous notion of integrity, ethics and morality which suggests that a LAW which requires an attorney to present untrue information to the court to obstruct the court from learning the truth, while compromising justice, integrity and personal reputation is designed to make a client trust his attorney.
The Client just watched the attorney lie to the Court. To think that builds trust is flawed logic.
We are really supposed to believe that a client will trust someone more because that person will lie for them AT ALL COSTS WITHOUT REGARD FOR ANYTHING OR ANYONE ELSE EVEN AT THE COST OF THEIR OWN INTEGRITY. THAT'S JUST STUPID. Shared lies do not build trust. The relationship is called a conspiracy and it is co-dependant at best. All the honor, truth and integrity synonyms in the world when presented to conceal a MANDATE TO MISLEAD will not result in TRUST.
The pig is still a pig.
Rule 1.6 prevents truth and encourages making every effort to mislead the court to further conceal a falsehood.
There is nothing admirable about telling a lie in a proceeding designed to determine the truth.
The other thing that just doesn't seem to make ANY appearance in any of the voluminous rhetoric surrounding The Rules of Professional Conduct.
(I have learned that what is not addressed or presented is often the baseline to consider.)
What about when the attorney is the one who initiates the untruth? When the attorney instructs the client to commit a crime? Their client can't risk exposing that to the court. The client needs the lawyer, AND THE CLIENT KNOWS THAT THE ATTORNEY WILL LIE TO THE COURT. If the lawyer will lie to the court, what kind of lies might he tell the court to retaliate against a client that exposes the lawyers fraud upon the court
The explanation for what necessitates the Confidentiality is a lie. And yes, it seems lawyers MUST do that.
They are telling you they are required to lie and will do so, what makes anyone believe that they are telling the truth?
Get this. It is unconstitutional, SO the lawyers must tell the truth to the court. The client must tell the truth to the court. So, if they are afraid of the truth being stated in court, they will lie and be exposed for their fraud.
Rule 1.6 is a ridiculous notion of integrity, ethics and morality which suggests that a LAW which requires an attorney to present untrue information to the court to obstruct the court from learning the truth, while compromising justice, integrity and personal reputation is designed to make a client trust his attorney.
The Client just watched the attorney lie to the Court. To think that builds trust is flawed logic.
We are really supposed to believe that a client will trust someone more because that person will lie for them AT ALL COSTS WITHOUT REGARD FOR ANYTHING OR ANYONE ELSE EVEN AT THE COST OF THEIR OWN INTEGRITY. THAT'S JUST STUPID. Shared lies do not build trust. The relationship is called a conspiracy and it is co-dependant at best. All the honor, truth and integrity synonyms in the world when presented to conceal a MANDATE TO MISLEAD will not result in TRUST.
The pig is still a pig.
Rule 1.6 prevents truth and encourages making every effort to mislead the court to further conceal a falsehood.
There is nothing admirable about telling a lie in a proceeding designed to determine the truth.
The other thing that just doesn't seem to make ANY appearance in any of the voluminous rhetoric surrounding The Rules of Professional Conduct.
(I have learned that what is not addressed or presented is often the baseline to consider.)
What about when the attorney is the one who initiates the untruth? When the attorney instructs the client to commit a crime? Their client can't risk exposing that to the court. The client needs the lawyer, AND THE CLIENT KNOWS THAT THE ATTORNEY WILL LIE TO THE COURT. If the lawyer will lie to the court, what kind of lies might he tell the court to retaliate against a client that exposes the lawyers fraud upon the court
The explanation for what necessitates the Confidentiality is a lie. And yes, it seems lawyers MUST do that.
They are telling you they are required to lie and will do so, what makes anyone believe that they are telling the truth?
Montgomery County doesn't follow law, court orders, ethics... or honor the deals they coerce out of their victims
I have heard an unconfirmed report that Gabrielle Drexler, who had been coerced into a guilty plea to avoid jail time for a perjury charge, has been incarcerated.
Her case indicates the misuse of the technology available to law enforcement to interfere and intercept people's lives via phones and computers. They got her to plead guilty by aggressively threatening her with jail time. So to avoid jail, she plead guilty. I hear they have put her in jail this week anyway.
In this post-Snowden world, a trial would have been too damaging for the County and very difficult to conceal. So, the County renegs on their coerced deal with a girl represented by a County provided attorney. Ethics is not Montco's strong suit. One might think that they apparently forgot about the pending case filed by Gabrielle in the US District Court which will expose their actions.
A trial would have revealed the county's surveillance capabilities. I don't imagine that DA Ferman informed the Grand Jury of those capabilities when seeking to prosecute the girl for perjury. Rule 1.6 excuses those opopsies. After the Merion School District SPYCAM mess, Montco didn't want further scrutiny of their misconducts.
Usually, Risa Ferman uses the perjury scenario against the county officials who challenge her. She would need a 24 hour perjury court to handle all the perjury in Montco if she really cared about truth. That Public Corruption Task Force she created when she was elected hasn't prosecuted anyone.
(You don't suppose they misunderstood their job, and ARE CAUSING CORRUPTION? Hmmm. No worries Rule 1.6 will cover it up... until JUSTICE RETURNS.)
This last week, Montgomery County has been in the news for the ethics violations of Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio. Judge Carluccio knew she was violating ethics policies when it happened. She announced her violation to all of the parties involved in her unethical buying and selling of the county office space.
Judge Carluccio seems to be under the remarkable belief that if you boast about your lack of ethics you are not violating ethics rules. The PhillyNews editorial was also surprised at the inaccuracy of Judge Carluccio's personal brand of ethics.
Review the malicious injustice that she has ordered upon litigants in her court and you will learn that her knowledge of the law and procedure is also her own personal brand.
Review the movie ART OF THE STEAL and you can actually see what Judge Carluccio looks like when she concocts her imaginary stories. She does not think well on her feet. Her delusions would be on the transcripts to my case BUT they are not being provided for my Appeal in Superior Court. (And Rule 1.6 is allowing the lower court to obstruct justice while the superior court wrestles with the pointlessness of them issuing an order which wouldn't be followed citing Rule 1.6 - OR - citing Rule 1.6 themselves to avoid taking any action. A Rule that covers every conspiracy and crime.
I feel bad for Gabrielle. The necessity for the District Attorney to attack a young girl in order to conceal the county's illegal use of surveillance technology to create and damage evidence was the priority.
The District Attorney is way too busy concealing the crimes of the county judiciary and her various task forces.
The County's new rule provides methods for hacking into EVERY litigant in the county who files electronically. This will help with cclearing the court calendar.... litigants won't get their email notices and won't show up for court. They lose by default, and the county blames the victim indicating they sent an email. SOMEHOW THIS HAS BEEN MADE THE OFFICIAL MONTGOMERY COUNTY PROCESS EVEN WHEN THE FLAWS IN THEIR SYSTEM ARE OBVIOUS, as it their intent to deny access to the courts. I suppose it will reduce the volume and varieties of judicial misconduct.
The Prothonotary has ignored my reports to them of the outdated and invalid certificate on their servers for years which creates an opportunity for computers to be illegally accessed. Is the County behind it? or their Private Investigators? or the opposing counsel? or anyone who goes up on the county web site and sees that "E" and knows your computers are exposed.
Peopple have been wondering why lawyers have begun running for the job of Prothonotary, and other Row Officers. The answer is simple. Rule 1.6. Once they have the Prothonotary as a lawyer mandated to conceal their misconduct and crimes, they don't have to worry about a rogue individual not cooperating in their injustice. Though Mark Levy has cooperated and not done his job in my case. It is too risky for him to not be under Rule 1.6. Yes, Rule 1.6 makes continued injustice mandatory.
Anyone who breaks Rule 1.6 does not get back into their Bar Organization. That's what happened to Judge Ann Lokuta when she reported on the misconduct of Judge Ciavarella in the Kids for Cash scandal. She violated Rule 1.6. Even after Ciavarella was convicted by the Federal Govt of incarcerating 5000 kids, Judge Lokuta could not get her job back. Rule 1.6 makes doing the right thing IMPOSSIBLE.
So it seems folks spend way too many TAX DOLLARS on their twisted avoidance of the laws and ethics which they ignore anyway.
At what point did the Montgomery County realize that they were above the law AND free to deny constitutionally protected civil rights of the people. Rule 1.6 has been in effect in Pennsylvania since the 80's.. and they terrorized me for 8 years by ignoring my rights. That could all be hidden until my case escaped to Superior Court - an action which Judge Page was not able to undo - no action too unlawful, too corrupt. The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 will demonstrate the unconstitutional aspect of THEIR failure to enforce (or follow) the law...
Attorney General Kathleen Kane has denied responsibility for enacting or enforcing Rule 1.6. We have asked who has that responsibility. And when she responds with regard to the unconstitutional delegations of authority, the judiciary may regain its integrity, lawyers can regain their self respect, and the legislature can do their job.
JUSTICE IS COMING.
Persevere. When is the media going to notice the effort to resurrect justice? Afterwards, there will still be news to report. There will simply be less injustice.
Her case indicates the misuse of the technology available to law enforcement to interfere and intercept people's lives via phones and computers. They got her to plead guilty by aggressively threatening her with jail time. So to avoid jail, she plead guilty. I hear they have put her in jail this week anyway.
In this post-Snowden world, a trial would have been too damaging for the County and very difficult to conceal. So, the County renegs on their coerced deal with a girl represented by a County provided attorney. Ethics is not Montco's strong suit. One might think that they apparently forgot about the pending case filed by Gabrielle in the US District Court which will expose their actions.
A trial would have revealed the county's surveillance capabilities. I don't imagine that DA Ferman informed the Grand Jury of those capabilities when seeking to prosecute the girl for perjury. Rule 1.6 excuses those opopsies. After the Merion School District SPYCAM mess, Montco didn't want further scrutiny of their misconducts.
Usually, Risa Ferman uses the perjury scenario against the county officials who challenge her. She would need a 24 hour perjury court to handle all the perjury in Montco if she really cared about truth. That Public Corruption Task Force she created when she was elected hasn't prosecuted anyone.
(You don't suppose they misunderstood their job, and ARE CAUSING CORRUPTION? Hmmm. No worries Rule 1.6 will cover it up... until JUSTICE RETURNS.)
This last week, Montgomery County has been in the news for the ethics violations of Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio. Judge Carluccio knew she was violating ethics policies when it happened. She announced her violation to all of the parties involved in her unethical buying and selling of the county office space.
Judge Carluccio seems to be under the remarkable belief that if you boast about your lack of ethics you are not violating ethics rules. The PhillyNews editorial was also surprised at the inaccuracy of Judge Carluccio's personal brand of ethics.
Review the malicious injustice that she has ordered upon litigants in her court and you will learn that her knowledge of the law and procedure is also her own personal brand.
Review the movie ART OF THE STEAL and you can actually see what Judge Carluccio looks like when she concocts her imaginary stories. She does not think well on her feet. Her delusions would be on the transcripts to my case BUT they are not being provided for my Appeal in Superior Court. (And Rule 1.6 is allowing the lower court to obstruct justice while the superior court wrestles with the pointlessness of them issuing an order which wouldn't be followed citing Rule 1.6 - OR - citing Rule 1.6 themselves to avoid taking any action. A Rule that covers every conspiracy and crime.
I feel bad for Gabrielle. The necessity for the District Attorney to attack a young girl in order to conceal the county's illegal use of surveillance technology to create and damage evidence was the priority.
The District Attorney is way too busy concealing the crimes of the county judiciary and her various task forces.
The County's new rule provides methods for hacking into EVERY litigant in the county who files electronically. This will help with cclearing the court calendar.... litigants won't get their email notices and won't show up for court. They lose by default, and the county blames the victim indicating they sent an email. SOMEHOW THIS HAS BEEN MADE THE OFFICIAL MONTGOMERY COUNTY PROCESS EVEN WHEN THE FLAWS IN THEIR SYSTEM ARE OBVIOUS, as it their intent to deny access to the courts. I suppose it will reduce the volume and varieties of judicial misconduct.
The Prothonotary has ignored my reports to them of the outdated and invalid certificate on their servers for years which creates an opportunity for computers to be illegally accessed. Is the County behind it? or their Private Investigators? or the opposing counsel? or anyone who goes up on the county web site and sees that "E" and knows your computers are exposed.
Peopple have been wondering why lawyers have begun running for the job of Prothonotary, and other Row Officers. The answer is simple. Rule 1.6. Once they have the Prothonotary as a lawyer mandated to conceal their misconduct and crimes, they don't have to worry about a rogue individual not cooperating in their injustice. Though Mark Levy has cooperated and not done his job in my case. It is too risky for him to not be under Rule 1.6. Yes, Rule 1.6 makes continued injustice mandatory.
Anyone who breaks Rule 1.6 does not get back into their Bar Organization. That's what happened to Judge Ann Lokuta when she reported on the misconduct of Judge Ciavarella in the Kids for Cash scandal. She violated Rule 1.6. Even after Ciavarella was convicted by the Federal Govt of incarcerating 5000 kids, Judge Lokuta could not get her job back. Rule 1.6 makes doing the right thing IMPOSSIBLE.
So it seems folks spend way too many TAX DOLLARS on their twisted avoidance of the laws and ethics which they ignore anyway.
At what point did the Montgomery County realize that they were above the law AND free to deny constitutionally protected civil rights of the people. Rule 1.6 has been in effect in Pennsylvania since the 80's.. and they terrorized me for 8 years by ignoring my rights. That could all be hidden until my case escaped to Superior Court - an action which Judge Page was not able to undo - no action too unlawful, too corrupt. The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 will demonstrate the unconstitutional aspect of THEIR failure to enforce (or follow) the law...
Attorney General Kathleen Kane has denied responsibility for enacting or enforcing Rule 1.6. We have asked who has that responsibility. And when she responds with regard to the unconstitutional delegations of authority, the judiciary may regain its integrity, lawyers can regain their self respect, and the legislature can do their job.
JUSTICE IS COMING.
Persevere. When is the media going to notice the effort to resurrect justice? Afterwards, there will still be news to report. There will simply be less injustice.
Thursday, September 12, 2013
Montgomery County Quotes
Regarding the Montgomery County Clerk responsible for issuing Marriage Licenses... (FULL STORY)
“The ruling was clear from the beginning that we could never have a situation where an executive official can pick and choose which laws to enforce,” said Bruce Castor, Montgomery County Commissioner.
The State’s General Counsel also issued a statement about the judge’s decision, saying in part,
“We respect the interests and dignity of all the parties involved in this case, but we are a government of laws and it is important that all office holders across the state enforce those laws uniformly.’’
Seriously? Montgomery County Courthouse has behaves as a lawless organization subverting justice and terrorizing people because they cannot lawfully prosecute the crimes of the judiciary.
Um, Bruce Castor. I have been asking for a meeting with your for years. YOU ARE GROSSLY UNINFORMED or just completely oblivious to the problem you cannot address, wil not address and fail to address.
Once we get the Challenge complete, I look forward to the county prosecutors no longer choosing which laws to enforce.
Bruce, 18 Judges on the Montgomery County Bench have terrorized me and denied my rights for 7 years now... and still ongoing. And you have ignored every crime, every infraction, every attack, every action they did intent on causing my suicide. EPIC FAILURE. EPIC.
BTW, THE MARRIAGE DOCUMENT ON THE COUNTY WEB SITE SAYS NOTHING ABOUT GENDER... AND IS NEITHER ACCURATE NOR PROFESSIONAL IN APPEARANCE.
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/PLANNINGMARRIAGEBROCHURE.pdf"]
“The ruling was clear from the beginning that we could never have a situation where an executive official can pick and choose which laws to enforce,” said Bruce Castor, Montgomery County Commissioner.
The State’s General Counsel also issued a statement about the judge’s decision, saying in part,
“We respect the interests and dignity of all the parties involved in this case, but we are a government of laws and it is important that all office holders across the state enforce those laws uniformly.’’
Seriously? Montgomery County Courthouse has behaves as a lawless organization subverting justice and terrorizing people because they cannot lawfully prosecute the crimes of the judiciary.
Um, Bruce Castor. I have been asking for a meeting with your for years. YOU ARE GROSSLY UNINFORMED or just completely oblivious to the problem you cannot address, wil not address and fail to address.
Once we get the Challenge complete, I look forward to the county prosecutors no longer choosing which laws to enforce.
Bruce, 18 Judges on the Montgomery County Bench have terrorized me and denied my rights for 7 years now... and still ongoing. And you have ignored every crime, every infraction, every attack, every action they did intent on causing my suicide. EPIC FAILURE. EPIC.
BTW, THE MARRIAGE DOCUMENT ON THE COUNTY WEB SITE SAYS NOTHING ABOUT GENDER... AND IS NEITHER ACCURATE NOR PROFESSIONAL IN APPEARANCE.
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/PLANNINGMARRIAGEBROCHURE.pdf"]
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Response to Attorney General Kathleen Kane's Request for Extension/Pro Hac Vice Waiver
| Terance Healy | ) |
| Todd M. Krautheim | ) |
| In the name of THE UNITED STATES | ) Civil Action# 13-4614 |
| ) | |
| v. | ) |
| ) | |
| Kathleen Kane | ) |
| Pennsylvania Attorney General; | ) |
| and | ) |
| The Attorneys General of the United States | ) |
| ) |
2. Attorney General Kane anticipates filing a Motion to Dismiss citing standard procedural defenses which suggest that the lack of subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claim; lack of personal jurisdiction, insufficient process and/or insufficient service of process; and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
3. The Plaintiffs affirm and reassert the information provided in the initial pleading on August 8, 2013 with regard to jurisdiction invoked under 28 USC 1331, 1343 and 1345; Venue; Service pursuant to Rule 5.1(a)(2); and their claim to which relief can be granted – the restoration of constitutionally protected rights.
4. Attorney General Kane is mistaken that the ‘non-Pennsylvania Defendants’ have not been served, or have been insufficiently served with the documents.
5. A Certificate of Service filed September 6, 2013 with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania indicates proof of service to each of the Attorneys General was accomplished and further provides evidence indicating - the (1) mailing on August 13, 2013; - the (2) Certified Mail Receipts indicating acceptance by the United States Postal Service of the documents for delivery to each defendant; and - the (3) return receipt signature cards confirming delivery of the initial pleading to each defendant.
6. Plaintiffs have challenged the constitutionality of Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information of the Rules of Professional Conduct as the rule causes the complete denial of constitutionally protected rights while subverting justice and corrupting the judiciary.
7. ‘Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information’ has been enacted into law in Pennsylvania and the forty nine other states, the District of Columbia, and the US Virgin Islands. Rule 1.6 has not yet been enacted into law in American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands and Puerto Rico.
8. The Attorneys General have been served with the Civil Action/Challenge pursuant to Rule 5.1(a)(2) as a state statute is being challenged.
9. The Plaintiff’s acknowledge Attorney General Kane’s statement that the Attorneys General are not responsible for enacting or enforcing rules such as Rule 1.6 and that “the Pennsylvania Attorney General does not enact and has no authority to enforce the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct.”
10. The dismissive and deliberate lack of authority is by design. The subsequent lack of any enforcement is intentional. The inability of the legislature to address such matters is evident. These are the symptoms which predict and indicate the loss of constitutionally protected rights to litigants.
11. The Attorneys General are requested and encouraged to provide the identity of the person(s), author(s), contractor(s), or organization(s) responsible for enacting and enforcing Rule 1.6 in their respective state as their action, or inaction, has resulted in the loss of constitutionally protected rights for litigants without recourse.
12. Rule 1.6 does not directly apply to the Pro Se Plaintiffs, but it indirectly results in their loss of constitutionally protected rights.
13. Rule 1.6 does apply to lawyers, the judiciary, the court administrators, the disciplinary boards, the judicial conduct boards, many levels of law enforcement, the state legislature, the Attorneys General and the Governors.
14. The effect of the mandate to follow Rule 1.6 results in a lawful failure to address misconduct.
15. The lawful misconduct evolves into crime and corruption which is not addressed, acknowledged or prosecuted creating the unconstitutional loss of rights, while adversely affecting the integrity of the judiciary, negatively impacting the legal profession, and subverts the legislature who is powerless to take any action to address the rule.
16. Attorney General Kane recently stated that she is responsible to enforce the law, and that she is a lawyer who is responsible to follow the Rules of Professional Conduct.
17. Rules 1.6 makes it lawful, and mandatory, for Attorney General Kane to ignore criminal actions and organizations within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania when they relate to lawyers, the judiciary, the court administrators, the disciplinary boards, the judicial conduct boards, many levels of law enforcement, the state legislature, herself and the Governor.
18. Criminal activity is incorrectly dismissed by the Attorney General and all levels of law enforcement as a lack of jurisdiction where they have jurisdiction, but they lack ability to take lawful action to address the crimes protected by Rule 1.6.
19. Plaintiffs concur with Attorney General Kane’s request for a courtesy waiver of pro hac vice requirements for ‘non-Pennsylvania Defendants’ as it indeed promotes their goal of a ‘just, speedy and inexpensive determination’ of this action.
The Plaintiffs look forward to working with the Attorneys General to address this challenge as our goals are not in opposition and the task before us is great.
The Plaintiffs view the Attorneys General not as adversaries, but fellow patriots, who can see and respect a sincere interest in returning the integrity and reputation of the judiciary and the judicial system, delivering to the legislature the ability to perform the duties of their position to manage the law, and restore the rights of all citizens in the United States.
Respectfully,
| /s/ Terance Healy | /s/ Todd Krautheim |
| Warrington, PA 18976 | Doylestown, PA 18901 |
| UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA |
| Terance Healy | ) |
| Todd M. Krautheim | ) |
| In the name of THE UNITED STATES | ) Civil Action# 13-4614 |
| ) | |
| v. | ) |
| ) | |
| Kathleen Kane | ) |
| Pennsylvania Attorney General; | ) |
| and | ) |
| The Attorneys General of the United States | ) |
| ) |
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL KANE’S REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE AND FOR WAIVER OF PRO HAC VICE REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-PENNSYLVANIA DEFENDANTS
was filed in person by the Plaintiffs at The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and is available for viewing and downloading from the Court’s Electronic Case Filing System.
Respectfully,
| /s/ Terance Healy | /s/ Todd Krautheim |
| Warrington, PA 18976 | Doylestown, PA 18901 |
PDF Version: http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/CCF09112013_0001.pdf
Response to Attorney General Kathleen Kane's Request for Extension/Pro Hac Vice Waiver
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA |
| Terance Healy | ) |
| Todd M. Krautheim | ) |
| In the name of THE UNITED STATES | ) Civil Action# 13-4614 |
| ) | |
| v. | ) |
| ) | |
| Kathleen Kane | ) |
| Pennsylvania Attorney General; | ) |
| and | ) |
| The Attorneys General of the United States | ) |
| ) |
PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL KANE’S REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF
THE RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE AND FOR WAIVER OF PRO HAC VICE
REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-PENNSYLVANIA DEFENDANTS
1. Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane fails to indicate upon whose authority, or necessity, she is requesting an order extending the responsive pleading deadline for the ‘non-Pennsylvania Defendants’.
2. Attorney General Kane anticipates filing a Motion to Dismiss citing standard procedural defenses which suggest that the lack of subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claim; lack of personal jurisdiction, insufficient process and/or insufficient service of process; and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
3. The Plaintiffs affirm and reassert the information provided in the initial pleading on August 8, 2013 with regard to jurisdiction invoked under 28 USC 1331, 1343 and 1345; Venue; Service pursuant to Rule 5.1(a)(2); and their claim to which relief can be granted – the restoration of constitutionally protected rights.
4. Attorney General Kane is mistaken that the ‘non-Pennsylvania Defendants’ have not been served, or have been insufficiently served with the documents.
5. A Certificate of Service filed September 6, 2013 with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania indicates proof of service to each of the Attorneys General was accomplished and further provides evidence indicating
- the (1) mailing on August 13, 2013;
- the (2) Certified Mail Receipts indicating acceptance by the United States Postal Service of the documents for delivery to each defendant; and
- the (3) return receipt signature cards confirming delivery of the initial pleading to each defendant.
6. Plaintiffs have challenged the constitutionality of Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information of the Rules of Professional Conduct as the rule causes the complete denial of constitutionally protected rights while subverting justice and corrupting the judiciary.
7. ‘Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information’ has been enacted into law in Pennsylvania and the forty nine other states, the District of Columbia, and the US Virgin Islands. Rule 1.6 has not yet been enacted into law in American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands and Puerto Rico.
8. The Attorneys General have been served with the Civil Action/Challenge pursuant to Rule 5.1(a)(2) as a state statute is being challenged.
9. The Plaintiff’s acknowledge Attorney General Kane’s statement that the Attorneys General are not responsible for enacting or enforcing rules such as Rule 1.6 and that “the Pennsylvania Attorney General does not enact and has no authority to enforce the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct.”
10. The dismissive and deliberate lack of authority is by design. The subsequent lack of any enforcement is intentional. The inability of the legislature to address such matters is evident. These are the symptoms which predict and indicate the loss of constitutionally protected rights to litigants.
11. The Attorneys General are requested and encouraged to provide the identity of the person(s), author(s), contractor(s), or organization(s) responsible for enacting and enforcing Rule 1.6 in their respective state as their action, or inaction, has resulted in the loss of constitutionally protected rights for litigants without recourse.
12. Rule 1.6 does not directly apply to the Pro Se Plaintiffs, but it indirectly results in their loss of constitutionally protected rights.
13. Rule 1.6 does apply to lawyers, the judiciary, the court administrators, the disciplinary boards, the judicial conduct boards, many levels of law enforcement, the state legislature, the Attorneys General and the Governors.
14. The effect of the mandate to follow Rule 1.6 results in a lawful failure to address misconduct.
15. The lawful misconduct evolves into crime and corruption which is not addressed, acknowledged or prosecuted creating the unconstitutional loss of rights, while adversely affecting the integrity of the judiciary, negatively impacting the legal profession, and subverts the legislature who is powerless to take any action to address the rule.
16. Attorney General Kane recently stated that she is responsible to enforce the law, and that she is a lawyer who is responsible to follow the Rules of Professional Conduct.
17. Rules 1.6 makes it lawful, and mandatory, for Attorney General Kane to ignore criminal actions and organizations within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania when they relate to lawyers, the judiciary, the court administrators, the disciplinary boards, the judicial conduct boards, many levels of law enforcement, the state legislature, herself and the Governor.
18. Criminal activity is incorrectly dismissed by the Attorney General and all levels of law enforcement as a lack of jurisdiction where they have jurisdiction, but they lack ability to take lawful action to address the crimes protected by Rule 1.6.
19. Plaintiffs concur with Attorney General Kane’s request for a courtesy waiver of pro hac vice requirements for ‘non-Pennsylvania Defendants’ as it indeed promotes their goal of a ‘just, speedy and inexpensive determination’ of this action.
The Plaintiffs look forward to working with the Attorneys General to address this challenge as our goals are not in opposition and the task before us is great.
The Plaintiffs view the Attorneys General not as adversaries, but fellow patriots, who can see and respect a sincere interest in returning the integrity and reputation of the judiciary and the judicial system, delivering to the legislature the ability to perform the duties of their position to manage the law, and restore the rights of all citizens in the United States.
Respectfully,
| /s/ Terance Healy | /s/ Todd Krautheim |
| Warrington, PA 18976 | Doylestown, PA 18901 |
| UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA |
| Terance Healy | ) |
| Todd M. Krautheim | ) |
| In the name of THE UNITED STATES | ) Civil Action# 13-4614 |
| ) | |
| v. | ) |
| ) | |
| Kathleen Kane | ) |
| Pennsylvania Attorney General; | ) |
| and | ) |
| The Attorneys General of the United States | ) |
| ) |
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Plaintiffs hereby certify that on September 10, 2013, a copy of the
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL KANE’S REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE AND FOR WAIVER OF PRO HAC VICE REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-PENNSYLVANIA DEFENDANTS
was filed in person by the Plaintiffs at
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
and is available for viewing and downloading from the Court’s Electronic Case Filing System.
Respectfully,
| /s/ Terance Healy | /s/ Todd Krautheim |
| Warrington, PA 18976 | Doylestown, PA 18901 |
PDF Version:
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/CCF09112013_0001.pdf"]
Monday, September 9, 2013
Response from Kathleen Kane, PA Attorney General
A Response to the Initial Pleading was filed on behalf of Kathleen Kane, Pennsylvania Attorney General by Randall J. Henzes, Deputy Attorney General and Gregory R. Heuhauser, Chief Deputy Attorney General.
One might hope that they represent the Attorney General better than they misrepresent the Plaintiffs.
A boilerplate dismissal was expected and delivered couched inside their request for more time to respond to the initial filing, with some confusion regarding their activity - unrequested? usurped? - to assume responsibility for every defendant in the matter and requesting waivers - again acting without request - on jurisdictional necessities.
Initial appearance that this contradicts their proposal of financial and judicial economy as there is no authorization to act on behalf of the other defendants.
The failure of the waivers to come from each defendant additionally provide basis for an appeal by any of the defendants prevented from participation by usurped authority of the attorneys for the PA Attorney General, or by order of the Court granting such authority to the attorneys for the PA Attorney General. 55 appeals going to the US Court of Appeals would not be financially economical or judicially practical.
Each Attorney Generals' responsibility to respond is a necessity which cannot be usurped or subverted by courteous offers requesting waivers and representation by the counsel representing Kathleen Kane.
Where ALL 56 Attorneys General have been properly served with the Constitutional Challenge, it would be reasonable to expect their timely response to the pleading.
http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Response20130906a.pdf
http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Response20130906b.pdf
http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Response20130906c.pdf
Certificate of Service to All US Attorneys General
The Certificate of Service for the initial pleading was filed upon completion of service to ALL 56 Attorneys General.
The document was filed in person at the US District Court in Philadelphia as plaintiffs have not yet been granted permission to file electronically.
The document demonstrates service, delivery and receipt of the initial pleading by each Attorney General.
PDF Version
http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Initial-Pleading-Cerificate-of-Service.pdf
Sunday, September 8, 2013
Response from Kathleen Kane, Pennsylvania Attorney General
A Response to the Initial Pleading was filed on behalf of Kathleen Kane, Pennsylvania Attorney General by Randall J. Henzes, Deputy Attorney General and Gregory R. Heuhauser, Chief Deputy Attorney General.
One might hope that they represent the Attorney General better than they misrepresent the Plaintiffs.
A boilerplate dismissal was expected and delivered couched inside their request for more time to respond to the initial filing, with some confusion regarding their activity - unrequested? usurped? - to assume responsibility for every defendant in the matter and requesting waivers - again acting without request - on jurisdictional necessities.
Initial appearance that this contradicts their proposal of financial and judicial economy as there is no authorization to act on behalf of the other defendants. The failure of the waivers to come from each defendant additionally provide basis for an appeal by any of the defendants prevented from participation by usurped authority of the attorneys for the PA Attorney General, or by order of the Court granting such authority to the attorneys for the PA Attorney General. 55 appeals going to the US Court of Appeals would not be financially economical or judicially practical. Each Attorney Generals' responsibility to respond is a necessity which cannot be usurped or subverted by courteous offers requesting waivers and representation by the counsel representing Kathleen Kane.
Where ALL 56 Attorneys General have been properly served with the Constitutional Challenge, it would be reasonable to expect their timely response to the pleading.
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Response20130906a.pdf"]
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Response20130906b.pdf"]
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Response20130906c.pdf"]
One might hope that they represent the Attorney General better than they misrepresent the Plaintiffs.
A boilerplate dismissal was expected and delivered couched inside their request for more time to respond to the initial filing, with some confusion regarding their activity - unrequested? usurped? - to assume responsibility for every defendant in the matter and requesting waivers - again acting without request - on jurisdictional necessities.
Initial appearance that this contradicts their proposal of financial and judicial economy as there is no authorization to act on behalf of the other defendants. The failure of the waivers to come from each defendant additionally provide basis for an appeal by any of the defendants prevented from participation by usurped authority of the attorneys for the PA Attorney General, or by order of the Court granting such authority to the attorneys for the PA Attorney General. 55 appeals going to the US Court of Appeals would not be financially economical or judicially practical. Each Attorney Generals' responsibility to respond is a necessity which cannot be usurped or subverted by courteous offers requesting waivers and representation by the counsel representing Kathleen Kane.
Where ALL 56 Attorneys General have been properly served with the Constitutional Challenge, it would be reasonable to expect their timely response to the pleading.
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Response20130906a.pdf"]
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Response20130906b.pdf"]
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Response20130906c.pdf"]
Certificate of Service - Initial Pleading
The Certificate of Service for the initial pleading was filed upon completion of service to ALL 56 Attorneys General.
The document was filed in person at the US District Court in Philadelphia as plaintiffs have not yet been granted permission to file electronically.
The document demonstrates service, delivery and receipt of the initial pleading by each Attorney General.
Initial Pleading Cerificate of Service
The document was filed in person at the US District Court in Philadelphia as plaintiffs have not yet been granted permission to file electronically.
The document demonstrates service, delivery and receipt of the initial pleading by each Attorney General.
Initial Pleading Cerificate of Service
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
You've been served.
As of September 4, 2013, the USPS reports that ALL Attorneys General have received and signed for the certified documents relating to the Constitutional Challenge.
The first was the first state - Delaware.
The last was the farthest - American Samoa.
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/0019.pdf"]
0019 Pennsylvania
0026 Alabama
0033 Alaska
0040 American Samoa
0057 Arizona
0064 Arkansas
0071 California
0088 Colorado
0095 Connecticutt
0101 Delaware
0118 District of Columbia
0125 Florida
0132 Georgia
0149 Guam
0156 Hawaii
0163 Idaho
0170 Illinois
0187 Indiana
0194 Iowa
0200 Kansas
0217 Kentucky
0224 Louisiana
0231 Maine
0248 Maryland
0255 Massachusetts
0262 Michigan
0279 Minnesota
0286 Mississippi
0293 Missouri
0309 Montana
0316 Nebraska
0323 Nevada
0330 New Hampshire
0347 New Jersey
0354 New Mexico
0361 New York
0378 North Carolina
0385 North Dakota
0392 Northern Mariana Islands
0408 Ohio
0415 Oklahoma
0422 Oregon
0439 Puerto Rico
0446 Rhode Island
0453 South Carolina
0460 South Dakota
0477 Tennessee
0484 Texas
0491 Utah
0507 Vermont
0514 Virgin Islands
0521 Virginia
0538 Washington
0545 West Virginia
0552 Wisconsin
0569 Wyoming
The last was the farthest - American Samoa.
[gview file="http://work2bdone.com/live/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/0019.pdf"]
0019 Pennsylvania
0026 Alabama
0033 Alaska
0040 American Samoa
0057 Arizona
0064 Arkansas
0071 California
0088 Colorado
0095 Connecticutt
0101 Delaware
0118 District of Columbia
0125 Florida
0132 Georgia
0149 Guam
0156 Hawaii
0163 Idaho
0170 Illinois
0187 Indiana
0194 Iowa
0200 Kansas
0217 Kentucky
0224 Louisiana
0231 Maine
0248 Maryland
0255 Massachusetts
0262 Michigan
0279 Minnesota
0286 Mississippi
0293 Missouri
0309 Montana
0316 Nebraska
0323 Nevada
0330 New Hampshire
0347 New Jersey
0354 New Mexico
0361 New York
0378 North Carolina
0385 North Dakota
0392 Northern Mariana Islands
0408 Ohio
0415 Oklahoma
0422 Oregon
0439 Puerto Rico
0446 Rhode Island
0453 South Carolina
0460 South Dakota
0477 Tennessee
0484 Texas
0491 Utah
0507 Vermont
0514 Virgin Islands
0521 Virginia
0538 Washington
0545 West Virginia
0552 Wisconsin
0569 Wyoming
To those who might oppose the Constitutional Challenge...
The Challenge does not insist on the belief that it is an adversarial challenge.
There is no reason to believe that the State Attorneys General will not want the reintroduction of the integrity of the judiciary, the return to the legislature of their ability to do their job, and the restoration of the rights of every citizen.
Perhaps I am idealized into believing that not all government officials want injustice to persist. I assure you any response which does not wish this to happen will be met with the simple question.
WHY?
There is no reason to believe that the State Attorneys General will not want the reintroduction of the integrity of the judiciary, the return to the legislature of their ability to do their job, and the restoration of the rights of every citizen.
Perhaps I am idealized into believing that not all government officials want injustice to persist. I assure you any response which does not wish this to happen will be met with the simple question.
WHY?
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Genuine Title - Fraudulent Conveyance of Title
| UPDATE: October 29, 2013. Genuine Title has failed to respond to a subpoena for the documents used in the fraudulent conveyance of my home. |
| If Genuine Title participated in a fraudulent transaction concerning your home. Contact the authorities, and let me know. Considering fraudulent documents seem to get a free pass and suddenly disappaear even when submitted as evidence in hearings, and then fail to show up in the Superior Court when ordered to be produced... The ability of lawyers and judges to hide each others 'misconduct' seems to have no boundaries. It will now be necessary to issue Federal Court Orders to produce the documents relating to the fraudulent sale of my home. There must be some very interesting frauds to be found. The participation in it seems to have been done with great enthusiasm. |
| And considering that a lawyer by the name of Valerie Angst, aka Valerie Rosenbluth, aka Valerie Park among other combos of the names almost exclusively dealt with foreclosures prior to 2007 when she began Healy v Healy... It would seem she knows how to manipulate other areas of misconduct... and how to conceal her fraudulent paper trail. |
Quoting Terance Healy
Jay,
Produce the court orders you allege authorized the fraudulent conveyance of my home. Were they authorized by the real estate connected Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio?
Did the orders also indicate to NEVER permit me to discover their existence or content?
BECAUSE THEY WERE ORDERED BY A TERRORIST JUDGE ABUSING POWER UNDER COLOR OF LAW IN VIOLATION OF CONSTITIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS?
Produce the documents. if they exist.
Terance
Quoting Terance Healy
Right, Jay. You didn't say that first though.
Please provide copies of the file. Otherwise, I will obtain the information by subpeonas and seek federal investigation and depositions of everyone in your company relating to the fraudulent sale of my home - which will also question any involvement in other transactions where peoples homes were stolen out from under them without due process in violation of their federally protected constitutional rights.
Terance
Quoting Jay Zukerberg
The check was for a recording overage that's all.
Sent from my iPhone
Quoting Terance Healy
Your failure to produce the court order, and failure to file the court order, and failure to follow the court order is yet another indication of your participation in the fraudulent conveyance of my home.
A judge will not be worried about your position or lack of proper paperwork. See attached Federal Civil Action.
Your failure to explain the check makes your fraud appear intentional. Or do you have a court order telling you to issue the check also?
Terance
Quoting Jay Zukerberg
Sir you will need to go through the courts as we went off the courts instructions as well. There is nothing the title company can do. If the court order was fraud then you will need to talk to the judge.
Sent from my iPhone
Quoting Terance Healy
Your continued failure to respond in any form indicates willful participation in the fraudulent conveyance of my home.
Quoting terance@work2bdone.com:
I am in receipt of a check for $ 159.50 and have no clue as to why It was sent to me.
I have not sold my home at 110 Banbury Avenue, North Wales, PA 19454
I have not had any dealings with Genuine Title except to inform you 2 years ago that you participated in the fraudulent conveyance of my home. At that time, I waited for a call back from Jodi. It never came.
I called earlier this week, and again no one - not even Jodi - called back.
The transfer of the deed to the property has been confirmed to be defective by the Montgomery County Recorder of Deeds and represents a fraudulent conveyance for the following reasons:
- Fraud. A person represents that they are the true owner of the land, but they are not.
- Forgery. A person has given a forged deed.
- A Bad Power of Attorney. A person claims to have power of attorney but does not have the legal authority to act for another person; the power of attorney is invalid; the power of attorney is not properly executed or notarized.
- Misrepresentation of marital status.
- Undue Influence.
- Mistakes were made recording legal documents.
- Falsified title records.
- Representations on legal documents are invalid or incorrect
I have begun legal proceedings to have the people trespassing in my house removed. Could this be why you sent me a check for $159.50? So that it would appear (If I were to cash it.) as though I was a party to the transaction.
I assure you I wasn't. The real estate agent at Keller Williams, Chris Grucella, also participated in the fraud and was fully aware of the crime being committed. Her manager also prevented me from knowing any information about the sale. Documents were filed in the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas which clearly demonstrate the deliberate criminal and fraudulent activity. Docket #2007-12477
Instead of sending me bogus checks, I would appreciate copies of all paperwork involved in the transaction immediately.
Thank you,
Terance Healy
c/o 871 Mustang Road
Warrington, PA 18976
| jay@genuinetitleinc.com, sbondroff@genuinetitleinc.com, afink@genuinetitleinc.com, cdavis@genuinetitleinc.com, critter@genuinetitleinc.com, kblackburn@genuinetitleinc.com, dpfister@genuinetitleinc.com, mpiezonki@genuinetitleinc.com, kminter@genuinetitleinc.com, rsmith@genuinetitleinc.com, scook@genuinetitleinc.com, bkool@genuinetitleinc.com, jnemtsev@genuinetitleinc.com, gwetherson@genuinetitleinc.com, hneal@genuinetitleinc.com, mrothenberger@genuinetitleinc.com, mwolfe@genuinetitleinc.com, dobrien@genuinetitleinc.com, klewis@genuinetitleinc.com, rlawton@genuinetitleinc.com, creno@genuinetitleinc.com, jodi@genuinetitleinc.com, chertsch@genuinetitleinc.com, emaildocs@genuinetitleinc.com, alisona@genuinetitleinc.com, jgelman@genuinetitleinc.com, ccook@genuinetitleinc.com, cmilstread@genuinetitleinc.com, agregory@genuinetitleinc.com, mduncan@genuinetitleinc.com, aross@genuinetitleinc.com, amcdonald@genuinetitleinc.com, mcaputo@genuinetitleinc.com, ktesterman@genuinetitleinc.com, msalkin@genuinetitleinc.com, bwolfe@genuinetitleinc.com, tstright@genuinetitleinc.com, nwhite@genuinetitleinc.com, jayl@genuinetitleinc.com, aloeffel@genuinetitleinc.com, tmowrey@genuinetitleinc.com, psidle@genuinetitleinc.co, jbach@genuinetitleinc.com, bglickstein@genuinetitleinc.com, afiorani@genuinetitleinc.com, jcassell@genuinetitleinc.com |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)