I was curious if you were aware of the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6?
Rule 1.6 made it illegal to prosecute injustice in the United States. A ‘law’ in every state enacted by the state Supreme Court results in an unconstitutional loss of rights and privileges of a litigant victim when an act of injustice occurs in a courtroom. (In Civil, Criminal or Family Courts)
The ‘law’ makes it illegal for any prosecutor, district attorney or attorney general to prosecute the crime – because it
- would affect the integrity of the judiciary,
- would reveal the prosecutorial misconduct of their own office, or
- would expose individual liability.
The victim is left with no recourse, or escape. They are bullied and harassed by the courts until one of three possible outcomes results. Loss of EVERYTHING in their life, prison, or suicide.
There is nothing any judge can do to address the injustice. This is not judges protecting their own. It is a violation of Rule 1.6 if the judge even tries to address the injustice. Their judicial integrity is sacrificed. This angers the judge who then seems to take it out further on the victim.
When the act which caused the injustice is known and exposed (even in court) the damage to the victim worsens. The injustice grows each time the victim appears in court because no lawyer or judge may acknowledge or address the injustice or resolve the matter.
The overall result is abuse of power under color of law. In criminal courts the prosecutor’s aggressive misconduct is ignored. All ‘lawful’, but unconstitutional – as they are mandated to never reveal it or they are quickly disciplined and discredited. It cannot be dealt with until the litigant has his constitutional rights restored. But the victim would have to figure out how they lost their rights – and there is NO ONE TO HELP. (They made helping the victim of injustice illegal. No lawyer may participate. If they try, they are disciplined.)
The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 is in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
Plaintiffs have lawfully petitioned the court and served the challenge on every US Attorney General to address a constitutional calamity which has ‘LAWFULLY BUT UNCONSTITUTIONALLY’ persisted in the United State for decades.
Each state lost the ability to address the injustice of their own courts, and mandated that no lawyer, attorney general or district attorney invite the federal government to investigate.
Each time the Federal Government has acted to address injustice and corruption of any state court, that state’s Supreme Court has modified Rule 1.6 to close the loophole. This leaves a trail which exposes the corruption caused by this ‘law’ which perverts the entire justice system.
Kids for Cash is one huge example in Pennsylvania. No one could stop it until a judge violated Rule 1.6 and reported it. Judge Ann Lokuta was disciplined and removed from the bench for doing the right thing.
A massive example is the foreclosure crisis nationwide, where a fraud upon the court – a forged and false mortgage note or deed – resulted in the actual fraud being ‘lawfully’ ignored by the court while people everywhere lost their homes. It wasn’t necessarily the banks that caused the crisis. It was the lawyers who committed the initial fraud upon the court which could not be addressed.
The victims of injustice lost their home because of a deliberate injustice and the mandate by Rule 1.6 that no one reveal it.
Rule 1.6 made it illegal for a lawyer to fix this crisis. It took two pro se defendants to find the needle in haystack of injustice… all deliberately and intentionally caused by the author of the ‘law’ … The American Bar Association.
The same unconstitutional law, same number, same name, in every state.
Read more at www.work2bdone.com/live
JUSTICE IS COMING.
The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6
Eastern District of Pennsylvania # 13-4614 (2-13-cv-04614-TON)
Third Circuit Court of Appeals # 13-4591
|Rule 1.6 refers to the Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.6 – CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION unlawfully enacted into ‘law’ by each state Supreme Court. Unlawfully enacted because it results in the denial of rights and privileges protected by the United States Constitution.|
JUSTICE IS COMING.