February 3, 2015
Governor Wolf
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
225 Capitol Bldg
501 North 3rd Street
Harrisburg , PA 17120
Kathleen Kane
Office of the Attorney General
11 N 3rd St
16th Floor, Strawberry Square
Harrisburg , PA 17101
Sheriff Russell J. Bono
Montgomery County Court House
First Floor
P.O. Box 311
Norristown, PA 19404
Under Pennsylvania law, a fraudulent conveyance has occurred with regard to my property at 110 Banbury Avenue, North Wales, PA. I ask your assistance in regaining possession of the property where the judiciary has indicated a lack of jurisdiction to address, resolve or rectify the matter.
Documents recorded with the Montgomery County Recorder of Deeds demonstrate the deficiencies and frauds which occurred during the criminal transaction. Additional documents demonstrating the fraud have been filed with the Prothonotary.
Where a property owner is resident on the property, an Action to Quiet Title would permit the court to address the fraudulent conveyance of the property and rectify/resolve/remove the improperly recorded documents.
Where a property owner is not resident on the property, an Action in Ejectment is required to remove the trespassers from the residence and rectify/resolve/remove the improperly recorded documents.
The Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas has indicated a lack of jurisdiction and improperly dismissed an Action in Ejectment. On Appeal, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania has purportedly affirmed the lower courts decision
without any review of facts; and
without indication or support according to an applicable rule of law; and
without evidence of any judicial review of the issues presented on appeal; and
without any proceedings or hearings on the matter; and
while failing to address the issue of the appeal; and
neglecting every motion properly prepared and filed with the appellate court; and
failing to explain and produce ex parte communications/documents/orders and subsequent manipulation and concealment in the court docket.
The litigation causes lawyers representing the Defendants to be subject to sanctions where they have failed to present any defense; and neglected to offer evidence of proper ownership; and have no justification in law. Their actions have served to delay the resolution of the matter, denying the plaintiff of his home and property while demonstrating a lack of judicial independence and a corruption which adversely affects the integrity of every judge and every court.
The challenge of an unconstitutional law was indicated with evidence demonstrated by actions in the lower court. Additionally, The interception and interference by the legal staff of the Superior Court violate Pennsylvania law, federal law and the US Constitution.
A complaint of the unconstitutional and criminal actions of the court staff has been filed with
United States Attorney Zane Memeger, as the offenses occurred within the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane, as the offenses occurred within Pennsylvania and as required by the Rules of Appellate Procedure the attorney general must be notified where an appeal will challenge the constitutionality of a law.
Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams, as the offenses occurred within the city and county of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Bucks County District Attorney David Heckler, as I am a resident of Bucks County, PA.
The United States Postal Inspectors, Philadelphia, as the forged and fraudulent documents attributed to the judiciary were delivered through the use of the US Postal Service.
The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, as the actions violate the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Attorney General Kathleen Kane has been ordered to SILENCE by two secret court orders from two unidentified courts. Where these orders additionally prevent investigation and require an improper negligence for the functions and responsibilities of the Attorney General, Kathleen Kane's failure might be 'explained'. But, what of the others who have neglected their law enforcement responsibilities and participation in a conspiracy to interfere with civil rights (42 USC § 1985, 18 U.S.C. § 241) under color of law (18 U.S.C. § 242).
Additionally, the following have been notified of the unconstitutional Pennsylvania law which has been improperly enacted by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania where their authority requires laws 'consistent with [the Pennsylvania] Constitution and neither abridge, enlarge nor modify the substantive rights of any litigant.' PA Constitution Article V Section 10(c)
- Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett
- The Senators and Representatives of the Pennsylvania Legislature
- The elected Sheriffs of Pennsylvania
- The Senators and Representatives of the US Congress
- President Barack Obama
- Pennsylvania Supreme Court Chief Justice Ron Castille
A Constitutional Challenge had been filed in federal district court and served upon the state attorney general in every state and territory, with notice to every state governor, as the same unconstitutional law has been enacted in every state and affects constitutionally protected rights of litigants while denying any protection of the law.
Improperly dismissed after default by every state attorney general, the United States Marshall service was notified along with the US Department of Justice and US Attorney General Eric Holder. An appeal to the Third Circuit Court affirmed the district court's dismissal while unsubstantiated by any dismissal doctrine and neglecting the facts associated with the matter.
Absent any available recourse within the judicial branch to address the theft by fraudulent conveyance of my property;
Having identified and demonstrated the unconstitutional collateral affect of the Rule 1.6 mandated non-disclosure and confidentiality by every legal professional;
With the resulting participation by the above-named persons, and all lawyers and legal professionals, in a conspiracy which denies constitutional rights, obstructing justice and denying the rule of law while neglecting any effort to address, remove or suspend the unconstitutional law;
I seek your assistance to regain possession of the residence which will permit me to file an Action to Quiet Title to resolve and rectify the fraudulent documents filed with the Montgomery County Recorder of Deeds.
Respectfully.
Terance Healy
cc:
Governor Wolf
Pennsylvania Legislature
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
Internet (www.work2bdone.com/live)
Media
Healy v Miller 2013-29976
Healy v Miller 900 EDA 2014
Attachments:
Notice Complaint of Unconstitutional Actions
Letter: Zane Memeger
Letter: Seth Williams
Letter: Kathleen Kane
Letter: David Heckler
Complaint: US Postal Inspectors
Overview of the Constitutional Challenge to Rule 1.6
Showing posts with label Letter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Letter. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 3, 2015
Saturday, November 15, 2014
Letter to Chief Deputy Attorney General
November 15, 2014
Gregory R. Neuhauser
Chief Deputy Attorney General
Litigation Section
15th Floor, Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA 17120
RE: Your File #3600
With regard to the Notice pursuant to Rule 521.
The Superior Court of PA - Central Legal Staff (CLS) are exposed violating PA Law, and Constitutional Rights. There is no authority for the Central Legal Staff to act alone on matters. They have violated Pennsylvania law, obstructed justice, interfered with the administration of the courts, demonstrated their participation in a conspiracy to deny, prevent and obstruct justice, and committed multiple acts of fraud.
Where these actions demonstrate a denial of constitutionally protected rights, there can be no assertion by CLS that their fraudulent actions can be excused and ignored by asserting Rule 1.6 BECAUSE THAT EXPOSES RULE 1.6 PERMITTING THE DENIAL OF MY CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS. Ergo, Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional.
It is unlikely that any member of the Superior Court Judiciary will come to the aid of the Central Legal Staff with signatures because the level of corruption involved in the lower courts has already demonstrated a lack of judicial independence causing the loss of judicial immunity.
Please review the attached documents filed with the Superior Court.
I wish to have the Central Legal Staff of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania criminally prosecuted to the fullest extent of state and federal law. Please advise, as PA Law requires I delay seeking civil damages until criminal prosecution has been addressed.
Terance Healy
871 Mustang Road
Warrington, PA 18976
Attached:
Notice / Complaint of Unconstitutional Actions
Motion for Reconsideration
Notice of Unavailability of Signed Documents
Motion for Reconsideration of Oral Argument
Motion for Proposed course of Action Towards Resolution
Motion for Production of Documents
Motion for Corrections to The Docket
Motion for the Applicable Rule of Law
ANNOTATED VERSION of unsigned Memorandum
PDF version
Gregory R. Neuhauser
Chief Deputy Attorney General
Litigation Section
15th Floor, Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA 17120
RE: Your File #3600
With regard to the Notice pursuant to Rule 521.
The Superior Court of PA - Central Legal Staff (CLS) are exposed violating PA Law, and Constitutional Rights. There is no authority for the Central Legal Staff to act alone on matters. They have violated Pennsylvania law, obstructed justice, interfered with the administration of the courts, demonstrated their participation in a conspiracy to deny, prevent and obstruct justice, and committed multiple acts of fraud.
Where these actions demonstrate a denial of constitutionally protected rights, there can be no assertion by CLS that their fraudulent actions can be excused and ignored by asserting Rule 1.6 BECAUSE THAT EXPOSES RULE 1.6 PERMITTING THE DENIAL OF MY CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS. Ergo, Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional.
It is unlikely that any member of the Superior Court Judiciary will come to the aid of the Central Legal Staff with signatures because the level of corruption involved in the lower courts has already demonstrated a lack of judicial independence causing the loss of judicial immunity.
Please review the attached documents filed with the Superior Court.
I wish to have the Central Legal Staff of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania criminally prosecuted to the fullest extent of state and federal law. Please advise, as PA Law requires I delay seeking civil damages until criminal prosecution has been addressed.
Terance Healy
871 Mustang Road
Warrington, PA 18976
Attached:
Notice / Complaint of Unconstitutional Actions
Motion for Reconsideration
Notice of Unavailability of Signed Documents
Motion for Reconsideration of Oral Argument
Motion for Proposed course of Action Towards Resolution
Motion for Production of Documents
Motion for Corrections to The Docket
Motion for the Applicable Rule of Law
ANNOTATED VERSION of unsigned Memorandum
PDF version
Letter to US Attorney Zane Memeger
November 15, 2014
Zane Memeger
U.S. Attorney's Office
615 Chestnut Street, Suite 1250
Philadelphia, PA 19106
RE: Complaint Hand Delivered on October 30, 2014
The Superior Court of PA - Central Legal Staff (CLS) are exposed violating PA Law, and Constitutional Rights. There is no authority for the Central Legal Staff to act alone on matters. They have violated Pennsylvania law, obstructed justice, interfered with the administration of the courts, demonstrated their participation in a conspiracy to deny, prevent and obstruct justice, and committed multiple acts of fraud.
Where these actions demonstrate a denial of constitutionally protected rights, there can be no assertion by CLS that their fraudulent actions can be excused and ignored by asserting Rule 1.6 BECAUSE THAT EXPOSES RULE 1.6 PERMITTING THE DENIAL OF MY CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS. Ergo, Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional.
It is unlikely that any member of the Superior Court Judiciary will come to the aid of the Central Legal Staff with signatures because the level of corruption involved in the lower courts has already demonstrated a lack of judicial independence causing the loss of judicial immunity.
Please review the attached documents filed with the Superior Court.
I wish to have the Central Legal Staff of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania criminally prosecuted to the fullest extent of state and federal law. Please advise, as PA Law requires I delay seeking civil damages until criminal prosecution has been addressed.
Terance Healy
871 Mustang Road
Warrington, PA 18976
Attached:
Notice / Complaint of Unconstitutional Actions
Motion for Reconsideration
Notice of Unavailability of Signed Documents
Motion for Reconsideration of Oral Argument
Motion for Proposed course of Action Towards Resolution
Motion for Production of Documents
Motion for Corrections to The Docket
Motion for the Applicable Rule of Law
ANNOTATED VERSION of unsigned Memorandum
PDF version
Zane Memeger
U.S. Attorney's Office
615 Chestnut Street, Suite 1250
Philadelphia, PA 19106
RE: Complaint Hand Delivered on October 30, 2014
The Superior Court of PA - Central Legal Staff (CLS) are exposed violating PA Law, and Constitutional Rights. There is no authority for the Central Legal Staff to act alone on matters. They have violated Pennsylvania law, obstructed justice, interfered with the administration of the courts, demonstrated their participation in a conspiracy to deny, prevent and obstruct justice, and committed multiple acts of fraud.
Where these actions demonstrate a denial of constitutionally protected rights, there can be no assertion by CLS that their fraudulent actions can be excused and ignored by asserting Rule 1.6 BECAUSE THAT EXPOSES RULE 1.6 PERMITTING THE DENIAL OF MY CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS. Ergo, Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional.
It is unlikely that any member of the Superior Court Judiciary will come to the aid of the Central Legal Staff with signatures because the level of corruption involved in the lower courts has already demonstrated a lack of judicial independence causing the loss of judicial immunity.
Please review the attached documents filed with the Superior Court.
I wish to have the Central Legal Staff of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania criminally prosecuted to the fullest extent of state and federal law. Please advise, as PA Law requires I delay seeking civil damages until criminal prosecution has been addressed.
Terance Healy
871 Mustang Road
Warrington, PA 18976
Attached:
Notice / Complaint of Unconstitutional Actions
Motion for Reconsideration
Notice of Unavailability of Signed Documents
Motion for Reconsideration of Oral Argument
Motion for Proposed course of Action Towards Resolution
Motion for Production of Documents
Motion for Corrections to The Docket
Motion for the Applicable Rule of Law
ANNOTATED VERSION of unsigned Memorandum
PDF version
Friday, November 14, 2014
Motion for Production of Documents
Filed in Superior Court - PDF Version
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA
MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
The Docket in this matter indicated the entry of a “Consideration Letter”. Copy of Docket attached.
Further, the docket indicated a NEXT EVENT TYPE: RESPONSE TO CONSIDERATION LETTER RECEIVED with a Due Date of September 23, 2014.
Appellant requests a copy of the Consideration Letter.
Appellant requests a copy of the Response provided.
Respectfully,
Terance Healy
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA
| Terance Healy | : |
| (Appellant) | : # 900 EDA 2014 |
| : | |
| v. | : |
| : | |
| David Miller Jennifer K. Miller | : |
| (Appellee) | : |
The Docket in this matter indicated the entry of a “Consideration Letter”. Copy of Docket attached.
Further, the docket indicated a NEXT EVENT TYPE: RESPONSE TO CONSIDERATION LETTER RECEIVED with a Due Date of September 23, 2014.
Appellant requests a copy of the Consideration Letter.
Appellant requests a copy of the Response provided.
Respectfully,
Terance Healy
Monday, August 11, 2014
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION/REVIEW OF PER CURIAM ACTION
Philadelphia Office
| Terance Healy | : NO: 900 EDA 2014 |
| : | |
| V. | : |
| : | |
| David R. Miller | : |
| Jennifer K. Miller | : |
| : |
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION/REVIEW OF PER CURIAM ACTION
Regarding the Per Curiam Order attached.
The caption is INCORRECT.
The decision is UNEXPLAINED.
The per curiam order is UNSIGNED.
The per curiam order is UNDATED.
The motion was UNCONTESTED.
Please identify the judge, the motions panel, and/or the member(s) of the Central Legal Staff involved in the careless preparation of the document.
Attached are copies of the following Superior Court Of Pennsylvania which demonstrate the previous decisions of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania with regard to procedurally defective orders where the court lacked jurisdiction.
| J-A01019-14 | Kozel v. Kozel | #461 WDA 2013 |
| J-A27027-13 | Wagner v. Wagner | #235 MDA 2013 |
| J-S17007-13 | Hauck v. Hauck | #1984 WDA 2011 |
| J-A02029-13 | Reece v. Reece | #987 WDA 2012 |
| J-S21041/08 | Danz v. Danz | #1506 WDA 2007 |
| J-A14035/09 | Bingaman v Bingaman | #1644 MDA 2008 |
| J-A30006/02 | Lazaric v. Lazaric | #263 EDA 2002 |
The evidence is clear. The law is clear. The precedents are well established.
Every action of the courts demonstrate the efforts to obstruct, misinform and misdirect somehow made ‘lawful’ by Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct causing the denial of life and liberty and terrorizing every aspect of life.
Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio issued a deliberately defective and void order. The court record indicates that she clearly lacked jurisdiction. The court record demonstrates the obstruction of the appeal filed on August 15, 2011.
There is no escape for the litigant. The court is mandated to terrorize and destroy the litigant ‘to protect the integrity of the courts.’ pursuant to Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
A deliberate, intentional and malicious court order issued by Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio without jurisdiction has terrorized the litigant from the day it was issued. An action done without jurisdiction to conceal the actions of fifteen prior judges in the matter which have attacked their victim since 2007.
The County & Court then went to work to obstruct and deny the appeal of that order issuing further void orders based on the defective and void orders. Those who enforced the defective and void orders becoming involved in criminal acts for doing so. The mandate for protecting integrity of those without integrity growing exponentially.
The Court personnel and all lawyers are mandated to obstruct and deny the victim ‘to protect the integrity of the court’. In doing so, they become involved in the obstruction of justice.
Each court believing the litigant is causing their involvement in this crime. Not the ‘judge’ acting without jurisdiction… not the Courts which mandated their participation in the denial of justice. Each ignoring the law and the US Constitution in the process of self-preservation and sacrifice of their own judicial integrity.
The Appellant is being denied Life, Liberty and equal protection under the law. He is experiencing the complete loss of rights and privileges protected by the Constitution of the United States, and the Pennsylvania Constitution.
The inability to accomplish anything with regard to the Appeal is caused by the courts, enabled by the court, endorsed by the courts, made ‘lawful’ by the courts as everyone involved in the denial of constitutionally protected rights is mandated to conceal the corruption, injustice and lack of jurisdiction of the court.
The victim can do nothing to escape the game of “The order is not void until we say it’s void’. There have been over 80 attempts to have the court take the lawful action to void the order. Every attempt has been ignored.
The Superior Courts are mandated to obstruct and deny the victim ‘to protect the integrity of the court’. In doing so they became involved in the obstruction of justice. Their knowledge of the void and defective orders mandated that they address the issue. A mandatory action, not a discretionary issue for the court.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is mandated to do the same. The Supreme Court enacted the law and in doing so must follow it. This prevents the Supreme Court from repealing the law or addressing the injustice.
And so it goes, that every effort to prevent any interaction with the judiciary is the primary focus. It is essential to ‘protect the integrity of the judiciary’. The denial of justice to the litigant is a consequence. The continued peril and jeopardy of the victim is not a concern.
The chaos injected by the letter dated August 8, 2014 and the improperly captioned, unexplained, unsigned, undated decision to the uncontested motion.
The Montgomery County Court has neglected to provide the full court record to the Superior Court and has obstructed efforts to produce the documents and transcripts to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
This Court has been notified of the litigation in the Federal Courts which is now before the United States Congress and the President to provide the only escape from the nightmare created when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and EVERY state supreme court, enacted the Rules of Professional Conduct into law without ANY constitutional review, construction by a legislature or signature of any governor. Copies of notices attached.
I respectfully request review of this matter based on the fact that Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct results in the absolute denial of right and liberties protected by the United States Constitution and that the supporting staff of this Court cease from unexplained and unsubstantiated actions to obstruct, prevent and deny justice in this matter.
AN ORAL ARGUMENT ON THIS MOTION IS DEMANDED
Respectfully,
Terance Healy
NB: The game of the Prothonotary deliberately improperly captioning the matter is obvious and tiresome. Please correct all records and documents accordingly.
The matter has left the appellant homeless and destitute and forced to respond to the Courts.
The appellant has no choice but to persist as he is not capable of suicide.
J-A01019-14 Kozel v. Kozel #461 WDA 2013
J-A27027-13 Wagner v. Wagner #235 MDA 2013
J-S17007-13 Hauck v. Hauck #1984 WDA 2011
J-A02029-13 Reece v. Reece #987 WDA 2012
J-S21041/08 Danz v. Danz #1506 WDA 2007
J-A14035/09 Bingaman v Bingaman #1644 MDA 2008
J-A30006/02 Lazaric v. Lazaric #263 EDA 2002
Letter to United States Attorneys August 8, 2014
Letter to President Barack Obama July 28, 2014
Letter to US Senators Patrick Toomey and Robert Casey July 28, 2014
Letter to the Senators of the 113th Congress July 28, 2014
Letter to US Senate Committee on the Judiciary July 30, 2014
Letter to Sheriffs of Pennsylvania July, 31, 2014
Letter to Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee July 31, 2014
Letter to United States House of Representatives July 30, 2014
Letter to US House Committee on the Judiciary July 30, 2014
Letter to Governor of EVERY state July 28, 2014
Letter to Governor Tom Corbett August 2, 2014
Letter to EVERY Pennsylvania Senator August 2, 2014
Letter to the Pennsylvania Legislature – Representatives August 2, 2014
Letter to Governor Tom Corbett, the Sheriffs of Pennsylvania, The Pennsylvania Legislature, the Attorney General of Pennsylvania August 3, 2014
Friday, August 8, 2014
Letter to United States Attorneys
August 8, 2014
The United States Attorneys
It has been one year since the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 was filed to address the Constitutional Crisis in the United States.
A law enacted without proper construction, without constitutional review, without involvement of any state legislature and without the signature of any governor designed to ignore judicial corruption and injustice which includes an aggressively enforced MANDATE of silence for all lawyers.
Filed and served upon every state Attorney General yet the federal courts undermined the preemptive challenge, concealed the matter from fifty six state attorneys general and improperly dismissed the matter without substantiation while ignoring the relevant doctrine. The actions by the court confirmed the deliberate intent and purpose of the law and it’s denial of constitutional rights without regard for the injustice served upon the people of the United States..
Enclosed are letters to the President, the US Congress, the Governors of the United states, et al.
Please review and respond. This issue will not go away on it’s own.
The Constitutional rights of the American People are being denied by the courts and held hostage by a mandate of confidentiality for all attorneys in state and federal courts which has effectively undermined the United States Government.
Your attention to this matter is anticipated and expected. Please contact us to arrange a meeting.
Respectfully,
Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim
PDF Version with ALL attachments
The United States Attorneys
It has been one year since the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 was filed to address the Constitutional Crisis in the United States.
A law enacted without proper construction, without constitutional review, without involvement of any state legislature and without the signature of any governor designed to ignore judicial corruption and injustice which includes an aggressively enforced MANDATE of silence for all lawyers.
Filed and served upon every state Attorney General yet the federal courts undermined the preemptive challenge, concealed the matter from fifty six state attorneys general and improperly dismissed the matter without substantiation while ignoring the relevant doctrine. The actions by the court confirmed the deliberate intent and purpose of the law and it’s denial of constitutional rights without regard for the injustice served upon the people of the United States..
Enclosed are letters to the President, the US Congress, the Governors of the United states, et al.
Please review and respond. This issue will not go away on it’s own.
The Constitutional rights of the American People are being denied by the courts and held hostage by a mandate of confidentiality for all attorneys in state and federal courts which has effectively undermined the United States Government.
Your attention to this matter is anticipated and expected. Please contact us to arrange a meeting.
Respectfully,
Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim
PDF Version with ALL attachments
Wednesday, August 6, 2014
HAND delivered - US Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick & PA Representative Thomas Murt
Continued our delivery of the letters to US Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick at his office in Newtown, PA...
On the way back we stopped for a delivery and DISCUSSION of the issues at the office of PA Representative Tom Murt in Hatboro, PA.
The following letters were included in the package. Each is different and exposes a different aspect of the Unconstitutional Effect of Rule 1.6.
- Letter to Governor Tom Corbett, Sheriffs of Pennsylvania, The Pennsylvania Legislature, and the Attorney General of Pennsylvania. PDF version
- Letter to President Barack Obama. PDF version
- Letter to US Senator Toomey and Senator Casey. PDF version
- Letter to the Senators of the 113th Congress. PDF version
- Letter to the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary. PDF version
- Letter to the Sheriffs of Pennsylvania. PDF version
- Letter to the Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee. PDF version
- Letter to US House of Representatives. PDF version
- Letter to US House Committee on the Judiciary. PDF version
- Letter to Governors of the US. PDF version
- Letter to Governor Tom Corbett. PDF version
- Letter to the Pennsylvania Senators. PDF version
- Letter to the Pennsylvania Representatives. PDF version
On the way back we stopped for a delivery and DISCUSSION of the issues at the office of PA Representative Tom Murt in Hatboro, PA.
The following letters were included in the package. Each is different and exposes a different aspect of the Unconstitutional Effect of Rule 1.6.
- Letter to Governor Tom Corbett, Sheriffs of Pennsylvania, The Pennsylvania Legislature, and the Attorney General of Pennsylvania. PDF version
- Letter to President Barack Obama. PDF version
- Letter to US Senator Toomey and Senator Casey. PDF version
- Letter to the Senators of the 113th Congress. PDF version
- Letter to the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary. PDF version
- Letter to the Sheriffs of Pennsylvania. PDF version
- Letter to the Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee. PDF version
- Letter to US House of Representatives. PDF version
- Letter to US House Committee on the Judiciary. PDF version
- Letter to Governors of the US. PDF version
- Letter to Governor Tom Corbett. PDF version
- Letter to the Pennsylvania Senators. PDF version
- Letter to the Pennsylvania Representatives. PDF version
Tuesday, August 5, 2014
Hand Delivery - State Reps & Senator Greenleaf
While the Fax machine was cooling off... We set out to hand deliver copies of the correspondence to the state representative and senators who have local offices.
First stop, Pennsylvania Representatives Marquerite Quinn's office. Hand delivered the following documents and reviewed the issue with a member of her staff.
- Letter to Governor Tom Corbett, Sheriffs of Pennsylvania, The Pennsylvania Legislature, and the Attorney General of Pennsylvania. PDF version
- Letter to President Barack Obama. PDF version
- Letter to US Senator Toomey and Senator Casey. PDF version
- Letter to the Senators of the 113th Congress. PDF version
- Letter to the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary. PDF version
- Letter to the Sheriffs of Pennsylvania. PDF version
- Letter to the Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee. PDF version
- Letter to US House of Representatives. PDF version
- Letter to US House Committee on the Judiciary. PDF version
- Letter to Governors of the US. PDF version
- Letter to Governor Tom Corbett. PDF version
- Letter to the Pennsylvania Senators. PDF version
- Letter to the Pennsylvania Representatives. PDF version
Next, Pennsylvania Representative Kathy Watson's office. Where a discussion about the failure to schedule a meeting for almost a year lead to a long discussion of the matter and the necessity to have a discussion with Rep. Watson. Hand delivered the same series of document as above.
Next, Pennsylvania Representative Todd Stephens was caught in his office. Delivered the letters to an unaware Todd Stephens who sat down for a brief meeting. The meeting reached the point where Rep Stephens attempted to indicate that the Courts can ignore constitutional rights because the courts decide if they are ignoring your constitutional rights. NO TODD, THEY CAN'T.
IS TODD STEPHENS A COMPLETE MORON WHEN IT COMES TO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS?
REP TODD STEPHENS WAS WRONG ON EVERY LEVEL BUT MOST CERTAINLY CONSTITUTIONALLY. Upon that descent into ridonculous, the meeting ended.
Rep Todd Stephens is on the Judiciary Committee. He knows better. OR HE OUGHTA. Even in lawyer night school they surely teach that the constitution is the 'supreme law of the land'. NOBODY CAN DENY RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.
Next, A stop at Senator Greenleaf's office. Where his Chief of Staff could be overheard to say "I DON'T WANT TO SEE HIM" - - which once overheard may explain the change of heart. Hand delivered the letters and asked AGAIN for a meeting with the Senator. Senator Greenleaf's office and staff know me. They know how disastrous and malicious the Montgomery County judiciary have been. Yet, they just won't schedule a meeting with the Senator.
Senator Greenleaf is the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee. He knows exactly what problem I am raising. AND HE IS AVOIDING THE ISSUE... it seems he's been there since it was created. A knowledgeable co-conspirator?
Back to the office to check out the fax... which was taking a break after a long hard week.
Saturday, August 2, 2014
Letter to Gov Corbett, PA Senators and Representatives
August 2, 2014
After meetings with Senator Chuck McIlhinney, it is clearly necessary to raise this issue to your attention directly.
The Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice was made up of lawyers (9 of 12) who heard information from county judges, district attorneys, public defenders and the Judicial Conduct Board. Attributing the blame to “silence, inaction, inexperience, ignorance, fear of retaliation, greed, ambition, carelessness.”, the lawyers on the commission maintained ‘confidentiality of information’ as required by law – Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Their realization was correct – “What good would [reporting] it do?” HOWEVER, the Commission’s report neglected to indicate the reason for the silence (Rule 1.6) and it also neglected to expose the cause (the Rule 1.6 mandate) , and as such their recommended reforms do nothing to prevent a recurrence of the judicial corruption.
Rule 1.6 mandates confidentiality of information where it adversely affects the integrity of the judiciary, the reputation of legal professionals, self-incriminates, or negatively affects their client. Protecting the integrity of a judiciary which lacks integrity is foolishness. Mandating it has unconstitutional effects.
The Commission Report and Reform Recommendations amount to fraud – a deliberate effort to conceal the root cause of the failure of the justice system to address judicial misconduct, corruption and injustice.
Far more frightening and perilous, is that the lawyers associated with the Commission have now been ‘educated and trained’ in how to execute and conceal crimes such as those committed by Ciavarella and Conahan – who only went to prison because they had failed at money laundering.
The Supreme Court’s authority to enact law is limited to situations where ‘such rules are consistent with this Constitution [Pennsylvania] and neither abridge, enlarge or modify the substantive rights of any litigant.’
The Attorney General is the chief law enforcement officer in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania who must follow the US Constitution, the Pennsylvania Constitution, and the Rules of Professional Conduct which were enacted by the Supreme Court.
For the Attorney General, the Rule 1.6 mandate of ‘confidentiality of information’ with regard to client information undermines ‘everything’ where an attorney general’s clients include (1) the public, (2) the Pennsylvania government, (3) the Office of the Attorney General, (4) government agencies and departments statewide, (5) personnel within those agencies and departments, (6) and themselves.
The Rules of Professional Conduct enacted by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania have substantially affected the ‘jurisdiction’ of the Attorney General preventing and obstructing law enforcement responsibilities when it relates to judicial corruption and injustice within the courts.
The Supreme Court, by the same mandate, has caused a ‘lawful’ requirement within every court and by every lawyer in the commonwealth to ignore injustice and judicial corruption.
Previous Codes of Professional Responsibility (among other titles) have included similar guidelines, BUT once enacted into ‘law’ in 1987 ignoring injustice and judicial corruption ceased being discretionary and was MANDATED BY LAW.
The result, the Rules of Professional Conduct collaterally affect and negate ‘the substantive rights of the litigant’. Specifically, Rule 1.6 Confidentiality causes a mandatory conspiracy of silence within the courts which ignores the damage and harm caused to litigants and further hinders and prevents any resolution.
The substantive rights of the children and families of Luzerne County were clearly ignored.
The Supreme Court lacked authority to enact Rule 1.6 into law as the substantive rights of the People have been ‘abridged’, ‘modified’, denied and ignored.
Additionally, the role of the Sheriff as Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the county has been negated and minimized by judicial decisions. Constitutionally, the Sheriff has the lawful authority and resources to enforce the law within the county.
Failing to act because the judiciary has convinced them of a greatly diminished role, the non-lawyer Sheriffs (reluctantly) defer authority to the county District Attorney who must follow the Rules of Professional Conduct and Rule 1.6. A necessity to prevent prosecution. District Attorneys take no action to investigate and prosecute the injustice and judicial corruption. Related crimes against the victims of injustice are ignored leaving the litigant with no protection under the law.
The American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct were rolled out to the states and enacted into law nationwide without the involvement of the state legislatures, the signature of the governors or any constitutional review.
“What is right is not always the same as what is legal.” was offered by Edward Snowden as an explanation for his actions revealing unconstitutional activity. This statement may also apply to the failure of attorneys general, judges, district attorneys and lawyers to address the unconstitutional actions made ‘legal’ which have undermined justice over the last 25 years.
It is the responsibility of the Governor to represent the People, to preserve, protect and defend the United States Constitution and the state Constitution, and to recognize that collaterally Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional to the People.
The act of sedition which enacted Rule 1.6 and mandated the silent participation of all legal professionals, perverted the judiciary, sacrificed the personal integrity of every judge, and undermined justice can no longer be ignored and excused because of the intimidation and threats of disciplinary action by the corrupt who have deliberately violated the public trust.
The Commission on Juvenile Justice have not done what was requested of them. They have participated in concealing the truth. They have endorsed and enabled continuing injustice.
You, the members of the Legislature and the Judiciary who assembled the Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice must review their report findings and recommendations. The deliberate knowledgeable failure of those lawyers to indicate the root cause of the problem in Luzerne County, which also less publicly affects every court in the Commonwealth, was caused by Rule 1.6 - An unconstitutional and repugnant law which has been improperly enacted by the state Supreme Court without proper review of its affect on constitutional rights.
You attention to this matter of statewide importance is appreciated.
Respectfully,
Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim
After meetings with Senator Chuck McIlhinney, it is clearly necessary to raise this issue to your attention directly.
The Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice was made up of lawyers (9 of 12) who heard information from county judges, district attorneys, public defenders and the Judicial Conduct Board. Attributing the blame to “silence, inaction, inexperience, ignorance, fear of retaliation, greed, ambition, carelessness.”, the lawyers on the commission maintained ‘confidentiality of information’ as required by law – Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Their realization was correct – “What good would [reporting] it do?” HOWEVER, the Commission’s report neglected to indicate the reason for the silence (Rule 1.6) and it also neglected to expose the cause (the Rule 1.6 mandate) , and as such their recommended reforms do nothing to prevent a recurrence of the judicial corruption.
Rule 1.6 mandates confidentiality of information where it adversely affects the integrity of the judiciary, the reputation of legal professionals, self-incriminates, or negatively affects their client. Protecting the integrity of a judiciary which lacks integrity is foolishness. Mandating it has unconstitutional effects.
The Commission Report and Reform Recommendations amount to fraud – a deliberate effort to conceal the root cause of the failure of the justice system to address judicial misconduct, corruption and injustice.
Far more frightening and perilous, is that the lawyers associated with the Commission have now been ‘educated and trained’ in how to execute and conceal crimes such as those committed by Ciavarella and Conahan – who only went to prison because they had failed at money laundering.
The Supreme Court’s authority to enact law is limited to situations where ‘such rules are consistent with this Constitution [Pennsylvania] and neither abridge, enlarge or modify the substantive rights of any litigant.’
The Attorney General is the chief law enforcement officer in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania who must follow the US Constitution, the Pennsylvania Constitution, and the Rules of Professional Conduct which were enacted by the Supreme Court.
For the Attorney General, the Rule 1.6 mandate of ‘confidentiality of information’ with regard to client information undermines ‘everything’ where an attorney general’s clients include (1) the public, (2) the Pennsylvania government, (3) the Office of the Attorney General, (4) government agencies and departments statewide, (5) personnel within those agencies and departments, (6) and themselves.
The Rules of Professional Conduct enacted by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania have substantially affected the ‘jurisdiction’ of the Attorney General preventing and obstructing law enforcement responsibilities when it relates to judicial corruption and injustice within the courts.
The Supreme Court, by the same mandate, has caused a ‘lawful’ requirement within every court and by every lawyer in the commonwealth to ignore injustice and judicial corruption.
Previous Codes of Professional Responsibility (among other titles) have included similar guidelines, BUT once enacted into ‘law’ in 1987 ignoring injustice and judicial corruption ceased being discretionary and was MANDATED BY LAW.
The result, the Rules of Professional Conduct collaterally affect and negate ‘the substantive rights of the litigant’. Specifically, Rule 1.6 Confidentiality causes a mandatory conspiracy of silence within the courts which ignores the damage and harm caused to litigants and further hinders and prevents any resolution.
The substantive rights of the children and families of Luzerne County were clearly ignored.
The Supreme Court lacked authority to enact Rule 1.6 into law as the substantive rights of the People have been ‘abridged’, ‘modified’, denied and ignored.
Additionally, the role of the Sheriff as Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the county has been negated and minimized by judicial decisions. Constitutionally, the Sheriff has the lawful authority and resources to enforce the law within the county.
Failing to act because the judiciary has convinced them of a greatly diminished role, the non-lawyer Sheriffs (reluctantly) defer authority to the county District Attorney who must follow the Rules of Professional Conduct and Rule 1.6. A necessity to prevent prosecution. District Attorneys take no action to investigate and prosecute the injustice and judicial corruption. Related crimes against the victims of injustice are ignored leaving the litigant with no protection under the law.
The American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct were rolled out to the states and enacted into law nationwide without the involvement of the state legislatures, the signature of the governors or any constitutional review.
“What is right is not always the same as what is legal.” was offered by Edward Snowden as an explanation for his actions revealing unconstitutional activity. This statement may also apply to the failure of attorneys general, judges, district attorneys and lawyers to address the unconstitutional actions made ‘legal’ which have undermined justice over the last 25 years.
It is the responsibility of the Governor to represent the People, to preserve, protect and defend the United States Constitution and the state Constitution, and to recognize that collaterally Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional to the People.
The act of sedition which enacted Rule 1.6 and mandated the silent participation of all legal professionals, perverted the judiciary, sacrificed the personal integrity of every judge, and undermined justice can no longer be ignored and excused because of the intimidation and threats of disciplinary action by the corrupt who have deliberately violated the public trust.
The Commission on Juvenile Justice have not done what was requested of them. They have participated in concealing the truth. They have endorsed and enabled continuing injustice.
You, the members of the Legislature and the Judiciary who assembled the Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice must review their report findings and recommendations. The deliberate knowledgeable failure of those lawyers to indicate the root cause of the problem in Luzerne County, which also less publicly affects every court in the Commonwealth, was caused by Rule 1.6 - An unconstitutional and repugnant law which has been improperly enacted by the state Supreme Court without proper review of its affect on constitutional rights.
You attention to this matter of statewide importance is appreciated.
Respectfully,
Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim
Thursday, July 31, 2014
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
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
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
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
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
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 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
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
Monday, July 28, 2014
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
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
Sunday, March 23, 2014
Submitted on the Briefs - April 3, 2014
The Appeal to the Third Circuit will be presented to the judges WITHOUT an opportunity for oral argument on April 3, 2014. Letter
The Appeal will be submitted before the following panel:
Judge Marjorie Rendell
Judge Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr.
Judge Ruggero J. Aldisert
The Appeal will be submitted before the following panel:
Judge Marjorie Rendell
Judge Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr.
Judge Ruggero J. Aldisert
Thursday, November 21, 2013
Montgomery County Commissioners
November 21, 2013
Montgomery County Commissioners
Norristown, PA
Josh Shapiro
Leslie Richards
Bruce Castor
Commissioners.
I am writing to ask your intervention in expediting the actions documented in the following documents.
I have been surviving against tremendous injustice since 2007.
Litigation to obtain the home I was illegally removed from has been stalled without explanation and remains unscheduled. All evidence indicates the fraud involved and the lack of jurisdiction regarding the defective and void court order dated May 9, 2011.
Nancy Becker personally assisted in moving the criminal prosecution forward by introducing me to Det. Greg Henry who was already aware of the issues involved in the fraudulent conveyance of my home and property.
Additionally, Gary Kline has failed to respond to questions about the mistreatment by his staff. The Domestic Relations Office is violating my rights, the law and the responsibility of Domestic Relations by following a defective and void order while refusing to address the issues which demonstrate the defects of the order.
I has been destitute and homeless since 2011 and somehow find the ability to persevere awaiting justice. I ask your assistance to address the issues currently before the County.
I beg your intervention and action.
Sincerely,
Terance Healy
included:
Letter November 7, 2013 DRO
Letter November 7, 2013, Gary Kline
Letter November 8, 2013, Sheriff Behr
Response November 13, 2013, Gary Kline
Letter November 19, 2013, Gary Kline
Letter November 19, 2013, Sheriff Behr
Montgomery County Commissioners
Norristown, PA
Josh Shapiro
Leslie Richards
Bruce Castor
Commissioners.
I am writing to ask your intervention in expediting the actions documented in the following documents.
I have been surviving against tremendous injustice since 2007.
Litigation to obtain the home I was illegally removed from has been stalled without explanation and remains unscheduled. All evidence indicates the fraud involved and the lack of jurisdiction regarding the defective and void court order dated May 9, 2011.
Nancy Becker personally assisted in moving the criminal prosecution forward by introducing me to Det. Greg Henry who was already aware of the issues involved in the fraudulent conveyance of my home and property.
Additionally, Gary Kline has failed to respond to questions about the mistreatment by his staff. The Domestic Relations Office is violating my rights, the law and the responsibility of Domestic Relations by following a defective and void order while refusing to address the issues which demonstrate the defects of the order.
I has been destitute and homeless since 2011 and somehow find the ability to persevere awaiting justice. I ask your assistance to address the issues currently before the County.
I beg your intervention and action.
Sincerely,
Terance Healy
included:
Letter November 7, 2013 DRO
Letter November 7, 2013, Gary Kline
Letter November 8, 2013, Sheriff Behr
Response November 13, 2013, Gary Kline
Letter November 19, 2013, Gary Kline
Letter November 19, 2013, Sheriff Behr
Friday, August 30, 2013
The Letter sent to US Government Officials
I am reaching out to inform you of the Complaint / Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on August 8, 2013.
Rule 1.6 causes a complete loss of constitutionally protected rights for litigants when there has been any misconduct by lawyers or judges in the matter.
The Plaintiffs look forward to working with the Attorneys General to address the challenge as our goals are not in opposition and the task before us is great.
The Plaintiffs view the Defendant Attorneys General not as adversaries, but fellow patriots, who can see and respect a sincere interest in returning the integrity and reputation of the judiciary and the judicial system, delivering to the legislature the ability to perform the duties of their position to manage the law, and restore the rights of all citizens in the state.
As such, Plaintiffs are reaching out to inform the Senate of their action and their intent. Where the legislature has lost the opportunity to take lawful action, the plaintiffs are returning the ability to act on behalf of the citizens they represent.
The official documents have been served on the Attorneys General. A copy is attached for your review.
Respectfully,
Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim
Time for Integrity. Time for Respect. Time for Justice.
www.work2bdone.com/live
Rule 1.6 causes a complete loss of constitutionally protected rights for litigants when there has been any misconduct by lawyers or judges in the matter.
The Plaintiffs look forward to working with the Attorneys General to address the challenge as our goals are not in opposition and the task before us is great.
The Plaintiffs view the Defendant Attorneys General not as adversaries, but fellow patriots, who can see and respect a sincere interest in returning the integrity and reputation of the judiciary and the judicial system, delivering to the legislature the ability to perform the duties of their position to manage the law, and restore the rights of all citizens in the state.
As such, Plaintiffs are reaching out to inform the Senate of their action and their intent. Where the legislature has lost the opportunity to take lawful action, the plaintiffs are returning the ability to act on behalf of the citizens they represent.
The official documents have been served on the Attorneys General. A copy is attached for your review.
Respectfully,
Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim
Time for Integrity. Time for Respect. Time for Justice.
www.work2bdone.com/live
Sent to US Senators Sent to PA Senate Sent to AL Senate Sent to AK Senate Sent to AZ Senate Sent to AR Senate Sent to Co Senate Sent to De Senate Sent to HI Senate Sent to IL Senate Sent to IA Senate Sent to KS Senate Sent to LA Senate Sent to ME Senate Sent to MD Senate Sent to MA Senate Sent to MN Senate Sent to MO Senate Sent to MT Senate Sent to NV Senate Sent to NH Senate Sent to NM Senate Sent to NY Senate Sent to NC Senate Sent to ND Senate Sent to OK Senate Sent to OR Senate Sent to RI Senate Sent to TN Senate Sent to UT Senate Sent to VT Senate Sent to VA Senate Sent to WA Senate Sent to WV Senate Sent to WI Senate Sent to WY Senate |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)