Showing posts with label Two. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Two. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 4, 2015

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.
0904011043a
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.

stick-me-with-a-fork-im-done-tracy-glantz"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. images

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.

a-monolithic-and-ruthless-conspiracy

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.

Saturday, December 20, 2014

Team Corbett continues attacks on the 'silenced' AG Kane

l_ap710481886615Tom Corbett, Frank Fina, Seth Williams, Bob Brady, Dave Heckler, Stewart Greenleaf, Bruce Castor, Risa Ferman, Tom Carluccio...

Pointing LOUDLY to one investigation with political suggestions, yet neglecting to address an investigation with two secret court orders from two secret judges in two secret courts.

Why does Team Corbett keep pointing to the 'low hanging fruit'? A distraction from the unprecedented - TWO SECRET COURT ORDERS WHICH PREVENT ACTION, EXPOSURE, INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION. What is that all about???

District Attorneys Heckler & Williams have ignored the well-documented crimes and constitutional violations of the courthouse staff.

Questioning the discretion of the Attorney General in spite of the corruption being concealed by court orders. Those who are not discussing the secret court orders are logically the people responsible for requesting the corrupt judicial actions.

Team Corbett is clearly focused on keeping "everything Sandusky' out of the public domain - if they lose Rule 1.6 Confidentiality then the public will learn EVERYTHING. The Unconstitutional affect of Rule 1.6 is proven in those criminal reports of violation of PA law and the US constitution. If they cannot conceal injustice and corruption under Rule 1.6, they will likely be joining Jerry Sandusky and wearing orange Team Corbett jumpsuits.

Every corrupt action to ignore the unconstitutional law - called Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information - is ONLY protected until the unconstitutional is acknowledged. It is proven in those lapsed investigations in the Philadelphia and Bucks County District Attorney's Offices. The complaint filed in both counties and federally with US Attorney Zane Memeger. An additional investigation was requested by the U.S. Postal Inspectors as the Central Legal Staff of the court used the mail in their fraud and forgery.

Attorney General Kathleen Kane has been court ordered NOT TO INVESTIGATE.

Governor Elect Tom Wolf, Shut Down The Montgomery County Courthouse.

kathleenkane“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.”

- Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane on two court ordered mandates from unidentified judges and unidentified courts.

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Genuine Title

Your lawyer is bragging about the injustice of the Weilheimer decision. Seriously?

How laughable that a lawyer in a large Philadelphia law firm records his 2014 successes - TWO - and the one entry is based on corruption and fraud with no support in law and an appeal is pending.

Your lawyer wasn't representing the Millers.* The Millers didn't even bother to show up. If the Millers had shown up maybe they could explain that "Weilheimer for Judge" sign on the lawn? Judge Weilheimer couldn't explain it.* Are we supposed to believe that in a local election, people believe so much in a candidate that they do not know and have never met that they seek out and obtain a sign supporting their election?

The lawyer failed to address the essential issue.** The lack of jurisdiction of the order they were seeking to enforce.** No mention of anything which supported jurisdiction in the entire transcript.** Yet the lack of jurisdiction was proven beyond any doubt on the court record... AND COMPLETELY IGNORED BY JUDGE WEILHEIMER.***

In the Appeal, Judge Weilheimer delayed 5 months in issuing her opinion. Justice delayed is justice denied. In her opinion she neglects to offer any support for the jurisdiction of the defective and void order.***

YET, THE LAWYER IS BRAGGING ABOUT THIS 'WIN' ON THE COMPANY WEB SITE. The lawyer who neglected to reveal that his client was Genuine Title Company.**** He never met the Defendants.

Bragging about the deliberate infliction of injustice. A big win - still pending appeal. A pathetic display of arrogance in the face of judicial corruption and injustice. Keeping a man homeless and destitute for a prolonged period while trying to regain his rightful property after enduring constant litigation since 2007.

* Rule 1.6 - Confidentiality of client identity
** Rule 1.6 - Do not adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary
*** Rule 1.6 - Do not self incriminate. Do not adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary.
**** Rule 1.6 - Confidentiality of client identity

Ejectment Action Against Homeowners Dismissed - April 9, 2014

zarwin


Is this posted on your mother's fridge?

Sunday, July 27, 2014

Operation Greylord

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

Operation Greylord 1980-1992

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Friday, June 6, 2014

Two lawful ways to resolve the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6

There are only two lawful ways to resolve the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6

1. Default by state attorneys general within the Federal Court.
2. An Act of Congress.

The state and federal courts have all mandated that they may take no action to adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary. A mandated bias and prejudice which prevents an independent review by the courts at every level.

The attorneys general can lawfully default in the challenge and the result is the requirement of the court to accept the default and find Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional. 55 of 56 attorneys general defaulted in the challenge.

Default was the gentle quiet resolution in the best interest of the entire country to avoid alarm and civil unrest.

The unexplained late filing of a future intention to dismiss on behalf of AG Kane required the response of the court. That 'Monkeywrench' thrown by Randall Henzes, purportedly on behalf of Attorney General Kane, sacrificed the integrity of the judges in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals who are mandated to conceal and suppress the matter. The improper doctrine and imaginary references presented are an embarrassment.

Default would have allowed the judges to maintain their individual dignity in this instance.

The United States Supreme Court additionally has the bias and prejudice of "protecting the integrity of the judiciary" from the exposure of the sedition of every state court in actions which denied the constitutional rights of the people of every state.

An Act of Congress will be required to address the situation. Constitutionally, the Congress must address the failure of the judiciary. Following the example of South Africa's Constitution, Congress must act to address the violation of the public trust by the judicial branch and prevent any future jeopardy to the liberty and rights of the People.

YOU DO NOT PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE JUDICIARY BY SEDITION
OR
BY DENYING THE RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS IN CIVIL, FAMILY and CRIMINAL COURTS,
OR
BY DENYING THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES IN LUZERNE COUNTY,
OR
BY DENYING THE RIGHTS OF MILLIONS OF HOMEOWNERS IN FRAUDULENT FORECLOSURE ACTIONS.

Every US Senator has been notified of the Constitutional Challenge.

Senator Toomey and Senator Casey of Pennsylvania have avoided meetings on the topic.

There are only two lawful ways to resolve the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6.

1. By the deliberate default by the Attorneys General in federal court, resulting in Rule 1.6 being declared unconstitutional without the court's interaction.
2. An Act of Congress.

The Federal Judiciary has a mandate which does not permit them to adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary. If the decision goes to the federal judges, they are required to sacrifice their integrity and write orders which have no basis in fact, law or legal doctrine.
Examples are documented in EVERY order from a federal judge.

The state Supreme Courts are under the same mandate. As such, they too are legally prevented from repealing their law, or finding it unconstitutional. The Federal Court did not certify the constitutional challenge with each state court because it would require a false answer.

The state Legislatures are similarly prevented from action. The non-lawyer governors may have legal authority, however the attorney general or private counsel are not permitted to advise them of such.

Thursday, June 5, 2014

MOTION FOR OPINION PURSUANT TO RULE 1925(a)

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY
NORRISTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA








Terance Healy: Montgomery County
(Plaintiff/Appellant): #2013-29976
 :
v.: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
 : #900 EDA 2014
David R. Miller
Jennifer K. Miller
(Defendant/Appellee)
:


MOTION FOR OPINION PURSUANT TO RULE 1925(a)


1. A Notice Of Appeal was filed in this matter on March 6, 2014.

2. A Concise Statement of Errors Complained of on Appeal was ORDERED on March 6, 2014

3. A Concise Statement of Errors Complained of on Appeal was filed on March 27, 2014 and served upon the parties and Judge Weilheimer.

'… upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the judge who entered the order giving rise to the notice of appeal, if reasons for the order do not already appear of record, shall forthwith file of record at least a brief opinion of the reasons for the order, or for the rulings or other errors complained of, or shall specify in writing the place n the record where such reasons may be found.”
- RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 210 Rule 1925(a)(1)

4. IT HAS BEEN OVER TWO FULL MONTHS SINCE THE COURT WAS SERVED WITH THE CONCISE STATEMENT OF ERRORS COMPLAINED OF ON APPEAL.

5. The failure of the Court to file an Opinion in this matter is delaying the Appeal to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

6. Plaintiff views this deliberate and unexplained delay as a further denial of due process and procedure rights in a matter where law, civil procedure and constitutional rights are being summarily dismissed.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court provide an Opinion in this matter.

Respectfully,

Terance Healy
Plaintiff