2016
01.04

The Opinions have been filed by the Judge in the two appeals in the Criminal Case. Wow, the Opinions are vacant. There is a simple reason.

The District Attorneys office has not provided ANY information to the court in support of jurisdiction.
AND
The District Attorneys office has ignored the Rules of Criminal Procedure.
AND
The District Attorneys office has denied rights protected by the Pennsylvania Constitution and the US Constitution.
AND
The District Attorneys office has manipulated Court Administration and the Clerk of Courts into actions which prevent due process and have resulted in a somewhat abbreviated (or redacted) docket in the matter.
AND
The District Attorney has failed to address ANY of the issues raised at any time, in any statement, at any proceeding.
AND
The District Attorney office has completely neglected their duties and responsibilities with an absolute and deliberately careless disregard for process, procedure, law and ethics.

Unsigned documents in the case, jpeg artwork, pdf, forgeries, unmailed and undocketed also include an improper letter which attempts to undermine and prevent the appeal through the Superior Court staff. A violation of the Rules of Appellate Procedure and a violation of judicial canons and ethics when the Judges signature is not original, or authenticated. The Judge has been set up…?

The Opinion of the Court can only be based upon the information available to the Judge. The DA has left the judge with NOTHING to include in any Opinion(s). Yes, The Judge has been set up…

The Opinion basically cites two incorrect laws, and ‘forgets’ that the judge granted permission for the Interlocutory Appeal on the record in open court.

Permission to Appeal was immediately requested by the Defendant when the SIGNED ORIGINAL Court Order failed to include the essence of the ‘Agreement’ for the Defendant – a statement of jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter brought before the Court by the District Attorney.

District Attorney and Defendant agreed:
IF the Court would issue a statement addressing proper lawful jurisdiction in the matter,
THEN, the Defendant would stipulate to a review of competency without requiring proceedings to address that issue.
BUT, The District Attorney failed to provide the Court with proper lawful jurisdiction.

With deliberate negligence the District Attorney had failed to follow the Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Further, having been notified by Defendant Statements filed, docketed and included as part or the court record:
– the District Attorney failed to take any actions to address the issues;
– the District Attorney failed to make any effort to remedy their negligence;
– the District Attorney failed to address the improper actions of court administration;
– the District Attorney failed to responsibly maintain the court documents and docket with the Clerk of Courts;
– the District Attorney IGNORED processes, procedures, rules, laws and constitutions with a terrifying disregard for the denial of the protection of the Rule of Law and the constitutionally protected rights of the Defendant.

The District Attorney acted with complete immunity and autocracy*; further protecting the entire Office of the District Attorney, and other courthouse personnel and departments from prosecution for their fraudulent, illegal and unethical actions.

Actions which deprive a Defendant of the protection of the Rule of Law, deny a Defendant of his constitutionally protected rights, and threaten the personal freedom of the Defendant without opportunity for recourse or resolution WHILE seeking to undermine the authority and independence of the judiciary. INJUSTICE OF THAT MAGNITUDE IS TERRORISM.



A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF HOW THIS DOES HAPPEN (and can in EVERY state.)

Any mandate of confidentiality of information which conceals and obstructs those corrupt actions would be repugnant to the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Constitution of the United States. Exactly, the law was improperly enacted without authority by the Judiciary. It is also very unconstitutional. ( But, that’s confidential.)

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 – Confidentiality of Information – was filed On August 8, 2013 and served to every state Attorney General. The Attorneys General defaulted and the unconstitutional rule fell; however the judiciary was prevented from reviewing the matter. The matter was dismissed by Court Administration. The subsequent appeal received the same mistreatment.

Subsequently, two related Appeals were filed with the Superior Court of Pennsylvania with Notice to the Attorney General that the constitutionality of a law was being challenged. The Appeals were improperly dismissed without review by the Judiciary, or the Attorney General. ‘Secret orders from unidentified courts’ ordered Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane, personally, to neglect the responsibilities of the Office of Attorney General.

KATHLEEN KANE HAD JUST WALKED INTO A HORNETS NEST OF CORRUPTION CONCEALED WITHIN THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY.

An injustice had occurred in 2007, which triggered the confidential denial of any protection of the Rule of Law and ignored the constitutional rights of a Defendant with no opportunity for recourse or resolution. In a divorce which annihilated an entire family, the entire Montgomery County judiciary, over the course of years, performed a farce of injustice. Decisions without support in law, and without explanation destroyed the Defendant personally, professionally and financially.

The District Attorney repeatedly failed to address the crimes and injustices committed against the Defendant… WITHOUT EXPLANATION.

The District Attorney interfered to prevent investigations by other law enforcement agencies with the county, state and federally… WITHOUT EXPLANATION.

Defective and void court orders hastily issued without jurisdiction delivered further injustices, nested on prior injustices. Seeking a resolution through the courts, the Defendant was further ignored. The court improperly indicated a lack of jurisdiction for the Courts to act. This was improperly affirmed without judicial review by Superior Court staff.

The fraudulent conveyance of the Defendants residence left him HOMELESS and destitute. The information provided by the Defendant in the litigation seeking to regain his home was further presented by those who stole the home to successfully obtain the title insurance, ($ 400,000.00). They paid off their mortgage in April 2015.

The deed would remain a problem unless the Defendant was ‘gone’.

The Defendant sought the assistance of the Governor to enforce the law, and from the Legislature to revisit laws relating to the jurisdiction for the court.

The District Attorneys office then conspired with those persons who stole the Defendants home to falsely allege the ‘terroristic threats’ (the letter to the Governor & Legislature) which are the subject of this criminal matter which is NOT properly before this court.

The DEED remains a problem while the Defendant is alive. The District Attorney was informed of and IGNORED the efforts by those in the home to provision and train for the Defendant’s execution. Bear in mind, they could go to jail for their fraud and theft. Better to murder the Defendant with the endorsement of the DA.

DEFENDANT: No Law. No Rights. No Kidding.

The corruption of the District Attorneys Office (under the direction AND RESPONSIBILITY* of Risa Ferman and Bruce Castor) will be presented in the criminal case should that be necessary to demonstrate the Defendant’s innocence.

The efforts of the District Attorney to prevent Attorney General Kathleen Kane from investigation and action are no longer AS obfuscated. The conspiracy to maintain the confidentiality is likely well documented in the staff emails within the Attorney General’s Office — between the porngate items.

The extensive and overwhelmingly intrusive investigations of the Defendant which have been ‘sealed’ within county investigating grand juries will be required to present a defense at the criminal hearing.


Both Opinions rely directly on the incorrect law. But, Opinion #2 goes a step beyond – it refers to THE WRONG ORDER entirely.

This is deliberate. Failure to indicate any law – when ANY LAW WHICH deprives a person of a Constitutional Right is NO LAW.

An unstoppable 1983 Abuse of Power claim is coming. Any law which attempts to prevent it… IS NO LAW.

Are you ready for the details?

No Comment.

Add Your Comment

%d bloggers like this: