Regaining Possession: An application of Rule 1.6

Under PA Law, there are two methods to address the issue of title and ownership of property.
If you are in possession of the property, you file a QUIET TITLE.
If you are not in possession of the property, you file an EJECTMENT.

Homeless since 2011, with patience and perseverance, I played their game. Rule 1.6 secretly and silently affects everything.

The corruption of the court is it's own undoing.


Ejectment filed in August 2013.
PHYSICALLY THROWN OUT OF COURT

Ejectment filed again in October 2013.

March 2014. The Court dismissed ejectment because I was not in possession of the property. An error which can be addressed on appeal.
- - the concealed issue is the exposure of their invalid deed,
- - the fraudulent conveyance
- - presenting the void and defective order issued by Judge Carluccio
- - the invalid court order cannot permit/excuse a crime
- - in the clear absence of subject matter jurisdiction, absolute judicial immunity is not available and exposes the entire bench, 20 judges, 8 years of litigation, a complete farce, liability for damages and releif.
- - improper use of the invalid order by county offices.

THE LOGIC FAILURE: THE COURT CANNOT ATTAIN RETROACTIVE JURISDICTION FOR THEIR INVALID ORDER. Ignoring only exacerbates everyone involved while preventing any resolution. FOREVER. MY MOTIVATION: The victim loses the protection of the rule of law and all constitutional rights without resolution. FOREVER. JUDGE'S MOTIVATION: Liability. Exposure of corruption and injustice and terror. Injustice. The egregious violation of the public trust.

December 2014. The Superior Court affirms the lower court.
- - adding chaos: there is no evidence of any judge being involved in their 'decision'.
- - The staff lawyers... is it Interference or Intervention?
a) Follow the law, the lower court is exposed.
b) Ignore the law, the judges are acting without immunity.
c) Commit Fraud, legal staff intercepts and 'plays judge'.

c) Commit Fraud

FRAUD - the lack of accountability and responsibility concealed by unsigned documents, failure to hold proceedings, and documents which violate EVERY judicial canon.
- Fraud in the furtherance of fraud under Rule 1.6
- UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTIONS and a failure to explain pursuant to Rule 1.6 proves Rule 1.6 is preventing constitutional rights. GOTCHA!!!

Recognizing this interference with the administration of justice, criminal complaints have been filed... with county, state and federal law enforcement... and filed with the court.

Escalate? NO.

The Supreme Court of PA can select which cases it reviews. Escalation would only delay gaining possession, the courts have acted to delay long enough. The refusal of jurisdiction is an acknowledgement of the corruption, lawlessness and injustice.
There is no point in exposing the injustice to the Supreme Court forcing the sacrifice of their integrity to conceal the corruption of the lower courts.
The Supreme Court will follow Rule 1.6 because the Supreme Court enacted it. (Unconstitutionally)

Supreme Court review of the dismissal would only return the matter to the lower court for hearings and a further delay.

Undisclosed, Rule 1.6 is actively corrupting every decision.

THE COURTS HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION AND CANNOT BE INVOLVED... AND AFFIRMED IT... TWICE. Judiciary is out. Ejectment fail. Rule 1.6 exposed.

Judicial branch has indicated a lack of jurisdiction. Their affirmed lack of jurisdiction prevents them from action, and intervention as I retake possession of my home. As I have legal title to the property, an Ejectment cannot be filed against me by a non-owner.

Let's go home!

Where required to Quiet Title, I have requested the assistance of the Governor, Attorney General and the Sheriff to regain possession of my home. Because, the people who are trespassing there sure are not gonna do it.

"THE RULE 1.6 THING"
The law is clear.
The judges are wrong in indicating their lack of jurisdiction,
BUT... it isn't what they are saying that causes their lack of jurisdiction.
It is what they are NOT saying.

Pursuant to Rule 1.6 Confidentiality, they may not disclose actions which will adversely affect the integrity of the court. If they indicate Rule 1.6 is the basis for their improper decision, they confirm the unconstitutional aspect of Rule 1.6 preventing the rule of law and constitutional rights.

The courts do not have jurisdiction because Rule 1.6 MANDATES non-disclosure and confidentiality where exposure adversely affects the integrity of the judiciary.

Rule 1.6 prevents the court from revealing that their lack of jurisdiction is necessitated by their corruption to conceal their corruption.

Thankfully, the Judiciary has removed themselves from the issue of possession. A full year lost... more litigation to come. But, taking back the house is likely to attract news media attention and expose Rule 1.6... I'm not restricted by unconstitutional law, nor improper court orders pending appeal, nor grand jury secrecy... and I've got a secret that's been called the worst kept secret in Pennsylvania. Your Welcome, PA. Justice is Coming.

---

Any application of Rule 1.6 demonstrates it is unconstitutional.
Disclosure is irrelevant where non-disclosure is evident. If it's not there... there's your proof.

Their improper decision is based on an unconstitutional law which is not indicated because THE LAW mandates non-disclosure, and if revealed it would expose that THE LAW is unconstitutional.

Rule 1.6 is concealing the corruption it causes and the improper decisions it requires without any indication that it is being applied pursuant to itself... because Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional.

An unconstitutional law is no law. A nullity. Without any effect. As if it never existed. ... and can not be the basis or justification for action or inaction.

So a Law which does not exist, and can never have existed,
is concealing the crimes and unconstitutional actions and judicial corruption
which it has caused and permitted
while concealed and mandated to be held confidential.
AND... THAT LAW can't be removed for the same reasons.

The Legislative branch did not write the law.
Non-disclosure is mandated of the lawyers in the Legislature. DO NOT ASK JUDICIARY COMMITTEE TO REVIEW. DUH!

The Executive Branch did not sign the law.
Where Gov Corbett was a lawyer non-disclosure is mandated.
Where Gov Wolf is NOT a lawyer, those he would consult are lawyers and non-disclosure is mandated.
Where the Attorney General is a lawyer, non-disclosure is mandated.

BUT, an unconstitutional law is no law. There is no mandate for non-disclosure by lawyers... where they recognize and understand the unconstitutionality of the 'law'.

When Attorney General Kathleen Kane recognized and understood the Unconstitutional effect of Rule 1.6, she was permitted to address it, and actually mandated by the Rules of Professional Conduct to address the issue.

THE SUDDEN PUBLIC SILENCE OF KATHLEEN KANE

WAIT!!!

Two secret court orders from unidentified courts require the attorney general to neglect the responsibilities of her office and expose her to personal liability. SILENCE!

The court orders must be followed while their impropriety is appealed. SILENCE!

WAIT WAIT!!!

A grand jury calls the attorney general to testify. Grand Jury secrecy requires the silence of the attorney general. SILENCE!

HOLD ON!!!

Lawyers and Prosecutors and District Attorneys commence a barrage of disinformation to which the 'silenced' attorney general may not respond. The same people who participated in and/or failed to address the corruption since 2007. From Montgomery County and the Attorney General's office - under Tom Corbett and Linda Kelly all those requests by phone, letter and EMAIL for HELP were ignored. Lots of email.

WAIT WAIT WAIT!!!

The Montgomery County Grand Jury, run by Judge Carluccio's Husband, and the Judge who jailed Drexler, which has not indicated what they are investigating. As it could be any topic - this requires the silence of Kathleen Kane with regard to EVERYTHING and ANYTHING to do with Terance Healy and Rule 1.6.

The unpublished presentment is 'leaked', but nothing can be confirmed or discussed. Everything is speculation which is fully extrapolated by lawyers who know the attorney general is 'silenced'. Clearly, these LAWYERS know and understand how to manipulate under Rule 1.6. Montgomery County Commissioner Bruce Castor, explained it concisely:

"Career lawmen think strategically. They don’t go for the immediate gratification
of a personal attack, instead preferring to set the board up just right and
striking at the precise moment where the object of the attack cannot recover."

“you don’t go to war with a person who spends his/her professional life figuring how to [screw] others…”

In 2007, Bruce Castor was Montgomery County District Attorney while unprosecuted terroristic technological intrusions into my life and family were reported and fully documented. Castor ignored and prevented federal authorities from investigating.

Under Rule 1.6, they may commit fraud and actions in the furtherance of fraud to prevent disclosure and resolution of prior frauds while mandated to non-disclosure and confidentiality. AND THEY DO.

Separation of Powers???

Unconstitutional law concealed by improper SECRET court orders which prevent the Executive Branch (Attorney General) from enforcing the laws of the Legislative Branch.

SECRET COURT ORDERS FROM UNIDENTIFIED COURTS. Yes, looks like... quacks like... that duck is Rule 1.6.

The Judicial Branch has usurped the full power of the government but cannot reveal how they did it.

The Executive and Legislative branches cannot address THE LAW which they have not written.

The Judicial Branch enacted it without authority... but they can't disclose that either.

The American Bar Association

The One Law which Overthrew the Government... was written by the American Bar Association while holding the Judicial Branch hostage while leveraging decisions and perpetuating injustice in the best interest of their membership. Injustice is a goldmine.


The Pennsylvania Legislature must act to suspend the unconstitutional law so that honest and ethical lawyers who have not been tainted by corruption can lawfully address the unconstitutional law improperly enacted by the Judiciary.

Only the Pennsylvania Legislature has the constitutional authority to suspend laws.

Only the non-lawyers in the Legislature can act without violating the law until it is not law.

Having to follow an unconstitutional law, until it is declared unconstitutional (nullity, blah blah) FAIL! RULE 1.6 REQUIRES NON-DISCLOSURE AND CONFIDENTIALITY BY LAWYERS AND LEGAL PROFESSIONALS - a deliberate built-in defense to conceal it's unconstitutionality and require participation in injustice.

Governor Wolf,

Order the Legislature to assemble for a presentation of Rule 1.6 - an improperly enacted unconstitutional law which corrupts the judiciary and causes injustice while defying exposure through it's own mandatory confidentiality - a self-defense which prevents correction, suspension or edit.

Senators and Representatives who are lawyers will sit silently. Rule 1.6 mandates their silence.

Suspend Rule 1.6, directly and where included by reference within any other law.

Watch the results... Rule of Law. Constitution. US Constitution. Justice.

Every. Person. Matters.

Respectfully,

Terance

LOGIC FAILURE: THE COURT CANNOT ATTAIN JURISDICTION FOR THEIR INVALID ORDERS. Ignoring only exacerbates everyone involved while preventing any resolution. FOREVER. The victim loses the protection of the rule of law and all constitutional rights without resolution. FOREVER. The injustice can be played by anyone... FOREVER. (Concealed by Rule 1.6) There is no allowance for retroactive jurisdiction. The order will always be invalid. Rule 1.6 prevents exposure and resolution while denying a person of their rights and any protection of the law. Rule 1.6 will always be unconstitutional.

WWKKD? What Would Kathleen Kane Do?

QUESTION: If Attorney General Kathleen Kane recognizes the unconstitutional aspects of Rule 1.6, confidentiality and non-disclosure would not be obligated. ... WHAT WOULD KATHLEEN KANE DO? WHAT WOULD KATHLEEN KANE SAY?


Fact: Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane is required to follow the US Constitution, the PA Constitution and the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Fact: An unconstitutional law is a nullity. No Law. It has no effect. (Judicial Branch has claimed exclusive rights to deciding constitutionality.)

Fact: Kathleen Kane did not defend a law which she believed to be unconstitutional. Similar laws had already been recognized as unconstitutional in many other states. Her actions were in accordance with the law. The Pennsylvania law was eventually recognized as unconstitutional.

Fact: Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information of the Rules of Professional Conduct is unconstitutional as it collaterally affects the substantive rights of litigants.

Fact: The Rules of Professional Conduct has a self-defense built in where non-disclosure is mandated where information would adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary. All non-disclosure and confidentiality is accomplished in the "rules" by direct reference to Rule 1.6.

Fact: The Rules of Professional Conduct are not enforced by the Attorney General. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court enforces the 'rules' through internal organizations within the judicial branch.

Fact: As a legal professional, the Attorney General must FOLLOW the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Fact: The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

Fact: The Pennsylvania Constitution may not infringe on the protections provided by the US Constitution.

Fact: Pennsylvania law must be constitutional - A REQUIREMENT of the PA Constitution and the US Constitution.

Fact: The Attorney General has the responsibility and obligation to address unconstitutional laws which affect every Pennsylvanian.


ISSUE: How do you approach the constitutionality of a law which requires silence/confidentiality/non-disclosure by all legal professional/lawyers/judges.

ISSUE: How do you approach the constitutionality of a law which permits (mandates) fraud for the purpose of concealing a prior fraud?

ISSUE: How do you approach the constitutionality of a law which permits (mandates) fraud which prevents the prior fraud from being rectified?


PROBLEM: Challenging an unconstitutional state law (which has been enacted in every state 1984-2009)
- without any assistance from lawyers/legal professionals
- where lawyers/legal professionals are permitted (mandated) to commit fraud to prevent your effort
- where lawyers/legal professionals are mandated to confidentiality and non-disclosure
- where the court staff are lawyers/legal professionals permitted (mandated) to commit fraud to prevent and conceal the issue

- where the unconstitutional law has been improperly enacted by the state supreme court
- the state supreme court cannot strike the law without violating the law

- where all federal lawyers (government) are prevented from intervention (McDade-Murtha Amendment)
- where the federal court staff are lawyers/legal professionals permitted (mandated) to commit fraud to prevent and conceal the issue (Local Rules)


SOLUTION: A pre-emptive Constitutional Challenge in Federal Court which would return the litigants to the state court with their constitutional rights 'restored' and with protection of the Rule of Law.
Success would require the attorney general to default in the matter.
- by doing nothing and remaining silent, the attorney general/lawyer does not violate the law
- by removing the discretionary decision from the judiciary, a judge does not violate the law in granting the 'default'
- after the fact, the argument that the 'mandate' is discretionary could made and upheld in any disciplinary proceedings

The integrity of a judiciary permitted (mandated) to commit fraud to prevent and conceal the issue would be adversely affected by any and every discretionary decision. DEFAULT is the best, most effective lawful and constitutional approach.

District Court	DEFAULT by 56 state attorneys general. A late-filed, electronically submitted, improperly titled document attributed to PA AG Kane which required a discretionary judicial response action resulted in dismissal. There is no evidence of any judicial involvement.
Reconsideration?	Denied.
Third Circuit Court	Decision of the District Court was affirmed. There is no evidence of any judicial involvement.
Reconsideration?	Denied.

BACK TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA... with Rule 1.6 still preventing the rule of law and my constitutional rights. This would demonstrate the issue, build evidence and adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary. No alternative.

In the Superior Court of Pennsylvania multiple appeals which referred to the issue of the Constitutional Challenge were reported to the Pennsylvania Attorney General as required by law and procedures. After the notices were sent, a document was filed with the Superior Court. The Superior Court responded to the document. Requests for those documents were refused. The clerks removed the entry. Motions for the Production of the documents were denied without explanation. There is no evidence of any judicial involvement.

FACT: Two secret orders were issued by unidentified courts to Attorney General Kathleen Kane which prevented her from the responsibilities of her office and mandated her silence regarding the issue.

Evidence was reported to law enforcement that the appeals to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania were intercepted and prevented from any judicial review.

The Superior Court staff (lawyers/legal professionals) are permitted (mandated) to commit fraud to prevent and conceal the issue according to Rule 1.6. HOWEVER, were they to claim Rule 1.6 Confidentiality when faced with the violations of state and federal law and evidence of denial of access to the courts and other constitutionally protected rights, THEY WOULD PROVE THE LAW WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

As the actions of the lower court were done in clear absence of subject matter jurisdiction, the protection of absolute judicial immunity is not available. This may be hindering the Superior Court judiciary from covering for the court staff.

After the report to Law Enforcement, a Montgomery County Grand Jury called Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane for questioning. Violations of Grand Jury secrecy were purported reasons for the interview, however AG Kane was not permitted to speak about the grand jury investigation.

Two secret court orders from two unidentified courts.
An alleged violation of a prior Grand Jury secrecy.
Grand Jury secrecy imposed regarding their investigation.

A great clandestine effort has been put forth to silence and prevent the Attorney General from investigation and performing the responsibilities of her office.

These pre-emptive efforts of the unidentified judiciary appear to violate the separation of powers and the PA Constitution. The Judicial branch is ordering the Executive branch to neglect the laws of the Legislative branch.

An apparent overthrow of the Pennsylvania government by a judiciary which has demonstrated a lack of judicial independence to review cases before the courts, and the acceptance of the fraudulent, illegal and unconstitutional actions of the court staff. ALL CAUSED AND CONCEALED BY RULE 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION which the Supreme Court did NOT have the authority to enact where not "consistent with this Constitution and neither abridge, enlarge nor modify the substantive rights of any litigant." Pa Constitution Article 5 Section 10 (c)

Rule 1.6 has undermined the authority and independence of a judiciary held hostage which overreaches and usurps the authority of the state and federal government. One Law. Every State. Affects every judiciary at state and federal levels. Silently and Confidentially ignoring the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States.

The American Bar Association. The organization responsible for the 'Rules' presented as an ethical standard - but lacking ethics, morals and legalizing fraud for lawyers - has affiliated organizations and members in every state and federal court. Their 1983 exclusion of the 'fraud provisions' was deliberate. The resulting injustice clear. The effort to execute and conceal the sedition of the American government accomplished pursuant to the same law. CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION.


LOGIC: If Attorney General Kathleen Kane recognizes the unconstitutional aspects of Rule 1.6, non-disclosure would not be obligated defend the law. WHAT WOULD KATHLEEN KANE DO?

She's Kathleen Kane. Kathleen Kane does not do 'unconstitutional'.

Kathleen Kane would not be silenced by an unconstitutional law which mandates her silence and participation in a conspiracy.

Kathleen Kane is going to 'DO SOMETHING" and the constitutions and the law support her actions.

How do you silence a "Rule 1.6 liberated Kathleen Kane"?

Issue court orders which silence her and prevent her action and investigation. Threaten sanctions and contempt of court for breaching those improper orders... Broadcast false information about her being 'above the law'... with a history of violating 'secrecy and confidentiality'... based on leaked reports from a grand jury... regarding the purported purpose of their investigation which was also leaked. Find a homophobe state representative to propose her impeachment because SHE WAS RIGHT about marriage laws... but he's still a homophobe.

Did I mention I was from Montgomery County? Two of those Appeals related to the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas. My divorce has been before 20 members of the Montgomery County Judiciary. In 2011, Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio, wife of Grand Jury Special Prosecutor Thomas Carluccio and then-President of the Montgomery County Bar Association, issued a deliberately defective and void order in clear absence of subject matter jurisdiction causing absolute judicial immunity to be unavailable for the entire bench. She did it to conceal another defective and void order in the matter from 2007 which undermined every proceeding, denied the rule of law, constitutional rights and subjected me to a level of injustice, surveillance and harassment that should have lead to suicide. Apparently, no court will address the defective and void order. And certainly not when it will 'clear the bench' and subject each judge to liability for damages.

The scandal of Rule 1.6 is big. Very big. Huge. It has been referred to as 'the worst kept secret in Pennsylvania" but is a national crisis. HUGE.

On CNN in November, Kane indicated:
“I knew that I was walking into public corruption. Which again is why I ran.”

“But I will tell you this. Even I am shocked at the level of public corruption.”

“I am shocked at how deep it goes.
I am shocked at how powerful it is.
I have never seen anything like this. It’s breathtaking.
It has been described by the people familiar with what is happening as shameful.”

“But, if this can be done to me as Attorney General, the chief law enforcement officer of the 5th largest state in the country, I am sickened to think what can and may be done to regular, good people who don’t have the resources that I have to challenge it.”

---

If you are thinking that this whackjob just doesn't want to be divorced. WRONG. When you have no protection of the law and no constitutional rights, you have no life. Every crime committed against you is ignored and excused. Every fraud and false allegation is prosecuted to the fullest extent by a 'corrupted' judiciary. Any success can be taken from you by false litigation. I have been unemployed since March 2007. Homeless since 2011. Destitute since 2007. Involved in constant litigation since 2007. When you have no rights, you face 3 possible destinations... 1) Homeless/Destitute 2) Incarcerated 3) Suicide.

---

UnConstitutional Law ? SILENCE ... (Secret Orders + Secret Courts)*Appeals + Grand Jury = SILENCE.

While it is clear why Attorney General Kathleen Kane is being SILENT, why has the news media neglected to present the story?

Kathleen Kane's Court Ordered Secrecy

Three Appeals will now be sent to the PA Supreme Court - with all three demonstrating the corruption and failure of the lower court AND the interception by the Superior Court Legal Staff - their fraudulent documents interfered with the administration of justice... and denied access to the court.

All three appeals neglected the deliberately defective and void order of Judge Carolyn Carluccio which lacked jurisdiction... still lacks jurisdiction... can never have jurisdiction... with a defect which causes a lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The defect - failure to follow the PA law - cause a clear loss of subject matter jurisdiction. All circuits interpret Stump and Bradley to require a clear absence of subject matter jurisdiction in order to lose judicial immunity.

The deliberately defective and void order causes the loss of judicial immunity for the entire judiciary in Healy v Healy. 20 judges of the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas. Where EVERY PROCEEDING AND ORDER since 2007 can be demonstrated to be undermined and leveraged by corruption and confidentiality mandated by Rule 1.6. Relitigate? No point. Recovery and escape from further their is a necessity. The case history demonstrates the affect of Rule 1.6 on my rights.

SUPERIOR COURT - CENTRAL LEGAL STAFF

Why would the Central Legal Staff not provide/deliver the appeal to the judges? To protect the judges from acting in a matter where they would have no judicial immunity.

So the Central Legal Staff intercepts and intervenes and acts to conceal the lower courts error, and the lower court's gross negligence when informed of the defect, and the lower court's continued malicious retaliation against the victim of their error.

There is no law which permits the Central Legal Staff to intercept and intervene. Their actions clearly deny due process and access to the court - constitutional violations. Any attempt to conceal their crimes pursuant to Rule 1.6 Confidentiality proves that Rule 1.6 causes the denial of constitutionally protected rights of litigant.

Where it denies constitutional rights, the substantive rights of a litigant have been affected demonstrating the lack of authority for the state Supreme Court to enact Rule 1,6 into law.

Rule 1.6 is an unconstitutional nullity - NOT A LAW.


PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL, KATHLEEN KANE

Where required by Rule 521 to notify the state Attorney general where the constitutionality of a law will come into question, PA Attorney General Kathleen Kane was notified of the three appeals in the Superior Court AND that the constitutionality of Rule 1,.6 would be called into question.

Filed in good faith, I did not expect the Central Legal Staff to demonstrate the unconstitutional affect of Rule 1.6.

Attorney General Kathleen Kane was subsequently ordered to silence by secret court orders from two different courts. The orders further prevented her from performing the functions and responsibilities of the Attorney General.

A Grand Jury called Kathleen Kane to testify under strict confidentiality which would prevent disclosure and investigative action by the attorney general.

The Norristown Grand Jury seeks to conceal the evidence of the extreme malicious corruption and cruelty of Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio in the matter of Healy v Healy.

The Grand Jury is being run by Special Prosecutor Thomas Carluccio. Had any other attorney been running the grand jury, they could be compelled to testify about the matter. A husband cannot be compelled to testify against his wife. The Norristown Grand Jury seeks to conceal the evidence.

Secret Order #1 was issued by the Superior Court of Pennsylvania demanding silence and non-participation of the attorney general. An act of judicial corruption and manipulation which prevents the attorney general from performing her job responsibilities and violates her oath of office.

Secret Order #2 was issued by the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas demanding silence and non-participation of the attorney general while seeking to determine the amount of information the attorney general already knew about Healy v Healy and the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 - and then requiring the information to be suppressed.

THE SECRET IS THAT INJUSTICE IS INESCAPABLE WHILE THE JUDICIARY VIOLATE THE PUBLIC TRUST TO PERPETUATE A CONSPIRACY OF CORRUPTION INITIATED BY THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION.

A secret order by a secret judge can not be secretly enforced... the judge and the court would have to reveal themselves to the public.. exposing their corruption to sunlight.

I believe it is time for Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane to break her silence.

I would hope she is joined by Attorney General Eric Holder and President Barack Obama.

I would hope they are supported by every state Attorney General - who have had their deliberate default action in the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 undermined and silenced.

I respectfully and sincerely request the support of every American to restore justice and the US Constitution.

Every. Person. Matters.
JUSTICE NOW.
Equality

The Worst Kept Secret In Pennsylvania

STATEMENT BY PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL KATHLEEN KANE
Monday, November 17, 2014
Norristown, Pennsylvania
=========================================
As many of you know, I initiated an independent inquiry into the way the Sandusky investigation was conducted -- a central concern raised during my campaign for Attorney General. During that investigation, thousands of emails were discovered sent and received by Pennsylvania public officials that contained pornographic materials. As a result of multiple requests to the Office of Attorney General under Pennsylvania's broad Right to Know Law, I released most of these emails to the media and the public.

The Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in a recently published opinion, described the attachments to these emails as "clearly pornographic" and possibly criminal. As a result, many senior public officials involved in these emails resigned. But others remain on the public payrolls, as the Chief Justice pointed out.

Today I am due to testify before a Pennsylvania Grand Jury, as has been publicly reported. However, due to continuous, even overlapping court orders since last March, I am not allowed to explain why I am testifying or what my testimony has to do with the release of the pornographic emails under the Right to Know law. These court orders also expose me to legal risk if I do my job as Attorney General that I was elected and trusted by the people of
Pennsylvania to do. I am not allowed at this time to explain why.

The Office of Attorney General has cooperated from the beginning of this process and I will do the same. I will tell the Special Prosecutor the truth and the facts surrounding the disclosure of information to the public that was done in a way that did not violate statutory or case law regarding Grand Jury secrecy.

Despite my present situation that restricts my ability to answer your questions, I remain committed to the central theme of my campaign -- transparency in government. The public has a right to know what public officials are doing or not doing with taxpayer dollars and whether they are doing their jobs properly or attempting to investigate or prosecute possible criminal conduct.

I promised I would expose corruption and abuse of the legal system. I understand that there are those on the public payroll who stand to lose their jobs and who may feel threatened by our commitment to expose them. I will not be deterred. The winds of change can only blow through open windows. My administration is being prevented from prying open the windows that corruption has nailed shut. But that change is coming.

The right of the public and media to know what public officials are doing is vital and should be protected by public officials, the media, and the people of Pennsylvania. I am fighting for the right of the Attorney General to do my job without interference.

But more importantly, I am fighting for an end to abuse of the criminal justice system, for transparency, and for better government. That doesn't come without cost to us. But if this can be done to me as Attorney General, the chief law enforcement officer of the 5th largest state in the country, I am sickened to think what can and may be done to regular, good people who don't have the resources that I have to challenge it.

In conclusion, I wish I could say more and answer all your questions but I cannot. But I can promise you this: The truth and the law will prevail.

What Changed?

After Watergate, the legal profession looked somewhat foolish because the lawyers did not understand who they represented, who they worked for and who they thought they were committing crimes on behalf of. As a result, several went to jail. The American Bar Association realized they had a problem. An ethics problem.... or lack of ethics problem.

The ABA set out to fix their ethics problem by codifying (MAKING LAW) of their Code of Conduct. To sell the concept, they called it 'ethics', BUT, the Model Rules of Professional Conduct are not ethical or moral. They are not even lawful. They ARE unconstitutional.

Previously, it was 'code' without legal teeth to enforce it. AS LAW, there was an aggressively enforced mandated for non-disclosure... which even went as far as preventing lawyers (District Attorneys, Attorneys general, US Attorneys) from prosecuting crimes. Everything pointed to ONE RULE enacted in every state which controlled the state and federal governments involvement, and denied the constitutional rights of the people who likely felt violated but never understood what happened to them or why. They made the 'discretionary' decision, into a mandate of non-disclosure. The difference between code and LAW.

Taking the Canons which had been practiced for hundreds of years, and merging them with the Code Of Conduct was the responsibility of the Kutak Commission. It took years to accomplish, but in the EARLY 80'S, the Model Rules of professional Conduct were presented to the American Bar Association Conference of Delegates - the ABA's pretend government.

At the loud, vocal, open insistence of over 2/3 of the Conference, the lawyers decided to make fraud legal. They called it ethical. While they focused on protecting their 'client fraud', Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information also prevented disclosure in a far broader spectrum of incidences.

THIS IS WELL DOCUMENTED. THEY DID IT ANYWAY.
On Ethics and Expediency: The ABA's Dubious Vote on Disclosure of Client Fraud by Charles E. Lundberg March-April 1983

THE ABA MADE FRAUD LEGAL AND CALL IT ETHICAL... but only for lawyers, and their clients... without any disclosure of who was responsible for the fraud. The standard exceptions demonstrate a sociopathic and self-indulgent psychosis.

1. Where the victim would be killed, the lawyer had 'discretion' to reveal the information. Sadistically keeping a victim on the line for further frauds. (I call this INTENT TO CAUSE SUICIDE.)
- or -
2. Where the lawyer was not compensated for his 'work'.

The ABA then proceeded to have each state supreme court enact their Model Rules into LAW. Starting in 1984 in New Jersey through 2009 in Maine, Fraud became legal Disclosure of the truth became illegal. Rule 1.6 was aggressively enforced by the state Supreme courts.

The states saw it for what it was AND ENACTED IT INTO LAW ANYWAY. With occasional exceptions added, but none which made the LAW ethical, moral or constitutional. How could they make fraud ethical? legal? As code it was discretionary - the good ole boy network - but as LAW everything changed.

Calling it Attorney Client privilege, lawyers would assert it and giggle through millions of foreclosures while neglecting the FACT that the constitutional rights of the innocent victim had been denied, and prevented from any recourse. Those who survived were left destitute, homeless and suicidal.

Rule 1.6 makes it ILLEGAL for a lawyer to disclose what happened.

Additionally, anyone addressing the unconstitutional affect on their rights, would have to pursue it through the judiciary, who enacted the unconstitutional law, who protected their 'integrity', whose shameful failure would allow and destroy millions in foreclosures, and thousands in Kids For Cash.

There are not many terrorized souls who have the wherewithal to find and prove the violation of their Constitutional Rights.

It's not easy to live, let alone litigate when you have NO RIGHTS, NO PROTECTION OF THE LAW., AND NO ESCAPE. The header of the web site indicates the situation where someone has lost their constitutionally protected rights.

I am a sane man dealing with an absolutely insane situation. Every person in a position to help has acted improperly in direct violation of procedures and the law preventing the resolution of any matter… they each make the situation worse… NO ONE HELPED… NO ONE COULD HELP.

The only difference. They pressed for a suicide that I could not deliver. As a result, I found the needle in the haystack of injustice. The subsequent response of the judiciary demonstrates their loss of judicial independence. Further demonstrating the corruption of EVERY state and federal judiciary. They conceal that they had allowed themselves to become UNDONE.

A problem such as this could be resolved within minutes when the public learned what had occurred...

The media black out of the story demonstrates a very strong controlling power by the ABA. Fraud is legal for lawyers, and that is a tool they use to prevent their exposure.

The US Constitution is stronger. JUSTICE IS COMING.

---

KATHLEEN KANE. My patience with your inaction is running thin. Do your job.

There is not one government official doing anything to preserve, protect, support, defend, or enforce the US Constitution.

Why bother to take an oath if you are mandated to ignore it? MMM YEA... Lawyers are allowed to commit fraud.

Follow your oath, or RESIGN.

How to Sabotage Attorney General Kathleen Kane

Pay attention Frank Fina.
Pay attention Randall Henzes.

If you want to destroy a case in the Pennsylvania Attorney General's office... it's simple.
All you needs to do is one misdeed which MANDATES the Attorney General into submissive silence.

The Attorney General's clients include the people in her office. Like Frank Fina, Randall Henzes, Claudia Tesoro, etc...

Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information applies to revealing information about your client. Who is the Attorney General's client?

So if any of the Attorney General's 'clients' wants a prosecution in the toilet all they need to do is toss that monkeywrench...

---

PERHAPS, improperly sending all surveillance information to the FBI. Surveillance data obtained properly through a judge may not be shared with other jurisdictions.

IF THIS HAPPENS, Rule 1.6 prevents the Attorney General from speaking about it because she must represent her client.

LIKE WHEN Frank Fina sent all the information on a multi-year Philadelphia sting to the FBI... and THEN everyone accused Kathleen Kane of refusing to talk about it... even the lawyers who knew exactly why she couldn't speak. Even Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams who blasted Kathleen Kane in the press... and hired Frank Fina into his office.

---

OR PERHAPS, after the Attorney General deliberately defaults on a national issue. Someone improperly files a document LATE with the court, doing it wrong and getting assistance from the clerk, and then failing to substantiate the matter sacrifices the integrity of the court.

IF THIS HAPPENS, Rule 1.,6 prevents the Attorney General from speaking about it or taking any actions to discipline the person in her office, or any action to retract it because it would reveal the corruption caused by Rule 1.6. The court has to protect the court without concern for justice.

LIKE WHEN Randall Henzes filed a document on September 6, 2013, which was not done properly so the clerk of courts MODIFIED (something they NEVER DO) the filing on September 9, 2013. Then submitting documents which couldn't substantiate his claim, BUT the court's integrity was at stake and the court is mandated to protect it no matter the injustice. The Attorney General's office is required to protect the perpetrator even going so far as to assign another person to the appeal in the Third Circuit Court to respond without any substantiation of the claim. Because, they knew the court would not be able to lawfully rule in any other way than to protect the courts.

---

And all those lawyers, district attorneys, prosecutors, judges, etc... who ignored the Luzerne County Kids for Cash scandal for years... and then the Commission filed a completely fraudulent account of why it happened.

Rule 1.6... it's the law that let's crimes become conspiracies without any regard to the number of people harmed. The law which deliberately denies justice and constitutional rights.

---

All those foreclosures nationwide across the United States where people lost their homes based on fraudulent documents and fraudulent business practices and no one was prosecuted... Rule 1.6 mandates the silence of lawyers when their clients are stealing peoples homes through fraud. Without regard to how many millions are harmed. And no one goes to jail.

---

DO WE NOW HAVE AN IDEA ABOUT WHY JERRY SANDUSKY WAS PERMITTED TO DESTROY LIVES FOR YEARS?

And why they had so little regard for Joe Paterno that they allowed him to be blamed for their inaction in prosecuting and stopping Jerry Sandusky.

---

So next time you wonder WHY ATTORNEY GENERAL KATHLEEN KANE IS SAYING NOTHING keep in mind, that's how we cover up injustice and corruption in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Your constitutional rights are being denied and ignored in the courts by the very people trusted to regulate themselves. THEY BLEW IT. And they mandated each other to keep the secret.

Enter the Constitutional Challenge Of Rule 1.6 filed by Pro Se litigants where every state attorney general defaulted to restore the constitutional rights of the people ion their state. UNTIL RANDALL HENZES threw the 'monkeywrench'.

The clerk helped to hide the case somewhat... removing the attorneys general from the docket and not communicating with them. Or in the Third Circuit telling the state attorneys general to not participate.

It doesn't matter who is watching or directly involved, the court, 55 other state attorneys general,... in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, one man (RANDALL HENZES) can prevent the lawful action seeking to restore the constitutional rights of every American citizen which have been denied by Rule 1.6 - CONFIDENTIALITY.

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 will move on to the Supreme Court of the United States.... and concurrently to the United States Congress.

THEY THINK THE PEOPLE ARE STUPID.
TIME TO TEACH R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

JUSTICE IS COMING.

Montgomery County Judiciary notified of the Constitutional Challenge

Michael R. Kehs
Court Administrator
P.O. Box 311
Court House - 2nd Floor
Norristown, PA 19404-0311


Mr. Kehs,

We wish to call to your attention a national Constitutional issue which is in the Federal Courts as the issue relates to cases in the Montgomery County Courts.

Please be advised and on notice of the activity which causes the denial of rights and liberties protected by the United States Constitution.

We respectfully request distribution of this letter and attachment to the Montgomery County Judiciary.

Respectfully,

Todd M. Krautheim Terance Healy

(Attachment 2 pages)
cc:
Hon. William J. Furber, President Judge
Hon. Joseph A. Smyth
Hon. Bernard A. Moore
Hon. William R. Carpenter
Hon. Rhonda Lee Daniele
Hon. Emanuel A. Bertin
Hon. Thomas M. Del Ricci
Hon. R. Stephen Barrett
Hon. Arthur R. Tilson
Hon. Thomas C. Branca
Hon. Steven T. O'Neill
Hon. Thomas P. Rogers
Hon. Garrett D. Page
Hon. Kelly C. Wall
Hon. Carolyn T. Carluccio
Hon. Wendy Demchick-Alloy
Hon. Patricia E. Coonahan
Hon. Gary S. Silow
Hon. Richard P. Haaz
Hon. Cheryl L. Austin
Hon. Stanley R. Ott
Hon. Lois E. Murphy
Hon. William T. Nicholas
Hon. S. Gerald Corso
Hon. Calvin S. Drayer, Jr.
Hon. Kent H. Albright

By Fax to District Courts:
HON. ALBERT J. AUGUSTINE
HON. FRANCIS J. BERNHARDT
HON. HAROLD D. BOREK
HON. ESTER J. CASILLO
HON. CHRISTOPHER J. CERSKI
HON. KENNETH DEATELHAUSER
HON. ANDREA DUFFY
HON. CATHERINE M HUMMEL FRIED
HON. JAY S. FRIEDENBERG,
HON. WALTER F. GADZICKI, JR.
HON. JAMES P. GALLAGHER
HON. MARGARET HUNSICKER
HON. JOHN D. KESSLER,
HON. EDWARD C. KROPP SR.
HON. FRANCIS J. LAWRENCE, JR.
HON. PAUL N. LEO
HON. DEBORAH LUKENS
HON. WILLIAM MARUSZCZAK
HON. CATHERINE E. MCGILL
HON. ELIZABETH MC HUGH
HON. HARRY J. NESBITT III
HON. SCOTT T. PALLADINO
HON. JUANITA A. PRICE
HON. CATHLEEN KELLY REBAR
HON. MAURICE H. SAYLOR
HON. HENRY SCHIRESON
HON. ROBERT M. SOBECK
HON. KATHLEEN VALENTINE
HON. PATRICIA ZAFFARANO
HON. KAREN EISNER ZUCKER

The Eastern District Decision

Onward to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals... As was expected the Challenge was dismissed to proceed to a court where the decision of Constitutionality can be addressed.

The following are their 'silly' reasons... in silly format. We will post the Decision within the next few days.

---

 - 

---

---

The Constitutional rights of people all across the country were prevented from being restored because on KATHLEEN KANE of PENNSYLVANIA. She single-handedly usurped the matter preventing any other state from responding to the matter, hearing about the ongoing litigation.

37 states defaulted and would have restored the constitutional rights of their citizens. Kathleen Kane prevented that from happening.

State Representative Darryl Metcalfe says Kane has created a constitutional crisis. Metcalfe has called for the Impeachment of Kathleen Kane.

Kathleen has responded in typical Rule 1.6 style... the typical accusation. You aint no lawyer. You don't know the law. Victims who have lost their rights have been told this often. Ain't nobody got time for that, Kathleen.

Kathleen Kane NEVER FORGETS her obligation to follow Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct. She always invokes the US Constitution, the laws of Pennsylvania, and the Rules of Professional Conduct. She know Rule 1.6 TRUMPS everything. She needs to recognize that it cannot lawfully continue to 'trump' the US Constitution. And the Constitutional Challenge would have lawfully allowed her to do so.

For Openers...

TERANCE HEALY and TODD M. KRAUTHEIM in the name of THE UNITED STATES file this pleading against KATHLEEN KANE, Pennsylvania Attorney General and the ATTORNEYS GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES challenging the constitutionality of Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Plaintiffs seek to restore the constitutional rights of Pro Se litigants while restoring the integrity and reputation of the judiciary and the legal profession and deliver to the legislature the ability to perform the duties of their position to responsibly manage the law.

Plaintiffs additionally offer that they are in the extremely unique position to be acting lawfully with proper standing while having a valid causes for relief in the proper forum for the rule to be addressed.

Yes, we've got standing AND a cause for relief AND a venue.
Evidence in Family Court, Civil Court and Criminal Court.

American Bar Association...
I AM COMING. I WANT MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
I WANT THEM NOW.