This Week's Correspondence

Don't say you were not informed. Where Republicans are continuing to block the web site, that doesn't seem very productive. There's quite a bit of information they are ignoring.

You would have to wonder how they expect someone made homeless and destitute would be able to write, respond, and send hundreds of letters, emails, faxes and tweets and all that litigation paperwork.

Annihilate the target. They failed at obtaining my suicide... EPIC FAILURE.

President Barack Obama

Senator Patrick Toomey
Senator Robert P. Casey

Governor Robert Bentley of Alabama
Governor Sean Parnell of Alaska (Puget Sound School of Law)
Governor Mike Beebe of Arkansas (University of Arkansas)
Governor Lolo Letalu Matalasi Moliga
Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona
Governor Jerry Brown of California (Yale)
Governor John Hickenlooper of Colorado
Governor Dan Malloy of Connecticut (Boston College)
Governor Jack Markell of Delaware
Governor Rick Scott of Florida (Southern Methodist University)
Governor Nathan Deal of Georgia (Walter F. George School of Law)
Governor Eddie Baza Calvo of Guam
Governor Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii
Governor C.L. Butch Otter of Idaho
Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois (Northwestern University)
Governor Mike Pence of Indiana (Indiana University)
Governor Terry Branstad of Iowa
Governor Sam Brownback of Kansas (University of Kansas)
Governor Steven L. Beshear of Kentucky (University of Kentucky)
Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana
Governor Paul LePage of Maine
Governor Martin O’Malley of Maryland
Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts (Harvard)
Governor Rick Snyder of Michigan (University of Michigan)
Governor Mark Dayton of Minnesota
Governor Phil Bryant of Mississippi
Governor Jeremiah W. Nixon of Missouri (University of Missouri)
Governor Steve Bullock of Montana (Columbia University)
Governor Dave Heineman of Nebraska
Governor Bruce Sandoval of Nevada ( )
Governor Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire (Northeastern School of Law)
Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey (Seton Hall University)
Governor Susana Martinez of New Mexico ( )
Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York (Albany Law School)
Governor Pat McCrory of North Carolina
Governor Jack Dalrymple of North Dakota
Governor Eloy Inos of Northern Mariana Islands
Governor John Kasich of Ohio
Governor Mary Fallin of Oklahoma
Governor John Kitzhaber of Oregon
Governor Tom Corbett of Pennsylvania (St Mary’s University School of Law)
Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla of Puerto Rico (Interamerican University)
Governor Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island
Governor Nikki Haley of South Carolina
Governor Denis Daugaard of South Dakota (Northwestern University)
Governor Bill Haslam of Tennessee
Governor Rick Perry of Texas
Governor Gary Herbert of Utah
Governor Peter Shumlin of Vermont
Governor Terry McAuliffe of Virginia (Georgetown Law School)
Governor John deJongh, Jr of the US Virgin Islands
Governor Jay Inslee of Washington (Willamette University)
Governor Earl Ray Tomblin of West Virginia
Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin
Governor Matt Mead of Wyoming (University of Wyoming)

United States Senators
Richard Shelby - Alabama
Jeff Sessions - Alabama
Lisa Murkowski - Alaska
Mark Begich - Alaska
John McCain - Arizona
Jeff Flake - Arizona
Mark Pryor - Arkansas
John Boozman - Arkansas
Dianne Feinstein - California
Barbara Boxer - California
Mark Udall - Colorado
Michael Bennet - Colorado
Richard Blumenthal - Connecticut
Chris Murphy - Connecticut
Tom Carper - Delaware
Chris Coons - Delaware
Bill Nelson - Florida
Marco Rubio - Florida
Saxby Chambliss - Georgia
Johnny Isakson - Georgia
Brian Schatz - Hawaii
Mazie Hirono - Hawaii
Mike Crapo - Idaho
Jim Risch - Idaho
Dick Durbin - Illinois
Mark Kirk - Illinois
Dan Coats - Indiana
Joe Donnelly - Indiana
Chuck Grassley - Iowa
Tom Harkin - Iowa
Pat Roberts - Kansas
Jerry Moran - Kansas
Mitch McConnell - Kentucky
Rand Paul - Kentucky
Mary Landrieu - Louisiana
David Vitter - Louisiana
Susan Collins - Maine
Angus King - Maine
Barbara Mikulski - Maryland
Ben Cardin - Maryland
Elizabeth Warren - Massachusetts
Ed Markey - Massachusetts
Carl Levin - Michigan
Debbie Stabenow - Michigan
Amy Klobuchar - Minnesota
Al Franken - Minnesota
Thad Cochran - Mississippi
Roger Wicker - Mississippi
Claire McCaskill - Missouri
Roy Blunt - Missouri
Jon Tester - Montana
John Walsh - Montana
Mike Johanns - Nebraska
Deb Fischer - Nebraska
Harry Reid - Nevada
Dean Heller - Nevada
Jeanne Shaheen - New Hampshire
Kelly Ayotte - New Hampshire
Bob Menendez - New Jersey
Cory Booker - New Jersey
Tom Udall - New Mexico
Martin Heinrich - New Mexico
Chuck Schumer - New York
Kirsten Gillibrand - New York
Richard Burr - North Carolina
Kay Hagan - North Carolina
John Hoeven - North Dakota
Heidi Heitkamp - North Dakota
Sherrod Brown - Ohio
Rob Portman - Ohio
Jim Inhofe - Oklahoma
Tom Coburn - Oklahoma
Ron Wyden - Oregon
Jeff Merkley - Oregon
Bob Casey, Jr. - Pennsylvania
Pat Toomey - Pennsylvania
Jack Reed - Rhode Island
Sheldon Whitehouse - Rhode Island
Lindsey Graham - South Carolina
Tim Scott - South Carolina
Tim Johnson - South Dakota
John Thune - South Dakota
Lamar Alexander - Tennessee
Bob Corker - Tennessee
John Cornyn - Texas
Ted Cruz - Texas
Orrin Hatch - Utah
Mike Lee - Utah
Patrick Leahy - Vermont
Bernie Sanders - Vermont
Mark Warner - Virginia
Tim Kaine - Virginia
Patty Murray - Washington
Maria Cantwell - Washington
Jay Rockefeller - West Virginia
Joe Manchin - West Virginia
Ron Johnson - Wisconsin
Tammy Baldwin - Wisconsin
Mike Enzi - Wyoming
John Barrasso - Wyoming

SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
Patrick Leahy
Diane Feinstein
Charles Schumer
Dick Durbin
Sheldon Whitehouse
Amy Klobuchar
Al Franken
Christopher Coons
Richerd Blumenthal
Mazie Hirono
CHuck Grassley
Orrin Hatch
Jeff Sessions
Lindsey Graham
John Cornyn
Mike Lee
Ted Cruz
Jeff Flake

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
Bob Goodlatte
F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.
Howard Coble
Lamar Smith
Steve Chabot
Spencer Bachus
Darrell Issa
J. Randy Forbes
Steve King
Trent Franks
Louie Gohmert
Jim Jordan
Ted Poe
Jason Chaffetz
Thomas Marino
Trey Gowdy
Raul Labrador
Blake Farenthold
George Holding
Doug Collins
Ron DeSantis
John Conyers, Jr.
Jerrold Nadler
Bobby Scott
Zoe Lofgren
Sheila Jackson Lee
Steve Cohen
Hank Johnson
Pedro Pierluisi
Judy Chu
Ted Deutch
Luis V. Gutierrez
Karen Bass
Cedric Richmond
Suzan K. DelBene
Joe Garcia
Hakeem Jeffries
David Cicilline

United States House of Representatives (Pennsylvania)
Robert Brady
Chaka Fattah
Mike Kelly
Scott Perry
Glenn W. Thompson
Jim Gerlach
Pat Meehan
Michael Fitzpatrick
Bill Shuster
Tom Marino
Lou Barletta
Keith Rothfus
Allyson Schwartz
Mike Doyle
Charles Dent
Joseph Pitts
Matthew Cartright
Tim Murphy

Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee
Senator Stewart Greenleaf, Chariman
John. C. Rafferty, Jr.
Joseph B. Scarnati, III
Richard L. Alloway, II
John H. Eichelberger, Jr.
John R. Gordner
Dominic Pileggi
Randy Vulakovich
Gene Yaw
Daylin Leach
Lisa M. Boscola
Lawrence M. Farnese, Jr.
Wayne D. Fontana
Michael J. Stack

THE FAX - THE FAX - THE FAX IS ON FIRE!

Letter to US Representatives from Pennsylvania

July 30, 2014

United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20510

Robert Brady, Chaka Fattah, Mike Kelly, Scott Perry, Glenn W. Thompson, Jim Gerlach, Pat Meehan, Michael Fitzpatrick, Bill Shuster, Tom Marino, Lou Barletta, Keith Rothfus, Allyson Schwartz, Mike Doyle, Charles Dent, Joseph Pitts, Matthew Cartright, Tim Murphy
For Distribution to all members.

Dear Congressmen/Congresswomen,

Please permit us to present a document sent to President Barack Obama which has national impact relating to the judiciary. The situation has evolved to where it defies any corrective action by the judiciary.

In August 2013, a Constitutional Challenge to Rule 1.6 was filed and served upon the Attorney General for every state, fifty six in all, to address a law enacted by the state supreme courts without benefit of the state legislature or the signature of any governor. The unconstitutional aspects were not taken into consideration during construction of the law.

Every state attorney general failed to respond to the summons and challenge by the deadline, yet the district court refused to accept or acknowledge their deliberate default action. The Challenge was concealed and then dismissed based on unsubstantiated doctrine and fictional misinformation. That decision only served to harm the integrity of the court. The very integrity which the Challenge had sought to restore while re-securing the constitutional rights of all Americans.

The national foreclosure crisis is an example of Rule 1.6 confidentiality undermining the judiciary and removing people from their homes based on fraudulent and robo-signed documentation. Pennsylvania’s Kids for Cash scandal demonstrated Rule 1.6 even more cleanly.

The judiciary is mandated to follow the very law which is being challenged and to protect the integrity of the court by sacrificing the integrity of the court. A seriously flawed logic which prevents lawyers and law enforcement from addressing judicial corruption and injustice within the state and federal judicial system. The federal courts follow the local (state) Rules of Professional Conduct where Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information is an indirect law which undermines the government and trumps EVERY law including the US Constitution.

Addressing the injustice of Rule 1.6 is an inevitability. Facing it responsibly will affect the public reaction to this realization. We ask your involvement, or where your direct action is ‘unlawful’, whatever assistance of support and resources which will permit us to succeed for the betterment of the nation in the best interests of every American.

We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss the issue in further detail.

Sincerely,


Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim

Letter to Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee

July 31, 2014

Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee
Senator Stewart Greenleaf, Chariman
Harrisburg, PA

Committee Members
John. C. Rafferty, Jr., Joseph B. Scarnati, III, Richard L. Alloway, II, John H. Eichelberger, Jr., John R. Gordner, Dominic Pileggi, Randy Vulakovich, Gene Yaw, Daylin Leach, Lisa M. Boscola, Lawrence M. Farnese, Jr., Wayne D. Fontana, Michael J. Stack

For Distribution to all members and all Senators and Representatives.


Senators,

Please permit us to present a document sent to President Barack Obama which has national impact relating to the judiciary. The situation has evolved to where it defies any corrective action by the judiciary. Since 2013, Senator McIlhinney had been informed and holding meetings with us on this issue.

In August 2013, a Constitutional Challenge to Rule 1.6 was filed and served upon the Attorney General for every state, fifty six in all, to address a law enacted by the state supreme courts without benefit of the state legislature or the signature of any governor. The unconstitutional aspects were not taken into consideration during construction of the law.

Every state attorney general failed to respond to the summons and challenge by the deadline, yet the district court refused to accept or acknowledge their deliberate default action. The Challenge was concealed and then dismissed based on unsubstantiated doctrine and fictional misinformation. That decision only served to harm the integrity of the court. The very integrity which the Challenge had sought to restore while re-securing the constitutional rights of all Americans.

The national foreclosure crisis is an example of Rule 1.6 confidentiality undermining the judiciary and removing people from their homes based on fraudulent and robo-signed documentation. Pennsylvania’s Kids for Cash scandal demonstrated Rule 1.6 even more cleanly.

The judiciary is mandated to follow the very law which is being challenged and to protect the integrity of the court by sacrificing the integrity of the court. A seriously flawed logic which prevents lawyers and law enforcement from addressing judicial corruption and injustice within the state and federal judicial system. The federal courts follow the local (state) Rules of Professional Conduct where Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information is an indirect law which undermines the government and trumps EVERY law including the US Constitution.

Addressing the injustice of Rule 1.6 is an inevitability. Facing it responsibly will affect the public reaction to this realization. We ask your involvement, or where your direct action is ‘unlawful’, whatever assistance of support and resources which will permit us to succeed for the betterment of the nation in the best interests of every American.

We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss the issue in further detail.

Sincerely,

Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim

Letter to Senate Committee on the Judiciary

July 30, 2014

Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Sen. Patrick Leahy, Chairman
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

For Distribution to all members.


Dear Senators,

Please permit us to present a document sent to President Barack Obama which has national impact relating to the judiciary. The situation has evolved to where it defies any corrective action by the judiciary.

In August 2013, a Constitutional Challenge to Rule 1.6 was filed and served upon the Attorney General for every state, fifty six in all, to address a law enacted by the state supreme courts without benefit of the state legislature or the signature of any governor. The unconstitutional aspects were not taken into consideration during construction of the law.

Every state attorney general failed to respond to the summons and challenge by the deadline, yet the district court refused to accept or acknowledge their deliberate default action. The Challenge was concealed and then dismissed based on unsubstantiated doctrine and fictional misinformation. That decision only served to harm the integrity of the court. The very integrity which the Challenge had sought to restore while re-securing the constitutional rights of all Americans.

The national foreclosure crisis is an example of Rule 1.6 confidentiality undermining the judiciary and removing people from their homes based on fraudulent and robo-signed documentation. Pennsylvania’s Kids for Cash scandal demonstrated Rule 1.6 even more cleanly.

The judiciary is mandated to follow the very law which is being challenged and to protect the integrity of the court by sacrificing the integrity of the court. A seriously flawed logic which prevents lawyers and law enforcement from addressing judicial corruption and injustice within the state and federal judicial system. The federal courts follow the local (state) Rules of Professional Conduct where Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information is an indirect law which undermines the government and trumps EVERY law including the US Constitution.

Addressing the injustice of Rule 1.6 is an inevitability. Facing it responsibly will affect the public reaction to this realization. We ask your involvement, or where your direct action is ‘unlawful’, whatever assistance of support and resources which will permit us to succeed for the betterment of the nation in the best interests of every American.

We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss the issue in further detail.

Sincerely,


Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim


PDF version
PDF Letter to President
PDF Attachment

Letter to House Committee on the Judiciary

July 30, 2014

House Committee on the Judiciary July 30, 2014
Rep. Bob Goodlatte, Chairman
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20510

For Distribution to all members.


Dear Congressmen/Congresswomen,

Please permit us to present a document sent to President Barack Obama which has national impact relating to the judiciary. The situation has evolved to where it defies any corrective action by the judiciary.

In August 2013, a Constitutional Challenge to Rule 1.6 was filed and served upon the Attorney General for every state, fifty six in all, to address a law enacted by the state supreme courts without benefit of the state legislature or the signature of any governor. The unconstitutional aspects were not taken into consideration during construction of the law.

Every state attorney general failed to respond to the summons and challenge by the deadline, yet the district court refused to accept or acknowledge their deliberate default action. The Challenge was concealed and then dismissed based on unsubstantiated doctrine and fictional misinformation. That decision only served to harm the integrity of the court. The very integrity which the Challenge had sought to restore while re-securing the constitutional rights of all Americans.

The national foreclosure crisis is an example of Rule 1.6 confidentiality undermining the judiciary and removing people from their homes based on fraudulent and robo-signed documentation. Pennsylvania’s Kids for Cash scandal demonstrated Rule 1.6 even more cleanly.

The judiciary is mandated to follow the very law which is being challenged and to protect the integrity of the court by sacrificing the integrity of the court. A seriously flawed logic which prevents lawyers and law enforcement from addressing judicial corruption and injustice within the state and federal judicial system. The federal courts follow the local (state) Rules of Professional Conduct where Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information is an indirect law which undermines the government and trumps EVERY law including the US Constitution.

Addressing the injustice of Rule 1.6 is an inevitability. Facing it responsibly will affect the public reaction to this realization. We ask your involvement, or where your direct action is ‘unlawful’, whatever assistance of support and resources which will permit us to succeed for the betterment of the nation in the best interests of every American.

We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss the issue in further detail.

Sincerely,


Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim

PDF version
PDF Letter to President
PDF Attachment

Rule 1.6 has NOT been Misinterpreted or Misunderstood

The Constitutional Challenge is NOT misinterpreting or misunderstanding Rule 1.6.

These are the dismissive suggestions of lawyers with regard to the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6. It is what they tell people who ask them about it. They offer no further information to back up their statement. They further indicate that we will never succeed. (and neglect to explain.)

These lawyers are WRONG.

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 backs up every statement. Every post on the web has supporting documentation which corroborates every statement.

Within Pennsylvania we have four clear examples of Corruption and Injustice where the actions of the judiciary and lawyers involved in the matters have defied any logical and acceptable explanation. When Rule 1.6 is applied the actions of law enforcement are clearly explained.
- Kids for Cash
- Jerry Sandusky prosecution & the Sandusky Report
- Foreclosures


How about we have a discussion? a debate? in Public? on Television? Anytime... Anywhere...


Let's see who understands the improperly enacted and unconstitutional law - lawyers mandated to say nothing about it, or two non-lawyers who can demonstrate the mandate for lawyers to conspire to conceal injustice and corruption.

As those same lawyers are MANDATED to silence/confidentiality of information even where it is about Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information, We will see who is misinterpreting misunderstanding OR misinforming.

And we will see who gets disciplined for discussing the issue.

Rule 1.6 is frequently the subject of law review articles. Usually those articles are also addressing the problems with the Rule which cause it to undermine undermine morality, ethics, personal integrity. AND TO UNDERMINE JUSTICE. Search for those keywords in your favorite search engine. You may be surprised at the volume of material. The step that seems to be missing from any article is the unconstitutional aspect and the inescapable situation it causes for the victims of judicial corruption and injustice.

Addressing the injustice of Rule 1.6 is an inevitability. Facing it responsibly will affect the public reaction to this realization.

Where substantive rights are violated, directly or collaterally, the law is repugnant to the Constitution and a nullity.

The judiciary have buried an unconstitutional law so deep in the law books that they never expected any non-lawyer to find it, and survive to prove it while being denied their constitutional rights and the protection of the law.

No matter how deeply the mandate of Rule 1.6 is buried and concealed, THE LAW MAY NOT VIOLATE SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS.

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 has been presented to the President of the United States, the United States Congress and the Supreme Court of the United States.

WE WELCOME YOUR QUESTIONS AND WILL ENDEAVOR TO ANSWER EACH. COMMENTS are not published on this site, but comments are reviewed and responded to on a regular basis.

Fireworks!

Oh, there's going to be fireworks (fireworks!)
On the Fourth of July (red, white, and blue!)
Red, white, and blue fireworks
Like diamonds in the sky. (diamonds in the sky!)
We're going to shoot the entire works on fireworks
That really show, oh yeah
We declared our liberty 200 years ago

Yeah!

In 1776 (fireworks!)
There were fireworks too (red, white, and blue!)
The original colonists
You know their tempers blew (They really blew!)
Like Thomas Paine once wrote:
It's only common sense (only common sense)
That if a government won't give you your basic rights
You'd better get another government

And though some people tried to fight it
Well, a committee was formed to write it:
Benjamin Franklin, Philip Livingston
John Adams, Roger Sherman, Thomas Jefferson
They got it done (Oh yes they did!)
The Declaration, uh-huh-huh
The Declaration of Independence (oh yeah!)
In seventeen hundred seventy six (right on!)
The Continental Congress said that we were free (we're free!)
Said we had the right of life and liberty
. . . And the pursuit of happiness!

Oh, when England heard the news (kerpow!)
They blew their stack (they really blew their cool!)
But the colonists lit the fuse
There'd be no turning back (no turning back!)
They'd had enough of injustice now
But even if it really hurts, oh yeah
If you don't give us our freedom now
You're going to see some fireworks!

And on the Fourth of July they signed it
And 56 names underlined it
And now to honor those first 13 states
We turn the sky into a birthday cake
They got it done (oh yes, they did!)
The Declaration, uh-huh-huh
The Declaration of Independence (oh yeah!)
In seventeen hundred seventy six (right on!)
The Continental Congress said that we were free (we're free!)
Said we had the right of life and liberty
. . . And the pursuit of happiness!

We hold these truths to be self-evident
That all men are created equal
And that they are endowed by their creator
With certain inalienable rights
That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

And if there's one thing that makes me happy
Then you know that it's (oh)
There's going to be fireworks!

Governors Updated and Informed

The Governors of the United States have received a letter updating them on the effort and asking for their assistance where their Attorneys General were not permitted to default in the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6.

Many Governors are NOT lawyers obligated to follow Rule 1.6. As such, they are not involved in the conspiracy to prevent this issue from being presented.

The NON-LAWYER Governors have the power to lawfully address the situation and take immediate action in their state.


Governor Robert Bentley of Alabama
Governor Lolo Letalu Matalasi Moliga
Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona
Governor John Hickenlooper of Colorado
Governor Jack Markell of Delaware
Governor Eddie Baza Calvo of Guam
Governor Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii
Governor C.L. Butch Otter of Idaho
Governor Terry Branstad of Iowa
Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana
Governor Paul LePage of Maine
Governor Martin O'Malley of Maryland
Governor Mark Dayton of Minnesota
Governor Phil Bryant of Mississippi
Governor Dave Heineman of Nebraska
Governor Pat McCrory of North Carolina
Governor Jack Dalrymple of North Dakota
Governor Eloy Inos of Northern Mariana Islands
Governor John Kasich of Ohio
Governor Mary Fallin of Oklahoma
Governor John Kitzhaber of Oregon
Governor Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island
Governor Nikki Haley of South Carolina
Governor Bill Haslam of Tennessee
Governor Rick Perry of Texas
Governor Gary Herbert of Utah
Governor Peter Shumlin of Vermont
Governor John deJongh, Jr of the US Virgin Islands
Governor Earl Ray Tomblin of West Virginia
Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin


The following Governors are lawyers OBLIGATED under Rule 1.6 to ignore the Constitutional Rights of citizens while ignoring judicial corruption, crimes and misconduct, and the failure to prosecute crimes of the judiciary and of the legal professionals who might implicate the judiciary.

Governor Sean Parnell of Alaska (Puget Sound School of Law)
Governor Mike Beebe of Arkansas (University of Arkansas)
Governor Jerry Brown of California (Yale)
Governor Dan Malloy of Connecticut (Boston College)
Governor Rick Scott of Florida (Southern Methodist University)
Governor Nathan Deal of Georgia (Walter F. George School of Law)
Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois (Northwestern University)
Governor Mike Pence of Indiana (Indiana University)
Governor Sam Brownback of Kansas (University of Kansas)
Governor Steven L. Beshear of Kentucky (University of Kentucky)
Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts (Harvard)
Governor Rick Snyder of Michigan (University of Michigan)
Governor Jeremiah W. Nixon of Missouri (University of Missouri)
Governor Steve Bullock of Montana (Columbia University)
Governor Bruce Sandoval of Nevada ( )
Governor Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire (Northeastern School of Law)
Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey (Seton Hall University)
Governor Susana Martinez of New Mexico ( )
Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York (Albany Law School)
Governor Tom Corbett of Pennsylvania (St Mary's University School of Law)
Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla of Puerto Rico (Interamerican University)
Governor Denis Daugaard of South Dakota (Northwestern University)
Governor Terry McAuliffe of Virginia (Georgetown Law School)
Governor Jay Inslee of Washington (Willamette University)
Governor Matt Mead of Wyoming (University of Wyoming)

Having a lawyer for a governor places a state under the control of the American Bar Association's Rule 1.6 with all branches of the state government - executive, legislative and judiciary - under the mandate of Rule 1.6 - Confidentiality of Information.

It makes the unconstitutionality of the rule IMPOSSIBLE to lawfully address.

It makes judicial crimes and corruption ILLEGAL to lawfully address. PREVENTING THOSE WHO HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO DO IT AND HAVE TAKEN AN OATH TO THAT EFFECT.

Letter to Senators

July 28, 2014

The Senators of the 113th Congress
Washington, DC 20510

Senators,

Please permit us to update you with a document sent to President Barack Obama. You may have also been informed of this issue by Senator Toomey and Senator Casey of Pennsylvania.

In August 2013, a Constitutional Challenge to Rule 1.6 was filed and served upon the Attorney General for every state, fifty six in all, to address a law enacted by the state supreme courts without benefit of the state legislature or the signature of any governor. The unconstitutional aspects were not taken into consideration during construction of the law.

Every state attorney general failed to respond to the summons and challenge by the deadline, yet the district court refused to accept or acknowledge their deliberate default action. The Challenge was concealed and then dismissed based on unsubstantiated doctrine and fictional misinformation. That decision only served to harm the integrity of the court. The very integrity which the Challenge had sought to restore while re-securing the constitutional rights of all Americans.

The national foreclosure crisis is an example of Rule 1.6 confidentiality undermining the judiciary and removing people from their homes based on fraudulent and robo-signed documentation. Pennsylvania’s Kids for Cash scandal demonstrated Rule 1.6 even more cleanly.

The judiciary is mandated to follow the very law which is being challenged and to protect the integrity of the court by sacrificing the integrity of the court. A seriously flawed logic which prevents lawyers and law enforcement from addressing judicial corruption and injustice within the state and federal judicial system. The federal courts follow the local (state) Rules of Professional Conduct where Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information is an indirect law which undermines the government and trumps EVERY law including the US Constitution.

Addressing the injustice of Rule 1.6 is an inevitability. Facing it responsibly will affect the public reaction to this realization. We ask your involvement, or where your direct action is ‘unlawful’, whatever assistance of support and resources which will permit us to succeed for the betterment of the nation in the best interests of every American.

Sincerely,

Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim

PDF Letter to President
PDF Attachment

Letter to Governors

July 28, 2014

Dear Governor,

Please permit us to update you with a document sent to President Barack Obama.

In August 2013, a Constitutional Challenge to Rule 1.6 was filed and served upon the Attorney General for every state, fifty six in all, to address a law enacted by the state supreme courts without benefit of the state legislature or the signature of any governor. The unconstitutional aspects were not taken into consideration during construction of the law.

Every state attorney general failed to respond to the summons and challenge by the deadline, yet the district court refused to accept or acknowledge their deliberate default action. The Challenge was concealed and then dismissed based on unsubstantiated doctrine and fictional misinformation. That decision only served to harm the integrity of the court. The very integrity which the Challenge had sought to restore while re-securing the constitutional rights of all Americans.

The national foreclosure crisis is an example of Rule 1.6 confidentiality undermining the judiciary and removing people from their homes based on fraudulent and robo-signed documentation. Pennsylvania’s Kids for Cash scandal demonstrated Rule 1.6 even more cleanly.

The judiciary is mandated to follow the very law which is being challenged and to protect the integrity of the court by sacrificing the integrity of the court. A seriously flawed logic which prevents lawyers and law enforcement from addressing judicial corruption and injustice within the state and federal judicial system. The federal courts follow the local (state) Rules of Professional Conduct where Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information is an indirect law which undermines the government and trumps EVERY law including the US Constitution.

Addressing the injustice of Rule 1.6 is an inevitability. Facing it responsibly will affect the public reaction to this realization. We ask your involvement, or where your direct action is ‘unlawful’, whatever assistance of support and resources which will permit us to succeed for the betterment of the nation in the best interests of every American.


Sincerely,



Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim

PDF Letter to President
PDF Attachment

Letter to President Obama

July 28, 2014

Barack Obama
President of the United States
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

Please permit us to officially bring this national issue to your attention.

Operation Greylord – An undercover federal investigation of judicial corruption of an unprecedented magnitude has lead to a conspiracy of incomprehensible scope and magnitude where the judiciary is undermined and justice is denied to millions of Americans while and entire profession of lawyers and law enforcement is mandated to silence/confidentiality which prevents exposure and resolution of the unconstitutional injustice by the government.

The surviving victims of nationwide state and federal judicial corruption and injustice are relegated to (1) BEING HOMELESS/DESTITUTE, (2) INCARCERATION UNDER FALSE PRETENSES or (3) SUICIDE.

An unaffected majority does nothing. A responsible minority witnesses and reacts to the ‘broken’ condition of the government. We SEE the cause. We CAN fix this. There IS a resolution.

The response to Operation Greylord, perpetrated by the American Bar Association and enacted into law by state Supreme Courts in every state over a 25 year period from 1984 (New Jersey) to 2009 (Maine), was a level of corruption by an unchecked and self-policing judiciary giving rise to injustice of a scope and magnitude that ANY government would be unwilling and hesitant to admit.

The United States, the world leader of democracy, has denied the most basic rights of millions of Americans and controlled the media preventing the exposure of the government’s corruption… while doing nothing to address the corruption. There can be no effective reform while Rule 1.6 remains.

Even after presentment to the Judiciary and Government Representatives at state and federal levels, the Government continues to perpetrate a fraud of unfathomable proportions… and continues to deny the citizens of their most basic rights.

Addressing the injustice of Rule 1.6 is an inevitability. Facing it responsibly will affect the public reaction to this realization. Continuing to ignore this national issue is not an alternative. We ask your involvement, or where your direct action is ‘unlawful’, whatever assistance of support and resources which will permit us to succeed for the betterment of the nation in the best interests of every American.

Sincerely,
Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim


PDF Letter to President
PDF Attachment

Letter to Senator Toomey (and Senator Casey too)

July 28, 2014

U.S. Senator Patrick J. Toomey
Eight Penn Center
1628 JFK Blvd, Suite 1702
Philadelphia, PA 19103

U.S. Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr.
2000 Market Street, Suite 610
Philadelphia, PA 19103

Senators,

Please permit us to update you with a document sent to President Obama. A draft of which had already been provided to you on June 18, 2014.

While we can never be certain that our correspondence reaches the President, we again ask that you present the issue directly to the President and to the U.S. Congress.

We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you both to discuss the matter.

We do understand that Senator Casey, as an attorney obligated to take no action in this matter, may continue to deny any meeting requests. One would hope that Senator Casey would be eager to be involved considering his fathers involvement as the Governor of Pennsylvania when the law was improperly and unconstitutionally enacted. In any case we will continue to keep Senator Casey informed so that he is permitted to make his own decisions in regard to taking action to address judicial corruption and injustice.

A meeting to update status of your actions and further actions we are taking would be appreciated. Please contact Todd Krautheim at (215) 290-XXXX.

Sincerely,

Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim

Cc: Philip Innamorato
Kurt Imhof

PDF Letter
PDF Letter to President
PDF Attachment

Senator Charles T. McIlhinney, Jr

A copy of the letter sent to the President, The US Congress and the Supreme Court of the United States was delivered to Pennsylvania Senator Chuck McIlhinney.

Senator McIlhinney has been aware and updated regarding the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 since 2013 when his involvement was requested to inform the Pennsylvania Legislature of the issue.

We have met on several occasions with the Senator and his Chief of Staff and have kept their Doylestown office informed and copied on documents filed in the matter.

We will continue to keep the Senator informed and will share his responses with his Bucks County constituents through this web site.



The package delivered to Senator McIlhinney today included the following: (PDF Version)
Letter To US Government
This is NOT A TEA PARTY
Proposed Disclaimer (Attorney General Kathleen Kane & the Sandusky Report)
Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice
The Rule 1.6 Problem - in two sentences
Marbury, Madison and Rule 1.6
Heroes and Villains

This is NOT A TEA PARTY.

Witness the reality.

Operation Greylord - An undercover federal investigation of judicial corruption of an unprecedented magnitude... leads to the
CONSPIRACY OF INCOMPREHENSIBLE SCOPE AND MAGNITUDE
WHERE THE JUDICIARY IS UNDERMINED AND
JUSTICE IS DENIED TO MILLIONS OF AMERICANS
WHILE AN ENTIRE PROFESSION OF LAWYERS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
IS MANDATED TO SILENCE/CONFIDENTIALITY
WHICH PREVENTS EXPOSURE AND RESOLUTION OF
THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL INJUSTICE BY THE GOVERNMENT.

The surviving victims of nationwide state and federal judicial corruption and injustice are relegated to (1) BEING HOMELESS/DESTITUTE, (2) INCARCERATED UNDER FALSE PRETENSES or (3) SUICIDE.

An unaffected majority does nothing.

A responsible minority witnesses and reacts to the 'broken' condition of the government.

Clearly, the response to Operation Greylord, perpetrated by the American Bar Association and enacted into law by state Supreme Courts in every state over a 25 year period from 1984 (New Jersey) to 2009 (Maine), was a level of corruption by an unchecked and self-policing judiciary giving rise to injustice of a scope and magnitude that ANY government would be unwilling and unable to admit.

The United States, the world leader of democracy, has denied the most basic rights of millions of Americans and controlled the media preventing the exposure of the government's corruption... WHILE DOING NOTHING TO ADDRESS THEIR CORRUPTION.

Even after presentment to the Judiciary and Government Representatives at state and federal levels, the Government continues to perpetrate a fraud of unfathomable proportions... AND CONTINUES TO DENY THE CITIZENS OF THEIR MOST BASIC RIGHTS.

---

THIS IS NOT A CALL FOR ANOTHER TEA PARTY OF RHETORIC, MISINFORMATION and MISDIRECTION.

THIS IS A CALL TO REMEMBER WHERE WE HAVE COME FROM AS A COUNTRY.

THIS IS A DEMAND FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS CORRUPTION AND RESTORE THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

---

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.

To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

- He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
- He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
- He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
- He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
- He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
- He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
- He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
- He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
- He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
- He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
- He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
- He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
- He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
     For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
     For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
     For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
     For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
     For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
     For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
     For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
     For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
     For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
- He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
- He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
- He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
- He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
- He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

If the words of the Declaration of Independence give cause for alarm... then history must truly be repeated by those who failed to learn from it.

Lawyers` `Code Of Silence` On Greylord Assailed

Lawyers` `Code Of Silence` On Greylord Assailed
November 23, 1985 By Maurice Possley.

U.S. Atty. Anton Valukas Friday sharply criticized the legal profession for tolerating the corruption uncovered in the Operation Greylord investigation shortly after a federal judge cut the prison terms of three former Chicago police officers to reward the ``brave step`` he said their cooperation in the case represented.

In a speech before the Chicago Bar Association`s Judiciary Committee, Valukas said he was ``unaware of any single lawyer who has voluntarily come forward to simply complain about . . . misconduct or corruption within the Circuit Court of Cook County`` during the Greylord investigation.

``I believe that most lawyers and, certainly, most judges take very seriously and sacredly the admonition that they will neither lie nor cheat. But I also believe that many do not accept as their responsibility the requirement that they not tolerate those who do,`` Valukas said.

This seems very similar to the reaction to the Kids For Cash Scandal where the law enforcement and legal community in Luzerne County maintained a conspiracy of silence. There is one great difference though. Because of Operation Greylord, the law was enacted which MANDATED the silence of lawyers where it would adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary. In KIDS FOR CASH, SILENCE/CONFIDENTIALITY WAS THE LAW. A very very unconstitutional law.

Earlier Friday, U.S. District Judge Charles R. Norgle reduced the prison terms of three former Chicago police officers whose testimony led to the Greylord conviction of former Cook County Circuit Judge Richard F. LeFevour on corruption charges.

Norgle cut the terms of James LeFevour, Arthur McCauslin and Lawrence McLain after Asst. U.S. Atty. Candace Fabri urged the judge to ``place a premium`` on the cooperative efforts of the three men.

``There truly is a code of silence out there,`` she said. ``These three men have indeed been branded by society.``

Norgle concurred, saying, ``I`m concerned . . . with the code of silence. These three men have taken a brave step. It should be called a coward`s code of silence.``

In his speech to the bar association, Valukas said that the only individuals who were involved in court corruption and who testified in a Greylord trial were those who agreed to cooperate after being indicted or were confronted with allegations of wrongdoing and agreed to testify with a grant of immunity from prosecution.

``It must be made specific and clear that in any and every instance that you believe that some improper or illegal act has occurred that you have an obligation to do something about it. And that obligation is something more than refusing to participate yourself in criminal activity,`` he said.

``Greylord occurred because people believed that they could get away with it and because others let them,`` Valukas said.

The U.S attorney referred to comments made during a Greylord case sentencing by U.S. District Judge John F. Grady about society`s ``strange view of justice`` in which ``we look with favor upon those who know about wrongdoing and who remain silent about it. . . . We call them good guys.``

Valukas also told the bar group that the judicial selection process, in which judges must run ``time and time again for retention or election`` is ``fraught with danger`` because judges are required to raise funds to campaign.

The individuals who support the judges financially also appear before them as litigants, Valukas said. ``We should be wary of any system which puts a judge in a position to decide matters other than on their merits.``

The reduction in sentences by Norgle came as federal prosecutors prepared for another round of indictments in the Greylord investigation.

Former Judge John Devine, former Court Clerk Harold Conn and former Chicago Police Officer Ira Blackwood, all convicted in Greylord and now serving prison terms, have been returned to Chicago for appearances before the Greylord grand jury.

Norgle reduced the sentence of James LeFevour, 57, first cousin of the former judge, to 18 months from 30 months. The former police officer is in the Terre Haute federal prison camp in Terre Haute, Ind.

The sentence of McCauslin, 57, was cut to 12 months from 18 months, and the sentence of McLain, 49, was reduced from 15 months in prison to 12 months in a work-release program in which he will work during the day and spend nights in jail. The two former police officers were ordered to begin serving their sentences Jan. 3.

Richard LeFevour, 54, was convicted last July 13 on 59 counts of taking bribes to fix drunken-driving cases and parking tickets over 14 years. He was sentenced by Norgle to 12 years in prison. He remains free on appeal bond.

Fabri told Norgle that the three former officers, all admitted bagmen for Richard LeFevour, ``have been fully cooperative and truthful`` and all were expected to testify in future Greylord trials.

Questions On Greylord Still Remain

Questions On Greylord Still Remain
May 03, 1987 By Joseph R. Tybor, Legal affairs writer.
Maurice Possley contributed to this report.

When the first round of indictments in the Operation Greylord investigation was announced 3 1/2 years ago, then-U.S. Atty. Dan Webb said that when the investigation was completed it would be viewed ``as one of the most comprehensive, intricate and difficult undercover projects ever undertaken by a law-enforcement agency.``

The conviction last week of Judge John H. McCollom and testimony during his trial underline the grim truth in Webb`s prophecy. There has been no investigation into official corruption on the state or federal level that can match its scope or prosecutorial success.

Although the investigation appears far from over--with reports of grand-jury investigations underway into the Domestic Relations Division of Cook County Circuit Court--the success and character of the trials to date have largely muted questions raised by many at the beginning about unprecedented undercover tactics used by government agents.

These methods included penetrating the traditional sanctity of a judge`s chamber with a wiretap and the use of contrived court cases by FBI agents posing as corrupt lawyers, drunken drivers and defendants giving false statements under oath in court.

Imagine that. An undercover investigation of judicial corruption of an unprecedented magnitude... leads to the CONSPIRACY OF INCOMPREHENSIBLE SCOPE AND MAGNITUDE WHERE THE JUDICIARY IS UNDERMINED AND JUSTICE IS DENIED TO MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WHILE AN ENTIRE PROFESSION OF LAWYERS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IS MANDATED TO SILENCE/CONFIDENTIALITY WHICH PREVENTS EXPOSURE AND RESOLUTION OF THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL INJUSTICE. THE SURVIVING VICTIMS OF THAT NATIONWIDE STATE AND FEDERAL JUDICIAL CORRUPTION AND INJUSTICE ARE RELEGATED TO (1) BEING HOMELESS/DESTITUTE, (2) INCARCERATED UNDER FALSE PRETENSES OR (3) SUICIDE. Clearly, the response to Operation Greylord was a level of corruption by an unchecked and self-policing judiciary giving rise to injustice of a scope and magnitude that ANY government would be unwilling and unable to admit. The United States, the world leader of democracy, has denied the most basic rights of millions of Americans and controlled the media preventing the exposure of the government's corruption... WHILE DOING NOTHING TO ADDRESS THEIR CORRUPTION. Even after presentment to the Judiciary and Government Representatives at state and federal levels, the Government continued to perpetrate a fraud of unfathomable proportions... AND CONTINUED TO DENY IT"S CITIZENS OF THEIR MOST BASIC RIGHTS.

Terrence Hake and David Ries were the two FBI agents who posed as corrupt lawyers and carried eavesdropping equipment to record conversations with judges and lawyers in washrooms, hallways, restaurants, chambers and courtrooms.

The investigative tactics were used with a good deal of care, according to those who once were wary of their implementation. Their validity also has been upheld by a federal appeals court against arguments that they represented frauds on the court and were an overextension of federal power.

``The phantom cases had no decent place in court,`` wrote Judge Frank Easterbrook of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago in upholding the conviction of former Associate Judge John Murphy, who like McCollom was guilty of bribe-taking in Traffic

Court.

``The government offered Murphy opportunities to sell the powers of his office and disgrace himself,`` Easterbrook said. ``He accepted with alacrity.`` Easterbrook pointed out that these tactics were used throughout the investigation. ``The FBI and prosecutors behaved honorably in establishing and running Operation Greylord. Operation Greylord harmed only the corrupt.`` Large questions still linger, however. Controversy persists over who and what are to blame and what some regard as the apparent failure of lawyers and judges and their institutions and regulatory agencies to cope with the causes.

Testimony at McCollom`s trial implicated with bribe-taking not only him but 25 other current or former judges and a state representative who works part-time as a court officer.

It seemed to put to rest any doubts that--although there are a high number of honest judges--corruption and its causes are systemic in the nation`s largest single-court system.

Among the witnesses at McCollom`s trial, which he ended with his guilty plea Friday, were 12 lawyers and police officers who said they paid hundreds of bribes in Traffic Court.

``What this trial shows more than any other Greylord trial to date is the depth and breadth of corruption at the Traffic Court,`` said Sheldon Zenner, who prosecuted the case with Lawrence Rosenthal, both assistant U.S. attorneys.

``It wasn`t just one bad lawyer or one bad judge or one bad cop,``

Zenner said. ``It was hundreds of cops and scores of lawyers and packs of judges.``

``What this case does is leave no one who can say there were just a few people who were casually engaged in casual wrongdoing,`` said U.S. Atty. Anton Valukas.

``It was not just the number of people involved, but they were paying these bribes on a day-to-day basis over an extended period of time.``

Evidence in the convictions of Judge Raymond Sodini, who also pleaded guilty in midtrial, and 19 other defendants earlier this year for massive bribery in branch and Traffic Courts shows that the ``corruption is ingrained, systemic and obviously pervasive,`` Valukas said.

So far, according to Valukas, Operation Greylord has yielded 65 indictments of judges, lawyers, police officers, deputies and court clerks.

Eight judges have been convicted; the case of one is still pending. Of those indicted, there have been 55 convictions, 8 cases are pending and 1 involves a former city attorney who has fled to Greece. There has been one acquittal: Associate Judge John Laurie.

In addition, the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission reports that 30 lawyers and judges have been disbarred or suspended because they were convicted or implicated in Operation Greylord proceedings.

An additional 27 are being prosecuted by the commission, and the Greylord-related activities of about 350 others are being investigated.

Despite these statistics, Thomas P. Sullivan, credited with beginning the Greylord investigation after he became U.S. attorney in 1977 and laying the groundwork to ensure that it was carried out ethically, takes a less than sanguine view of its impact.

``It is naive to believe that all of the corrupt judges have been identified and rooted out,`` he said.

``Most lawyers who practice here will not speak of this for publication, because they fear reprisals by the judges, but the existence of judicial corruption has been discussed among knowledgeable lawyers in Cook County for as long as I can recall.``

Sullivan believes that prosecutions alone cannot end criminal conduct and that their deterrent effect is ``transient and minimal.`` Like many, he calls for a change from electing judges.

Indeed, calls for an appointive system based on merit have increased with the progress of the investigation, but there are those who fear such a system may be dominated by members of large law firms and result in an ``elitist`` judiciary, cutting out minority groups and women.The investigation also has produced concern in the legal profession over failure to restore public confidence in the system.

Appearing at a Greylord panel last week marking the centennial of the Harvard Law Society of Illinois, Richard Phelan, former president of the Chicago Bar Association, criticized the Illinois Supreme Court for failing to act on a request made nearly three years ago by the association and the Chicago Council of Lawyers to conduct its own investigation and come up with proposals for changes in the Cook County courts.

Others blame the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, although that agency last week filed with the Supreme Court its annual report showing more cases and successful prosecutions of attorneys in 1986 than before.

The report also said that the commission was notified of Operation Greylord by Sullivan`s office in 1977 and later turned over records from its independent investigations into court corruption. The commission believed that federal authorities had greater resources to investigate such matters, the report said.

Since February, 1986, the report said, the U.S. attorney`s office has been giving the commission investigative information after trials are complete that result in ``more complete disciplinary prosecutions`` of those implicated in Greylord.

There are many who believe that before corruption is rooted out, lawyers and judges who suspect misconduct must change their long-held views about protecting their colleagues.

``It`s real simple,`` said Robert P. Cummins, chairman of the Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board and chairman of the American Bar Association`s Committee on Professional Discipline. ``Lawyers and judges have got to have the guts to call misconduct into question because it seems the epidemic of improper conduct we`ve seen in Greylord was aided and abetted by people who believed they had to `play the game` and simply disregarded their professional responsibility.``


IT WOULD SEEM THAT THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CORRUPTION WAS IGNORED AND SPREAD TO LAW ORGANIZATIONS AND COURT DIVISIONS. AS A RESULT, THE PLAN TO MAKE SURE IT NEVER HAPPENED AGAIN WAS DISGUISED. BY ENACTING THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT INTO LAW - A JUDGE WOULD NOT BE PROSECUTED FOR JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT OR INJUSTICE. ... AND IT WOULD TAKE DECADES BEFORE THEIR EFFECTIVE UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW TO CONCEAL CORRUPTION WOULD COME TO LIGHT.

Operation Greylord

Excerpt from Corruption in Cook County: Anti-Corruption Report Number 3 February 18, 2010

Operation Greylord 1980-1992

Operation Greylord was one of the first undercover federal investigations that employed listening devices in a judge’s chambers. Incriminating evidence was also collected by an undercover judge and an Assistant Cook County States Attorney, Terrence Hake. Hake was incensed by the corruption he saw. He went to the FBI and then worked undercover as a prosecutor. He became a defense attorney and continued to hand out bribes to fix phony cases slipped into the system by the FBI.20

The undercover judge, Brocton Lockwood, was from Downstate Marion, Illinois. He was assigned to Cook County to help reduce a backlog of cases.21 He befriended many of the court bailiffs and other personnel and secretly taped their conversations as they bragged about envelopes of cash, open drawers, splitting up the loot and passing bribes to judges.22

The Greylord probes and subsequent convictions exposed rampant corruption, incompetence, and influence peddling in the Cook County court system23. By the end, 15 judges, 47 lawyers and 24 police officers and court personnel were convicted or pleaded guilty.24

Among the most shocking was the conviction of Judge Thomas J. Maloney, who was found guilty of taking thousands of dollars in bribes to fix four felony cases including three murder trials.25

In the aftermath of Operation Greylord, many court reforms were implemented such as limiting conversations between judges and attorneys in hallways and other non-courtroom settings and in the way judges are appointed and assigned trials.26

However former U.S. Attorney Dan Webb concluded, “In terms of convictions, Greylord is the most successful operation in the history of undercover operations. But in terms of institutional impact, Greylord has been a miserable failure. Judges are still elected to the bench by political parties and kept there by party-dominated retention elections.”27

Two books and more than1,000 newspaper articles have been written about the indictments, trials and convictions. Yet, there is disagreement about the derivation of the name, “Greylord.” It either was named after a race horse or it refers to British jurists who don grey wigs and have been called Greylords.

20.Maurice Possley, “August 5, 1983 – Operation Greylord Investigation Revealed,” Chicago Tribune, Nov. 6, 1997.

21.James Tuohy and Rob Warden, Greylord: Justice Chicago Style, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1989.

22.“Operation Greylord Winds Down,” Chicago Tribune, Jan.1, 1992.22

23.Brocton Lockwood, Operation Greylord: Brocton Lockwood’s Story, Southern Illinois University Press, 1990.

24.Book review by Jon R. Waltz, “Supernerd Triumphant – How Judge Lockwood became Greylord’s Unlikely
Nemesis,” Chicago Tribune, Jan. 7, 1990.

25.O'Connor, Matt. "Judge Maloney Found Guilty in Corruption Case." Chicago Tribune, April 17, 1993.

26.Trevor Jensen, "Judge headed Cook County courts - Guided judicial system during federal Greylord corruption probe." Chicago Tribune, January 30, 2008.

27.James Tuohy and Rob Warden, Greylord: Justice Chicago Style, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1989, p. 257.

Rule 1.6 is the Death of America

When Judges Fail to Answer the Question

How do you continue to treat the judiciary with the necessary respect when they are being complete asses?

Each Petition and document filed since May 2011 has indicated the defective and void order of May 9, 2011.

Each Appeal (Carluccio, Page, Weilheimer) has indicated the defective and void order of May 9, 2011.

Each Concise Statement includes the indication that the order is defective and void. AB INITIO.

Each Opinion issued by the judges fails to address the defect, fails to address the void, and then mistates and misrepresents random irrelevant items.

It's almost laughable when they cite law. When the law they cite is not applicable and they are ignoring the one law that DOES apply. The LAW THAT INDICATES THE JUDGE HAD NO JURISDICTION FOR THE MAY 9th order, and each subsequent order is undone because they are based on a defective and void order. All nullities based on a nullity.

The issue has been properly raised and presented over a hundred times... before three judges. Never contested or refuted. Never addressed by opposing counsel. YET, Ignored by the judiciary.

SIMPLY PUT: If the order was not defective, they would prove that and back it up with relevant statements and be done with it.

But the judges can't. So they don't. And Rule 1.6 forces them to stupidity and irrelevance to avoid addressing the lack of jurisdiction.

It should be no big deal. Why wouldn't they address the issue? It's not a matter of interpretation. It is a procedure which MUST be followed. But, it wasn't.

Instead of facing the issue, Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio made such a deliberate malicious mess pushing for my suicide... Her courtroom was lawless fraud, intimidation and judicial terror. Carluccio was attempting to 'bury' years of injustice and corruption by the entire Montgomery County Bench.

ANSWER: Follow the law. End the deception. End the lawlessness. End the corruption.

In the long run, there is no possible way for the effective order to ever have jurisdiction. Jurisdiction cannot be created retroactively. There's no fixing it. IT MUST BE FACED.

THE ONLY ANSWER: Follow the law. End the deception. End the lawlessness. End the corruption.

The judiciary and the lawyers have terrorized my life for over 8 years... all documented on the court record. The excessive volume of injustice and the clear intent is so undeniable and all consuming that it backfired in such a massive way to reveal the injustice was nationwide AND DELIBERATE AND ALL CAUSED, ENABLED, IGNORED AND UN-PROSECUTED BECAUSE OF RULE 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY WHEN IT ADVERSELY AFFECTS THE JUDICIARY.

NEWSFLASH: JUDICIAL CORRUPTION AND INJUSTICE ADVERSELY AFFECTS THE INTEGRITY OF THE JUDICIARY. Rule 1.6 conceals judicial corruption and injustice and is aggressively enforced. By design, it promotes corruption and undermines the courts.

And considering the continuing collateral damage that the Rule 1.6 Confidentiality/Conspiracy requires... It's about time the judiciary faces their truth.

The American Bar Association has undermined the judiciary in every state. Overthrown the government to the point where everything is broken or breaking. There is no ignoring the mess.

So face it. JUSTICE IS COMING.

Any delay is only going to exacerbate the situation more and more. The civil unrest will escalate further when the People learn that the Courts have failed to take responsibility and that they were informed ("caught") a year ago. The Rule 1.6 secret is not going back in the box.

In Kids for Cash, Ann Lokuta was Rule 1.6 - Disciplined and removed from the bench for contacting the FBI. Every lawyer in the state kept confidential, even the district attorneys, prosecutors and attorneys general and governors.

A Commission of lawyers deliberately neglected to expose that Rule 1.6 was the silence of “those who knew but failed to speak; those who saw but failed to act.”

The Commission did NOTHING which would prevent a recurrence, or a continuation of the judicial corruption and injustice.

Far more frightening, these lawyers now know how to do it… and how to get away with it.

Ciavarella and Coonahan went to jail ONLY BECAUSE they were inept at money laundering.

The ABA has done well by its membership. Their profession creates an economy and a case whenever it chooses, requiring the use of their membership at $200-500/hour. Even when lawyers are stealing houses through fraudulent foreclosures using fake companies, false and robo-signed deeds, they expect you to hire a lawyer to help you. While Rule 1.6 prevents them from helping because they cannot acknowledge the fraud and misrepresentation.

They even created programs which could occur before going to court where again the lawyers were the ones getting paid.

And everyone fell for it.

Tsk tsk tsk... Clone.

Another question that doesn't get answered... Why does my phone think it is at my brother's house?

When the cloned phone hits the GPS satellite, the target phone gets updated as if it is there. Something I have known for quite some time.

I mentioned to several people this week that my phone has regularly indicated a few locations where I haven't been.

One of them is a private investigator's house. And, I haven't been to my brother's house in years.

Deliberate Judicial Injustice

The injustice began with the issuing of the secret order (undocketed, undistributed to Terance Healy) by Judge Rhonda Daniele in August 2007.

Judge Dickman was not likely aware of the secret order. Judge Dickman’s notes on an Agreed Order indicated her anticipation for vexatious litigation by Angst & Angst. Judge Dickman died in late 2007.

Judge Ott reviewed considerable documentation and evidence and issued a Protection from Abuse order with regard to the technology intruding into computers, phones and networking equipment.

Judge Tilson dismissed The Protection from Abuse order regarding technology intrusions of computers, phones and networking equipment.

Judge DelRicci failed to enforce Sonya Healy’s compliance, or sanction her contempt of ANY AND EVERY court order.

Judge DelRicci incarcerated me for contempt of an order which had not yet been before a judge, or signed by any judge.

Judge Del Ricci participated directly in the conspiracy to conceal the secret order, and prevent the scheduling of custody proceedings.

Judge Del Ricci intervened with the police, county detectives and the District Attorneys Office to prevent Sonya Healy, and 20 others (including the parties children) from being prosecuted for breaking and entering, and burglary in defiance of an Agreed Court Order and misrepresenting to police that the ‘secret order’ authorized her to have access to the house.

Judge DelRicci prevented custody or visitation, delayed custody proceedings, issued ex parte orders without holding proceedings, and then recused himself while threatening me with litigation accusing me of liable and slander on the internet. (He never produced the offending document.)

Judge DelRicci neglected enforcement or excused compliance by Sonya Healy of any discovery order which would reveal her technology intrusions.

Judge Tilson issued several ex parte custody orders without holding or scheduling any proceedings and threatening incarceration should I take any action to prevent my son from leaving the United States alone – even where his orders were contrary to procedure, state and federal law, and the Hague Convention.

Judge Bertin manipulated the pleadings, delayed scheduling of hearings, and issued orders which caused criminal actions to be ‘not cognizable’ once they were no longer a part of the family court pleading from which it was split.

Judge Bertin failed to enforce Sonya Healy’s compliance, or sanction her contempt of ANY AND EVERY court order.

Judge Coonahan refused to act on Emergency Petitions, failed to enforce Sonya Healy’s compliance, or sanction her contempt of ANY AND EVERY court order, or to schedule any proceedings while the case was assigned to her.

Judge Barrett showed such extreme disrespect that his recusal was requested after the first hearing before him. It was granted.

Judge Carluccio took me for a complete fool who would believe everything she said no matter how preposterous.

Judge Carluccio failed to enforce Sonya Healy’s compliance, or sanction her contempt of ANY AND EVERY court order.

Whenever she realized that I was prepared for emergency hearings and had filed hearing statements, she would continue the proceedings; then, repeatedly reschedule in anticipation that I might not appear and the petitions would be dismissed for non-appearance. As a result, I had to be prepared for any and all of 15 petitions which had been outstanding and unheard for over a year.

When I appeared for an uncancelled hearing, based on an Order to Appear, Depuities were provided a false report of a threat. Opposing counsel and parties failed to appear after having indicated their understanding that the hearing was not cancelled in a letter to the court.

Judge Carluccio was corrupt and manipulative from her first action.

Judge Carluccio refused to recuse and was determined to do damage.

As the President of the Montgomery County Bar Association, Judge Carluccio always concealed the deliberate errors and misconduct of lawyers in her court – even where the lawyers actions caused the court to not have proper jurisdiction.

Judge Carluccio prevented the Appeal from delivery to Superior Court of Philadelphia.

Judge Haaz upon realizing that he had no jurisdiction for the hearing, ended the proceeding and instructed Court Administration to schedule it.

Judge Coonhan failed to schedule any proceeding while assigned the case.

Judge Page was assigned the case in December 2012. Though the court lacked jurisdiction while an appeal was pending in the Superior Court, Judge Page ordered the proceeding to occur.

Judge Page rescheduled the proceeding just about every day for a period of a month. An attempt to confuse and prevent the scheduling of witnesses.

Judge Page indicated during the hearing that I had plenty of time to schedule witnesses to appear even though he had only scheduled the proceeding the night before.

Judge Page ignored that he did not have proper jurisdiction to conduct a hearing.

Judge Page ignored the evidence of the defective divorce decree.

Judge Page ignored that there had been no evidence of contempt. Though Judge Carluccio’s orders were defective and void, I followed the orders.

Where orders were issued part on paper and part on the court record/transcript, Judge Page lacked documentation of the judge’s complete order.

Judge Page instead chose to issue an absurd order for over $300,000 in penalties for contempt to a party kept unemployed by years of constant litigation, and made destitute and homeless by judicial corruption and lawlessness.

The Montgomery County Judiciary continued to ignore their complete disregard for the law.

When seeking to appeal Judge Page’s Order, there was not one judge in the courthouse willing to hear the Petition to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. There had been multiple IFP’s filed over the years, each was ignored without proceedings.

Judge Wall having failed to issue any decision after two proceedings.

The judiciary was content that they had left me destitute and homeless and had deliberately perpetrated the disposal of everything I owned.

Judge Austin left me standing in the hallway outside her court for hours while she entertained guests in her courtroom, only to send out a member of her staff to indicate she would not conduct the IFP hearing.

At the end of the long day, Judge Page signed the IFP. The Appeal moved forward. Transcripts were ordered.

Once the Concise statement was delivered to his chambers, Judge Page revoked the IFP without any proceeding or explanation, further instructing the Court Reporters to NOT produce the transcripts.

To Appeal THAT corrupt and void order would require a judge to approve a new IFP. A new IFP must be filed for every action. Apparently, the fact that I was destitute and homeless and terrorized by litigation since 2007, was no reason to stop the injustice.

It became very clear that there was no denying that the corruption and injustice of the Montgomery County Judiciary was meant to compel my suicide. Something which I was not capable of delivering.

The County then failed to send the complete court records to the Superior Court. Even the exhibits from the proceeding before Judge Page were NOT included. The Superior Court denied a motion to compel without explanation. The Supreme Court would do the same. Even if they issued a Mandamus Order for the court to provide the paperwork, the lower court could refuse… BECAUSE TO PROVIDE THE COURT RECORD OF THE EXTREME INJUSTICE EXPERIENCED ON THE RECORD WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE JUDICIARY.

I sent a short letter to the Judiciary of Montgomery County asking the direct question, “WHAT THE F%&K IS WRONG WITH YOU?” There was no response from any judge to the question.

In July 2013, I discovered the undocumented power (and purpose) of Rule 1.6 – Confidentiality of Information.

Rule 1.6 was rolled out by the American Bar Association and enacted to prevent the prosecution of judges for judicial corruption and injustice. To protect the integrity of the Cook County Courts reeling from the sting of the FBI’s OPERATION GREYLORD, the AMA would undermine the judiciary in every state with the LAW which further MANDATED the compliciteness and participation of EVERY lawyer.

LAWYERS CANNOT FIX THE RULE 1.6 INJUSTICE. RULE 1.6 PREVENTS IT.

Each state Supreme Court aggressively enforces Rule 1.6. The state policy even conceals the entire situation where a lawyer admits to the violation and submits to the discipline – there is no publication, or public record of the lawyers violation of the rules of professional conduct. Where a case has been undermined by unethical and unscrupulous lawyers, all the lawyer need to do is admit it (in private) and they are permitted to continue the injustice… CONFIDENTIALITY.

The lawyers may then proceed further with complete disregard for due process and procedures, and the injustice continues with a judge trying to conceal the deliberate misconduct of the attorneys in the case. For example, Judge Page holding a hearing without jurisdiction while the matter is with the Superior Court. The failure to permit the first Appeal (August 2011)to proceed causes the corruption to continue, and to grow.

Healy v Healy includes more corrupt judges and courthouse personnel than the FBI’s Operation Greylord prosecuted and jailed.

The Courts were all hiding behind Rule 1.6 and preventing evidence and obstructing justice. The courts could ignore every law, procedure, constitution, etc by writing fiction in their Orders and Opinions.

It became necessary to address the loss of constitutionally protected rights. The loss was clearly evident without delving into the full story once the matter had arrived in Superior Court.

After the deadline for an Answer had passed for the Pennsylvania Attorney General and it was clear that the 56 state Attorneys General would default to restore people’s constitutional rights nationwide, a unexplained and unexcused late filing under an improper title was filed by an attoerney electronically without a signature purportedly on behalf of Attorney General Kathleen Kane.

The Eastern District Court follows Rule 1.6 as enacted by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Attorney General Kathleen Kane could not violate the confidentiality of an employee in her office. As her staff are her clients, she is mandated to maintain confidentiality of information. EVEN WHERE HER LAWFUL AND CONSTITUTIONAL ACTION TO DEFAULT HAS BEEN UNDERMINED… and would further undermine the matter for the other 55 Attorneys General who have also defaulted in the matter.

The integrity of the Eastern District Judge was sacrificed as he failed to substantiate his decisions based on fiction and misinformation. Rule 1.6?s MANDATE of confidentiality had undermined it’s own constitutional challenge.

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals follows Rule 1.6 as enacted by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

In affirming the dismissal the Third Circuit panel neglected to present any facts which would support their decision. Their integrity was sacrificed pursuant to Rule 1.6 to conceal the injustice caused by Rule 1.6.

The Constitutional Challenge is currently being presented to President Barack Obama and the United States Congress concurrently with submission to the Supreme Court of the United States. A necessity as SCOTUS may not be lawfully permitted to address the corruption which the state judiciaries have caused IN EVERY STATE.

Heroes and Villains

I posted the following 'nominations' to the WBTruth Exposing Corruption site.

They presented their list of Heroes & Villains on the steps of the Luzerne County Courthouse on July 17, 2014.

---

A few nominations...

Heroes... Todd Krautheim, Terance Healy
( Working to expose an unconstitutional law (improperly enacted in every state) which robs people of their rights, and prevents lawyers, judges and law enforcement from any action to expose it.)

Villains... The Wilkes Barre Law And Library Association
(aka... The Luzerne County Bar Association) The lawyers all know they must maintain silence/confidentiality where it would adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary. Silent Complicity.

CHALLENGE... Willian Ecenbarger. Heroes do NOT conceal the actions of Villains.
I might raise the question of the investigative journalist who seems to have switched sides. It would seem that William Ecenbarger, as a NON_LAWYER aware of the lawyers MANDATE OF CONFIDENTIALITY pursuant to Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, neglects to ever indicate the LAW which silenced the Luzerne County legal community in the face or extreme corruption. Though he is NOT mandated by law to conceal the impact of Rule 1.6, HE DID.

William Ecenbarger now conducts CLE classes for the Bar Association - The Psychology of Secrets.

I excuse Lourdes Rosado, Juvenile Justice Center, for failing to expose the impact of Rule 1.6 Confidentiality in the SILENCE surrounding corruption. As an attorney, she is mandated BY LAW to maintain the 'dirty little secret' of Rule 1.6.

The efforts of the Juvenile Justice Center exposed that the failure of the judiciary to recognize the damage they have caused extends to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. It was the PA Supreme Court who enacted Rule 1.6. An act of unconstitutional magnitude which was made irreversible at the time it was enacted. Lawyers cannot reveal the damage caused by the law. Two non-lawyers could. AND, Healy and Krautheim did.

Villain... Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice - The commission failed to see themselves among “those who knew but failed to speak; those who saw but failed to act.” The commission fails to address their silence, while misdirecting blame to include public officials and private citizens who did speak and were ignored; who did act and were dismissed.

THE COMMISSION failed to indicate any impact of Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of information.

THE COMMISSIONS MEMBERS
Judge John M. Cleland - - - - A judge mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
Judge James A. Gibbons - - - - A judge mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
Judge John C. Uhler - - - - A judge mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
Judge Dwayne Woodruff - - - - A judge mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
Kenneth J. Horoho, Jr, Esquire - - - - A lawyer mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
Jason A. Legg, Esquire - - - - A lawyer mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
Robert L. Listenbee, Jr. Esquire - - - - A lawyer mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
George Mossee, Esquire - - - - A lawyer mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
Darren M. Breslin, Esquire - - - - A lawyer mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
Tod C. Allen
Valerie Bender
Ronald P. Williams

WITNESSES WHO APPEARED BEFORE THE COMMISSION
The president judge of Luzerne County - - - - A judge mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
the former district attorney - - - - A lawyer mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
the incumbent district attorney- - - - A lawyer mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
the county public defender - - - - A lawyer mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
assistant district attorneys - - - - A lawyer mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
assistant public defenders - - - - A lawyer mandated to follow Rule 1.6.
juvenile probation officials ???
former juvenile defendants ???
parents of juvenile defendants ???
school officials ???
county commissioners ???
officials of the Judicial Conduct Board judges and lawyers - - - - ALL mandated to follow Rule 1.6.

Silence, inaction, inexperience, fear of retaliation. Greed, ambition, carelessness. MAYBE.

BUT, There was no ignorance of the law requiring CONFIDENTIALITY… the Commission's failure to act was deliberate and deceptive and calculating.

BTW, Rule 1.6 has a far broader effect than Attorney-Client Privilege. The mandate of confidentiality extends beyond a lawyers death.

Rule 1.6 mandates an obligation to maintain confidentiality where information
- would affect the integrity of the judiciary, or
- would reveal the misconduct of the lawyers office, or
- would expose individual liability of the lawyer, or
- would negatively impact their client.

Government lawyers are unsure of WHO their client even is…
- Public
- Government as a whole
- Branch of government in which employed
- Particular agency or department
- Responsible officers who make decisions with an agency or department.

Rule 1.6 concealed the single point of failure… itself.

THE COMMISSION CONCEALED THAT BIT OF INFORMATION.
- As a result, they took no true step towards preventing another scandal.
- They failed to protect the people.
- They failed to protect the judiciary from further corruption.

Far more frightening, these lawyers now know how to do it... and how to get away with it.

Ciavarella and Coonahan went to jail ONLY BECAUSE they were inept at money laundering.

The Weilheimer Opinion

Judge Gail Weilheimer has finally written her long delayed Opinion in Healy v Miller.

Thank You to Judge Weilheimer for demonstrating the Rule 1.6 impact so cleanly.

In the judge's seven page opinion, Judge Weilheimer presents the techniques used by judges nationwide in the delivery of injustice and denial of facts, misdirected rule of law, and blindness to constitutional rights.

DO THESE JUDGES THINK THEY ARE FOOLING ANYONE?
THIS 'GAME' BEING PLAYED IS AT THE EXPENSE OF MY LIFE, MY FAMILY, MY LIBERTY.
CLEARLY, The judges DO NOT CARE about you, your family, the law, their integrity, your dignity, their lack of self-respect, your life, your liberty, their abuse of power, your civil rights, your human rights.

Rule 1.6 mandates concealing their corruption and injustice... and THAT IS WHAT THEY DO.

In their arrogance, they fail to address their fault and their responsibility for causing a nationwide constitutional crisis in the United States, while preventing any resolution to the sedition by the American Bar Association which has undermined the authority of every court in the country.

---

The initial complaint (Healy v Miller) was to have been filed in Montgomery Township in August 2013.

This filing was prevented by the Administrator for that court when she interrupted the proceeding, took the papers directly from Judge Andrea Duffy's hands, and returned them to me indicating I should leave. As the judge had never before seen behavior like this from an Administrator, I requested the opportunity to explain. This is how a person is treated when they have no rights and no protection of the law.

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 was included as part of the documents submitted to the court. Judge Duffy had just experienced the affect of Rule 1.6. I informed her that as an American she cannot imagine being without her constitutional rights, and that was why she was unable to recognize and identify and explain the actions of her administrator.

What Judge Duffy had witnessed was a denial of access to the courts, and a prevention of any recourse for grievances. By procedure and Pennsylvania law, the Administrator could have forwarded the matter to the Common Pleas Court in Norristown. Instead, she interrupted a hearing, caused needless drama, involved the police. prevented other district court office personnel from action, and attempted to intimidate and threaten a litigant. Judge Duffy watched the judicial process being undermined in her own courtroom. The Administrator following instructions from Norristown to prevent or end any proceeding in the District Court.

The only way for a judge to maintain their integrity when Rule 1.6 is 'in play' is to do nothing. This has been demonstrated by Judge Haaz, and by Judge Boylan in Bucks County.

The complaint was filed October 3, 2013 in the Common Pleas Court.

[FIVE MONTHS LATER]

The hearing took place on March 5, 2014 with Judge Weilheimer ruling immediately at the end of the hearing.

The Appeal was filed on March 6, 2014.

Concise Statement was ordered and served upon the judge on March 27, 2014.

[THREE MONTHS LATER]

A Motion to Compel the Opinion was filed in June 2014, and ignored.

The Montgomery County Prothonotary had once again not sent the case file and court record to the Superior Court.

On July 1, 2014, The Superior Court of Pennsylvania sent a letter requesting the Opinion and case files from Montgomery County.

On July 14, 2014, The Motion to Strike A Defective and Void Order was filed with the Superior Court and served on the Miller's and their attorney.

On July 18, 2014, Judge Weilheimer issued her Opinion.

Let's count the ways in which Judge Weilheimer has twisted her words to conceal the truth. The truly offensive part is that the courts deliberate neglect shows carelessness and disregard for the litigants, the law, and the facts.

The court has been provided another opportunity to address the lack of jurisdiction which the court has IGNORED since June 2011. Over 75 times, the court has IGNORED the defective and void order issued without jurisdiction. Clearly, a litigant cannot cause the judicairy to be just and honest once a case has been corrupted pursuant to Rule 1.6.

NOTE TO COURT: The Plaintiff is very aware of what has occurred and the malicious intent of Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio. The responsibility to inform the court of the defective order so that the Court could take action to address the defect was met and presented repeatedly. While the court neglected its responsibility and perpetrated additional injustice, the litigant was denied the protection of the law, rights and privileges secured by the Constitution of the United States, and mistreated with tremendous disrespect while his life, liberty and property were being unlawfully destroyed.

QUESTION:
WHY HAS NO ONE PRESENTED ANY INFORMATION WHICH DEMONSTRATES THE ELEMENTS OF JURISDICTION NECESSARY FOR THE COURT TO ISSUE A DIVORCE DECREE?

ANSWER:
THE COURT LACKED JURISDICTION. THE ORDER IS VOID AB INITIO.

PROBLEM:
WHERE JURISDICTION DID NOT EXIST, THERE IS NO ABILITY TO ASSERT JURISDICTION RETROACTIVELY.

The actions of Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio were not judicial, and are not excused by judicial immunity. The refusal to address the malicious abuse of power under color of law initiated by Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio further executed and denied review by county personnel is well documented.

Those actions demonstrate a conspiracy within the court involving extrinsic and intrinsic fraud which also affects the immunity of the prior judges who have acted improperly in this matter.

The injustice began with the issuing of the secret order (undocketed, undistributed to Terance Healy) by Judge Rhonda Daniele in August 2007. Judge Dickman was not likely aware of the secret order. Judge Dickman's notes on an Agreed Order indicated her anticipation for vexatious litigation by Angst & Angst. Judge Dickman died in late 2007. Judge Ott reviewed considerable documentation and evidence and issued a Protection from Abuse order with regard to the technology intruding into computers, phones and networking equipment. Judge Tilson dismissed The Protection from Abuse order regarding technology intrusions of computers, phones and networking equipment. Judge DelRicci failed to enforce Sonya Healy's compliance, or sanction her contempt of ANY AND EVERY court order. Judge DelRicci incarcerated me for contempt of an order which had not yet been before a judge, or signed by any judge. Judge Del Ricci participated directly in the conspiracy to conceal the secret order, and prevent the scheduling of custody proceedings. Judge Del Ricci intervened with the police, county detectives and the District Attorneys Office to prevent Sonya Healy, and 20 others (including the parties children) from being prosecuted for breaking and entering, and burglary in defiance of an Agreed Court Order and misrepresenting to police that the 'secret order' authorized her to have access to the house. Judge DelRicci prevented custody or visitation, delayed custody proceedings, issued ex parte orders without holding proceedings, and then recused himself while threatening me with litigation accusing me of liable and slander on the internet. (He never produced the offending document.) Judge DelRicci neglected enforcement or excused compliance by Sonya Healy of any discovery order which would reveal her technology intrusions. Judge Tilson issued several ex parte custody orders without holding or scheduling any proceedings and threatening incarceration should I take any action to prevent my son from leaving the United States alone - even where his orders were contrary to procedure, state and federal law, and the Hague Convention. Judge Bertin manipulated the pleadings, delayed scheduling of hearings, and issued orders which caused criminal actions to be 'not cognizable' once they were no longer a part of the family court pleading from which it was split. Judge Bertin failed to enforce Sonya Healy's compliance, or sanction her contempt of ANY AND EVERY court order. Judge Coonahan refused to act on Emergency Petitions, failed to enforce Sonya Healy's compliance, or sanction her contempt of ANY AND EVERY court order, or to schedule any proceedings while the case was assigned to her. Judge Barrett showed such extreme disrespect that his recusal was requested after the first hearing before him. It was granted. Judge Carluccio took me for a complete fool who would believe everything she said no matter how preposterous. Judge Carluccio failed to enforce Sonya Healy's compliance, or sanction her contempt of ANY AND EVERY court order. Whenever she realized that I was prepared for emergency hearings and had filed hearing statements, she would continue the proceedings; then, repeatedly reschedule in anticipation that I might not appear and the petitions would be dismissed for non-appearance. As a result, I had to be prepared for any and all of 15 petitions which had been outstanding and unheard for over a year. When I appeared for an uncancelled hearing, based on an Order to Appear, Depuities were provided a false report of a threat. Opposing counsel and parties failed to appear after having indicated their understanding that the hearing was not cancelled in a letter to the court. Judge Carluccio was corrupt and manipulative from her first action. Judge Carluccio refused to recuse and was determined to do damage. As the President of the Montgomery County Bar Association, Judge Carluccio always concealed the deliberate errors and misconduct of lawyers in her court - even where the lawyers actions caused the court to not have proper jurisdiction. Judge Carluccio prevented the Appeal from delivery to Superior Court of Philadelphia. Judge Haaz upon realizing that he had no jurisdiction for the hearing, ended the proceeding and instructed Court Administration to schedule it. Judge Coonhan failed to schedule any proceeding while assigned the case. Judge Page was assigned the case in December 2012. Though the court lacked jurisdiction while an appeal was pending in the Superior Court, Judge Page ordered the proceeding to occur. Judge Page rescheduled the proceeding just about every day for a period of a month. An attempt to confuse and prevent the scheduling of witnesses. Judge Page indicated during the hearing that I had plenty of time to schedule witnesses to appear even though he had only scheduled the proceeding the night before. Judge Page ignored that he did not have proper jurisdiction to conduct a hearing. Judge Page ignored the evidence of the defective divorce decree. Judge Page ignored that there had been no evidence of contempt. Though Judge Carluccio's orders were defective and void, I followed the orders. Where orders were issued part on paper and part on the court record/transcript, Judge Page lacked documentation of the judge's complete order. Judge Page instead chose to issue an absurd order for over $300,000 in penalties for contempt to a party kept unemployed by years of constant litigation, and made destitute and homeless by judicial corruption and lawlessness. The Montgomery County Judiciary continued to ignore their complete disregard for the law. When seeking to appeal Judge Page's Order, there was not one judge in the courthouse willing to hear the Petition to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. There had been multiple IFP's filed over the years, each was ignored without proceedings. Judge Wall having failed to issue any decision after two proceedings. The judiciary was content that they had left me destitute and homeless and had deliberately perpetrated the disposal of everything I owned. Judge Austin left me standing in the hallway outside her court for hours while she entertained guests in her courtroom, only to send out a member of her staff to indicate she would not conduct the IFP hearing. At the end of the long day, Judge Page signed the IFP. The Appeal moved forward. Transcripts were ordered. Once the Concise statement was delivered to his chambers, Judge Page revoked the IFP without any proceeding or explanation, further instructing the Court Reporters to NOT produce the transcripts. To Appeal THAT corrupt and void order would require a judge to approve a new IFP. A new IFP must be filed for every action. Apparently, the fact that I was destitute and homeless and terrorized by litigation since 2007, was no reason to stop the injustice. It became very clear that there was no denying that the corruption and injustice of the Montgomery County Judiciary was meant to compel my suicide. Something which I was not capable of delivering. The County then failed to send the complete court records to the Superior Court. Even the exhibits from the proceeding before Judge Page were NOT included. The Superior Court denied a motion to compel without explanation. The Supreme Court would do the same. Even if they issued a Mandamus Order for the court to provide the paperwork, the lower court could refuse... BECAUSE TO PROVIDE THE COURT RECORD OF THE EXTREME INJUSTICE EXPERIENCED ON THE RECORD WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE JUDICIARY. I sent a short letter to the Judiciary of Montgomery County asking the direct question, "WHAT THE F%&K IS WRONG WITH YOU?" There was no response from any judge to the question. In July 2013, I discovered the undocumented power (and purpose) of Rule 1.6 - Confidentiality of Information. Rule 1.6 was rolled out by the American Bar Association and enacted to prevent the prosecution of judges for judicial corruption and injustice. To protect the integrity of the Cook County Courts reeling from the sting of the FBI's OPERATION GREYLORD, the AMA would undermine the judiciary in every state with the LAW which further MANDATED the compliciteness and participation of EVERY lawyer. LAWYERS CANNOT FIX THE RULE 1.6 INJUSTICE. RULE 1.6 PREVENTS IT. Each state Supreme Court aggressively enforces Rule 1.6. The state policy even conceals the entire situation where a lawyer admits to the violation and submits to the discipline - there is no publication, or public record of the lawyers violation of the rules of professional conduct. Where a case has been undermined by unethical and unscrupulous lawyers, all the lawyer need to do is admit it (in private) and they are permitted to continue the injustice... CONFIDENTIALITY. The lawyers may then proceed further with complete disregard for due process and procedures, and the injustice continues with a judge trying to conceal the deliberate misconduct of the attorneys in the case. For example, Judge Page holding a hearing without jurisdiction while the matter is with the Superior Court. The failure to permit the first Appeal (August 2011)to proceed causes the corruption to continue, and to grow. Healy v Healy includes more corrupt judges and courthouse personnel than the FBI's Operation Greylord prosecuted and jailed. The Courts were all hiding behind Rule 1.6 and preventing evidence and obstructing justice. The courts could ignore every law, procedure, constitution, etc by writing fiction in their Orders and Opinions. It became necessary to address the loss of constitutionally protected rights. The loss was clearly evident without delving into the full story once the matter had arrived in Superior Court. After the deadline for an Answer had passed for the Pennsylvania Attorney General and it was clear that the 56 state Attorneys General would default to restore people's constitutional rights nationwide, a unexplained and unexcused late filing under an improper title was filed by an attoerney electronically without a signature purportedly on behalf of Attorney General Kathleen Kane. The Eastern District Court follows Rule 1.6 as enacted by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Attorney General Kathleen Kane could not violate the confidentiality of an employee in her office. As her staff are her clients, she is mandated to maintain confidentiality of information. EVEN WHERE HER LAWFUL AND CONSTITUTIONAL ACTION TO DEFAULT HAS BEEN UNDERMINED... and would further undermine the matter for the other 55 Attorneys General who have also defaulted in the matter. The integrity of the Eastern District Judge was sacrificed as he failed to substantiate his decisions based on fiction and misinformation. Rule 1.6's MANDATE of confidentiality had undermined it's own constitutional challenge. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals follows Rule 1.6 as enacted by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. In affirming the dismissal the Third Circuit panel neglected to present any facts which would support their decision. Their integrity was sacrificed pursuant to Rule 1.6 to conceal the injustice caused by Rule 1.6. The Constitutional Challenge is currently being presented to President Barack Obama and the United States Congress concurrently with submission to the Supreme Court of the United States. A necessity as SCOTUS may not be lawfully permitted to address the corruption which the state judiciaries have caused IN EVERY STATE.

If you find the experience in the above box exhausting to read, you must understand that the above is only the biggest of the injustices delivered by each judge. The indiginities suffered while they annihilated my life, liberty and any happiness have terrorized every minute of every hour of every day since 2007 without any break. This web site documents much of the injustice of the experience, BUT it is by no means a complete listing. In all sincerity, even typing the summary above tears at my spirit and causes me to relive the most horrific years of my life while still not knowing when the courts will address their own corruption.

The Bottom line is Judge Weilheimer completely neglects to address the lack of jurisdiction for the Court to issue the Order of May 9, 2011.

Judge Weilheimer completely neglects to address the uncontested and unrefuted testimony in her court which demonstrated the lack of jurisdiction.

Judge Weilheimer completely neglects to address the lack of jurisdiction while ignoring the rule of law, precedents and case law which exist in state and federal courts.

The clear demonstration of her lack of integrity, the recently elected and sworn to office in January 2014, Judge Weilheimer presents that after less than 2 months serving on the Montgomery County bench she would deny a litigant justice in spite of overwhelming evidence and facts already on the court record to conceal the corruption of the Montgomery County judiciary.

Shameful. The only possible redemption would be for her to come out publicly in support of the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6. The challenge was filed to restore the integrity of the judiciary. For Gail Weilheimer, there may be hope. By her own choice, Rule 1.6 stole her integrity.

Would she have the courage to regain some self-respect by preserving protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States.

For Rhonda Daniele and Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio, their malice and terroristic injustice designed to cause my suicide show they lack any inclination towards redemption.

The rest in varying degrees are in a similar situation. Judge Page crafted the proceeding in his court to deliver an injustice which could put me in jail to pay off over $300,000 in contempt charges. No amount of time in his twisted church will lessen the terror his injustice has caused to me, and to others.

JUSTICE IS COMING. Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information of the Rules of Professional Conduct is UNCONSTITUTIONAL in that it denies litigants of their rights under the Constitution of the United States. It diminishes the victim to being destitute, homeless and forced to suffer continuing injustices.