2017
04.01

A lawyer talking about his client’s crime is not permitted to tell that truth – the truth is privileged.

BUT, LIES ARE NOT.

#LookWhosTalking

2017
04.01


RUSSIAN DRESSING:
SPECULATION can’t be stopped… NO FACTS to stop it & NO EVIDENCE to prove it (’cause it didn’t happen).

Only the LIAR gains from it.

This is an attack designed to negatively affect the credibility of a person telling the TRUTH.

2017
04.01

Asking for IMMUNITY to testify has 2 possibilities.

1. You will speak the truth BUT, you are involved in the crime and fear prosecution.

2. You plan to lie in order to implicate others. The LIE will include your confession of involvement with the crime.
BUT, SHOULD THE CONSPIRACY TO LIE (the set-up arranged by the Prosecutor) BE REVEALED, you fear prosecution.

In America, #2 happens way more often… PEOPLE LIE IN COURT. If not properly motivated, their testimony is often incentivized or coerced.

In America, improperly enacted and unconstitutional Rule 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY would prevent the TRUTH from ever being addressed.

In America, the effort to prevent the truth from being spoken in a Courtroom is so massive that it has filled the prisons… and the country is populated with people who admitted guilt (LIE’d) about something they never did just to make it go away. The bad advice of their lawyer.

In America, the TRUTH is on life support.

2017
04.01

Even if you find the flaw, the flaw is fatal – silence is complicit.

A DA protects an incompetent ADA. DA must keep ADA errors CONFIDENTIAL by law (Attorney Client Privilege) – [Govt Attorney has privileged relationship with their staff and office.]

The Defendant is illegally and improperly prosecuted denied protection of the law and denied constitutional rights.

The flaw is ignored. The flaw is fatal – silence is complicit.

The Confidentiality can undermine the jurisdiction of the court… BUT, once the court acts without jurisdiction THAT flaw is fatal.

Even if you identify the flaw, the flaw is fatal – silence is complicit.

CONFIDENTIALITY is mandated when the issue affects the integrity of the court. As such, the higher courts affirm the lower court – often the opinion will not address the issue directly or correctly.

Even though you found the flaw, the flaw is fatal – silence is complicit.

Appealing to state Supreme Court – you are now presenting the problem to those who have caused it. They enacted the RULE 1.6 – CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION.
Confidentiality prevents them from addressing the issue.
Confidentiality prevents them from fixing their law.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST prevents them from addressing their unconstitutional law – improperly enacted.

The flaw is fatal.


No one enforces the Constitution. Law Enforcement enforces laws. The laws must be constitutional – if a LAW is challenged the courts decide. Within the state, there is no escape.

Raising to the Federal Courts, you will learn that hidden in an appropriations bill, an amendment which could NOT pass multiple attempts in Congress was whittled down to a few sentences. The McDade Murtha Amendment requires federal lawyers to follow that very same state Confidentiality law.
[Murtha was chair of Appropriations.]

The flaw is fatal. It can happen to anyone. EVERYONE HAS NOTICED… Black Live Matter, Kids for Cash, a Foreclosure Crisis based on robosigned and fake deeds.

The lawyers must capitulate – or face the aggressive discipline of the state Supreme Court. ALL LAWYERS. At every level of court and law enforcement. The flaw is fatal.

There is no escape. If you survive, your survival is consider a declaration of war against a District Attorney “who spends his/her professional career learning hows to [screw] others.”

Every person to whom you turn for help will be discovered to be working against you.

Since 2007, and the recent round launched 2015, It is happening to me… and to make the mater even more difficult, the court acting without jurisdiction, without hearing, without evidence, without testimony has compelled a Public Defender to represent me.

The Public Defender will not meet or speak with me. They act on my behalf AGAINST MY BEST INTEREST.

The Public Defender actually knows their assignment is void, and without any authority because the court lacked jurisdiction. They fail to comply with any court orders.

The Public Defender has been assigned to prevent any action by myself – they have taken my voice. This prevents me from filing statements, petitions or documents. I file, the Clerk stamps, then rejects and send to the Public Defender who fails to file the document on my behalf. Remember, the Public Defender has no authority to act on my behalf – their assignment is void.

‘Acting on my behalf’ they deliberately neglect necessary documents which undermine their effort – THEIR FARCE IS EXPOSED.

To prevent any actions at all, the Public Defender reassigns the case within their own office. This is strategicalloy designed to prevent appeals. You are prevented from filing an Appeal. You can’t contact your Public Defender. If you do, their first statement is they no longer represent you. Running our the deadlines for appeal. They cannot file the Appeal – (Remember, the Public Defender has no authority to act on my behalf – their assignment is void.) You are being prevented from filing any appeal by the defective and void order issued without jurisdiction.

The Public Defenders, there have been 5 so far, are trying to avoid doing anything which could create a liability for them.

The chaos of their actions is strategic. The chaos is designed to overwhelm. The chaos is intended to distract from the fact that THE COURT LACKS JURISDICTION IN THIS MATTER. The Court can never resolve the matter which is before them. BUT, If they are able to convert the matter into a contempt, or alternate crime, the DA will proceed from on that single issue and use the chaos created to cause it as evidence of a frustrating situation – CONVERSION TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE SOLUTION.

Yes, they have been pushing for a SUICIDE SOLUTION since 2007.
Yes, they have attempted to convert to an ADMINISTRATIVE SOLUTION ever since.
They now fail to accomplish the CRIMINAL SOLUTION since 2015. An EPIC FAILURE which has expanded to include aggressive investigation, intrusive surveillance, there are no boundaries to the effort to isolate or implicate/involve in a crime or to provoke violence.

I have been unemployed and destitute since 2007. I am prevented from any government benefit or resource – financial or medical. Homeless – the DA is protecting those who stole my home, filed and received the title insurance, and have taken out loans using my house as the collateral. Profits of about $1 million. The DA won’t prosecute that crime or the direct death threat (5 pages) which was delivered via the District Attorneys Office. A document which plans provisions and trains for my murder based on acknowledged fiction.

They have conducted a case which has been a farce since 2007 – when that first Order without jurisdiction was issued in August 2007. Twenty-two judges on the Montgomery County Bench have participated in the on-going farce.

The present matter is related. Judge Duffy lacked jurisdiction to escalate the matter to the Court of Common Pleas. This triggered a deliberate neglect by the ADA to follow the Rules of Criminal Procedure. Because, they knew they were acting without jurisdiction – there was no need to abide any rule, procedure, law or constitutional right.

I have survived only because I learned to file statements before each proceeding.

They have countered with the farce representation by the Public Defenders – because that prevents my voice, prevents my filing the statements. I had indicated this as an action of sabotage.

When Jurisdiction is ignored, by everyone. You’re dead. There is no such thing as retroactive jurisdiction. There is no excuse for acting without jurisdiction. Once it occurs, JURISDICTION will be the unmentioned neglected missing piece to every discussion, document, order and opinion. They will inflict an overwhelming volume of chaos to distract and misdirect. When it all comes down to a simple NECESSITY.

JURISDICTION IS A NECESSITY.
But, The problem with the Confidentiality law is that it is Confidential.


Sent to the entire Montgomery County Public Defenders office

Date: Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:09 AM
Subject: Unending corruption of Montgomery County
To: dbeer@montcopa.org, pdangelo@montcopa.org, dmarone@montcopa.org, rroberts@montcopa.org
Cc: fzeock@montcopa.org, mwarren@montcopa.org, itorres@montcopa.org, dtheveny@montcopa.org, ktaxis@montcopa.org, csweeney@montcopa.org, msontchi@montcopa.org, rsimon@montcopa.org, csilveri@montcopa.org, mschanba@montcopa.org, tross@montcopa.org, srosenberg@montcopa.org, erideout@montcopa.org, lpetrill@montcopa.org, epeterse@montcopa.org, kpemment@montcopa.org, lortiz@montcopa.org, gnester@montcopa.org, dmontows@montcopa.org, cmiller3@montcopa.org, rmadden@montcopa.org, jkravitz@montcopa.org, hkranzel@montcopa.org, akostyk@montcopa.org, akosinsk@montcopa.org, akatzman@montcopa.org, ljones@montcopa.org, djohnson@montcopa.org, mjohn@montcopa.org, khudson@montcopa.org, chosay@montcopa.org, khoran@montcopa.org, shayden@montcopa.org, kgrimsru@montcopa.org, ggriffit@montcopa.org, dgreensp@montcopa.org, egrant@montcopa.org, wgordon@montcopa.org, cfortune@montcopa.org, mdayoc@montcopa.org, adaniels@montcopa.org, bcooper@montcopa.org, econey@montcopa.org, pcassidy@montcopa.org, ncasey@montcopa.org, gcardena@montcopa.org, dcaglia@montcopa.org, wburnett@montcopa.org, ebrogan@montcopa.org, tbowman@montcopa.org, lalexan1@montcopa.org

2017
01.26

After receiving “NO RESPONSE” regarding the documents delivered to Bucks County Officials on Thursday January 12, 2017

A Private Criminal Complaint was filed today in District Court naming as Defendants,
Bucks County Prothonotary, Patricia Bachtle
Bucks County Sheriff, Edward Donnelly
Bucks County District Attorney, Matt Weintraub
Bucks County First Assistant District Attorney, Michelle A. Henry
Bucks County Recorder of Deeds, Joseph J. Szafran
Honorable Jeffrey Finley, President Judge
… and others …

Magesterial District Court Judge Mark D. Douple indicated that the Complaint will be forwarded to Bucks County District Attorney Matt Weintraub for review. However, as there is a conflict of interest, the complaint will likely be forwarded to the Pennsylvania Attorney General for action.

Private Criminal Complaint
2013-07214
2012-05546
2011-00193
Attachments

As former Bucks County First Assistant District Attorney, Michele Henry, has accepted a position as First Deputy Attorney General and reports directly to Attorney General Josh Shapiro, a conflict of interest may exist in the AG’s office as well.

First Deputy AG Michelle Henry said, “We’re pledging to one another and to every Pennsylvanian that this office places the highest value on integrity in our work – criminal prosecutions, civil litigation and public protection cases. It sends an important message to the public: You can have faith that the Office of Attorney General is striving every day to achieve justice and fairness in all that we do.”

Attorney General Josh Shapiro has stated, “We’re pledging to one another and to every Pennsylvanian that this office places the highest value on integrity in our work – criminal prosecutions, civil litigation, and public protection cases. It sends an important message to the public: You can have faith that the Office of Attorney General is striving every day to achieve justice and fairness in all that we do.”

“We will apply the law without fear or favor and infuse integrity in all that we do,” Shapiro said Tuesday, at his swearing-in ceremony, “so we can focus on best protecting you.”

Shapiro’s new code of conduct includes requirements such as “serving the interests of the citizens of Pennsylvania above his [or] her own” and “safeguarding all confidential information.”

“This code is a promise I’m making to you,” Shapiro said, “and a promise every member of this office is making to one another – to uphold the highest standard of integrity and ensure our justice system works for all.”

“This code reflects a basic principle,” Shapiro said, “and in signing it I join over 800 members of this office in recommitting ourselves to this truth:

“Public service is a public trust.”

2017
01.16

There are likely millions of Fraudulent Foreclosures which were improperly handled through the courts, or their default processes.

So many, in fact, that there’s a name for what is on the horizon… THE IBANEZ TIMEBOMB.

Property Title Trouble in Non-Judicial Foreclosure States: The Ibanez Time Bomb?

This Article explores the extent to which the Ibanez ruling may influence the jurisprudence in other non-judicial foreclosure states and the likelihood that clear title to foreclosed properties is jeopardized by the shoddy handling of notes and mortgages.

2017
01.15

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
MOTION TO STRIKE DEFAULT JUDGMENT(s)
MOTION TO VOID SHERIFF SALE(s)
MOTION TO ENJOIN FURTHER HARASSMENT
MOTION TO ENJOIN FURTHER FRAUDULENT ACTIONS

The Complaint was delivered on Thursday, January 12, 2017. Filed with the Bucks County Prothontary to put the Motions before the county judges. Copies delivered to the offices of …
Bucks County Prothonotary, Patricia Bachtle
Bucks County Sheriff, Edward Donnelly
Bucks County District Attorney, Matt Weintraub
Bucks County First Assistant District Attorney, Michelle A. Henry
Bucks County Recorder of Deeds, Joseph J. Szafran
Honorable Jeffrey Finley, President Judge

Copies prepared and filed for each property involved.
#1 Woodspring Circle and Attachments
#2 Mary Street and Attachments
#3 East Ashland Street and Attachments

Todd M. Krautheim, Defendant in the above captioned case and the following cases in the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas, has been denied protection of the Rule of Law; Due Process and Procedure; and rights which are guaranteed by the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Constitution of the United States.

#2011-00193 Bank of America v Todd M. Krautheim
#2012-05546 US Bank NA v Todd M. Krautheim
#2013-07214 First Savings Bank of Perkasie v Todd M. Krautheim

The county officials have neglected the responsibilities of their elected office and by their informed deliberate and intentional negligence have permitted the authority, integrity and independence of the County Judiciary to be undermined and usurped.

The county officials have actively participated in the grossly unconstitutional conduct having permitted constitutional rights and the Rule of law to be ignored.

The county officials have directly, or indirectly by directing their staff, contributed and participated in the harassment and intimidation of the Defendant while preventing the matter(s) from being presented to the Bucks County Judiciary for review and adjudication.

Defendant provides the following statement and documents in support of the matter:

On December 13, 2016, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Zane David Memeger, filed an indictment containing indications of actions and means available to engage in unlawful and corrupt ‘sham’ actions through Bucks County court.

The indictment named John I. Waltman, Robert P. Hoopes and Bernard T. Rafferty indicating they “conspired and agreed, together and with persons known and unknown to the grand jury to commit offenses” [sic] “to conduct, attempt to conduct, or aid and abet the conducting of, financial transactions involving property” [sic] “with the intent to conceal or disguise the nature, location, source, ownership and control of property believed to be the proceeds of the specified unlawful activities.”

ATTACHMENT A – US District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Indictment – Criminal No. 16-509 filed December 13, 2016

While the indictment did not indicate any relationship(s) between Waltman, Hoopes and Rafferty and the personnel in the Office of the Prothonotary, the Sheriffs office, and other county offices, several relationships are significant in light of their claims and the inappropriate fraudulent default foreclosures being perpetrated against Defendant while having been denied any opportunity or hearing before any Court.

ATTACHMENT B – Delaware Valley News.com
“Lower Southampton officials arrested by federal authorities” December 22, 2016

“Hoopes is an attorney that prior to this indictment, used to represent car accident victims and people that claimed they fell on other peoples property.”

“[Hoopes] was a cop many years ago serving Lower Southampton Township.”

“[Waltman] replaced Susan McEwen, who was caught tampering with judicial records involving a family member and giving a cop a very hard time as he used to court to get warrants.”

“Waltman will be removed from the bench shortly.”

“Waltman is not a lawyer.”

“Rafferty has been involved in law enforcement for almost 20 years, service as Deputy Constable.”

ATTACHMENT C – ABA Journal
“Judge is charged with money laundering in FBI sting operation” December 16, 2016

“The indictment claims Rafferty’s consulting firm account was used to launder money, and all of the defendants obtained bogus documents to make their transactions appear legitimate.”

“They are also accused of planning to obtain a sham default judgment…”

ATTACHMENT D – Bucks County Courier Times
“There has to be a better way” December 21, 2016

“Upon his appointment to Lower Southampton’s newly created position of public safety director, Robert Hoopes was called “the perfect candidate” by board of supervisors Chairman Patrick Irving.”

“Likewise, when District Judge John Waltman was appointed to the bench in 2010 by then Gov. Ed Rendell, a spokesman for the governor said Waltman received “very strong endorsements” from state Sen. Tommy Tomlinson and state Rep. Frank Farry.”

“[Tomlinson] agreed that a more formal vetting process would be a good idea.”

“Still, the township supervisors appointed [Hoopes] following a closed-door process.”

ATTACHMENT E – Levittown Now.com
“Constable Crashes School Board Meeting; Board Member Takes Verbal Swings At Judge” August 16, 2016

“During the board comment portion of the meeting, [Mike] Morris called out Waltman on the documents he received and accused Waltman of “political abuse.”

“Unfortunately, this is how it gets done,” Morris said. He also additionally claimed he had witnessed the judge “destroy people’s lives.”

“Morris, who has talked to reporters at previous meetings about claims of harsh politics in Lower Southampton, called Waltman a “political hack” and implied that members of his family were corrupt. He also stated the elected judge had influence over the Lower Southampton Police Department.”

“In addition, Morris made claims to members of the media after the school board meeting that Waltman had made threats of violence against him in the past and had mishandled a criminal case involving someone the elected official knew.”

ATTACHMENT F – Patch.com
“Grassroots Politics” August 1, 2011

“Magisterial District Judge John Waltman spoke at the end of the event, first announcing he’s not a fan of long speeches. But he, like other Repuiblicans in attendance spoke about keeping grassroots politics in mind.”

“Our secret to success is when we all stick together,” [Waltman] said.

ATTACHMENT G – Bucks County Constables Assocation
Bucks County Constables Association 2010 Officers
PRESIDENT – John Waltman
Lower Southampton Twp

TREASURER – Barney Rafferty
Pendel Boro

The impropriety which surrounds and envelopes the careers and relationships of those involved in the indictment is cause for serious concern and demonstrates opportunities for abuse and corruption, conducted with extreme arrogance and indifference and affirms their belief that they were above the law.

ATTACHMENT H – Judicial Conduct Board
Press Release December 16, 2016
Petition for Relief for Interim Suspension With or Without Pay
Indictment
Verification
Proof of Service

“Under the Pennsylvania Constitution, the Court of Judicial Discipline has the authority to issue an interim order suspending [Waltman], prior to a hearing, based on the filing of the indictment charging felonies.”

ATTACHMENT – I The Committee to Expose Dishonest and Incompetent Judges, Attorneys and Public Officials
“Ex-Judge Susan E. McEwen of Philadelphia; scofflaw, arrogant, potty-mouth loser”

“… Judge McEwen was charged with egregious misconduct by the Pennsylvania Judicial Commission.”

“When Judge McEwen’s neighbors called the police complaining about a loud party at her house, the cops responded and discovered ten teenagers boozing it up, of all of whom were underage and all of whom were arrested. One of the teens was McEwen’s grandson Matthew Keller.”

“Subsequently, the case was assigned to Judge David Heckler who found all of them guilty; however, Keller didn’t appear in court but was fined $200 + $121.64 in court costs by Heckler. Shortly thereafter, Judge McEwen illegally “altered” Judge Heckler’s court ruling by crossing out the $300 fine and substituting it with $150.”

“Officer Outland attempted to offer an explanation of the circumstances to Judge McEwen, but she continued to scream calling him a “Bastard” and “Stupid Asshole.”

“You Asshole, I can’t believe you called me out for this.”

“Upon leaving the courthouse, Judge McEwen continued to point her finger and yell at Officer Outland, referring to the police as a bunch of “Stupid Assholes”

“Knowing she would be found guilty of egregious misconduct and likely removed from the bench, Judge McEwen did what any respectable coward would do, she resigned, which caused the charges against her to be dismissed.”

ATTACHMENT J – Court of Judicial Discipline
ORDER June 24, 2010

“the Complaint filed by the Judical Conduct Board in this case is marked withdrawn and the case closed, without prejudice.”

ATTACHMENT K – Expose Corrupt Courts
“Is It Too Much to Ask That Employees Stop Altering Court Records?” July 1, 2009
“Judge Accused of Altering Her Grandson’s Court File, Calling Cop an “A$$#@!=”
July 1, 2009

“altering official records”

“indecorous language and behavior towards a police officer”

“engaging in conduct that prejudices the proper administration of justice”

“engaging in activity that brings the judicial office into disrepute”

“The board also charged McEwen with violating Rule 2A of the Rules Governing Standards of Conduct of Magisterial District Judges, which states that district judges ‘shall respect and comply with the law and shall conduct themselves at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary’ and ‘shall not allow their family, social or other relationships to influence their judicial conduct or judgment.” The board argued McEwen was also in violation of Rule 8A of the district judge rules, which requires district judges to recuse themselves from cases “in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

Their relationships with county personnel shows they had the personnel and resources in place to conduct their criminal enterprise and avoid detection where county officers ignored and failed to respond to issues when brought to their attention.

It can be demonstrated on the court record (documents, letters and notices, etc) that the Defendant has been denied access to the court, and denied any opportunity for hearings; denied the opportunity to present testimony and provide evidence; and his property has been unconstitutionally taken using an improperly applied default process in favor of a plaintiff who lacks proper standing to bring this matter before the court.

For these reasons, and possibly others, an improper default action has been attempted which prevents any judicial review of any facts, evidence, testimony, etc.

The denial of access to the courts is being perpetrated by persons in positions of authority who have refused to meet; speak; respond to letters, documents, court petitions, court orders, etc;
-They have additionally deliberately neglected to sign any documents, or indicate responsibility for the decision making authority or applicable law under which their action, or in-action, is appropriate.

-They have additionally filed false reports, or made false statements, regarding the Defendant (and others) which have lead to the harassment of the Defendant (and others) by other county personnel – who know the deception involved and are ‘following orders’.

“Our secret to success is when we all stick together,” [Waltman] said.

Any law which is preventing a litigant from access to the courts is unconstitutional as it is denying a right protected by the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Constitution of the United States.
– This is the reason that County Officials neglect to substantiate or indicate the applicable law which supports their actions/inaction.
– This is the reason that documents are not signed.
– Elected officials, and their employees, have a responsibility by law and are ultimately responsible for the negligence and corruption within their departments.

AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW CANNOT PROVIDE ANY DEFENSE FOR THE DENIAL OF ANY RIGHT.

ATTACHMENT L – Office of Prothonotary
Letterhead

Indicates Patricia L. Bachtle as Prothonotary
Indicates Nicole Waltman as First Deputy

RE: RETURN OF DOCUMENT
Indicates Patricia L. Bachtle as Prothonotary
Indicates Nicole Waltman as First Deputy
Timestamp: November 2, 2016
Form revised 03/2012

Rule 1037.B
Rule 1037.B provides for the Default resolution of a matter by the Prothonotary upon praecipe by the Plaintiff.

Rule 1037.b is unconstitutional in that it unfairly provides procedures to the Plaintiff in litigation which are not similarly provided to the Defendant. This unfair practice denies the Defendant of “fairness” and his right to due process of law.

Rule 1037.B has been enacted by the Judiciary pursuant to their power to prescribe by general rule the practice and procedure in civil actions for the courts of common pleas.

The rulemaking authority of the judiciary requires “such rules are consistent with Constitution and neither abridge, enlarge nor modify the substantive right of any litigant.”

The General Assembly, by Act of June 21, 1937, P. L. 1982, as amended, 17 P. S. § 61 et seq. (repealed), vested in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania the power to prescribe by general rule the practice and procedure in civil actions for the courts of common pleas. This concept was incorporated into the Constitution of 1968, Article V, Section 10(c) which continued to vest in the Supreme Court:

‘‘. . . the power to prescribe general rules governing practice, procedure, and conduct of all courts . . . if such rules are consistent with Constitution and neither abridge, enlarge nor modify the substantive right of any litigant, nor affect the right of the General Assembly to determine the jurisdiction of any court or justice of peace, nor suspend nor alter any statute of limitation or repose. All laws shall be suspended to the extent that they are inconsistent with rules prescribed under these provisions.’’

A clear conflict of interest exists for the judiciary to review the constitutionality of a Rule which the judiciary has improperly enacted without any constitutional review.

PENNSYLVANIA LEGISLATURE

IN AN ATTEMPT TO CONCEAL THE CORRUPTION OF THE COUNTY OFFICERS, the Pennsylvania Legislature has been presented with legislation which would move several county departments, and elected Row Offices, under the direct responsibility of the Judiciary. The legislation has not moved forward in any of the last six (6) sessions of the Pennsylvania Legislature. A clear indication that the Legislature is aware of the deception involved in this effort.

It can be demonstrated that the Defendant has attempted to engage and solicit the efforts of the elected county officials, departments and law enforcement. Those requests have been ignored.

ATTACHMENT M
Email – April 23, 2013 – Doylestown Township Police – Eva Gebre
Letter – November 1, 2013 – Judge Rea Boylan
Fax – November 1, 2013 – Judge Rea Boylan
Letter – March 11, 2014 – Judge Rea Boylan
Letter – March 11, 2014 – President Judge Jeffrey Finley (cc)
Letter – March 11, 2014 – former President Judge Susan Scott (cc)
Letter – March 11, 2014 – Patricia Bachtle, Prothonotary (cc)
Fax – March 11, 2014 – Judge Rea Boylan
Fax – March 11, 2014 – President Judge Jeffrey Finley (cc)
Fax – March 11, 2014 – former President Judge Susan Scott (cc)
Fax – March 11, 2014 – Patricia Bachtle, Prothonotary (cc)
Notice – Letter & Fax March 11, 2014
Email – March 26, 2014 – Bucks County District Attorney – David Heckler
Letter – May 29, 2015 – Judge Robert J. Mellon
Letter – May 29, 2015 – Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane (cc)
Letter – May 29, 2015 – Chief Counsel Judicial Conduct Board Robertn Graci (cc)
Letter – May 29, 2015 – Bucks County Sheriff – Edward Donnelly (cc)
Letter – June 5, 2015 – Central Bucks Regional Police – Pat Penecale
Letter – June 8, 2015 – Bucks County Sheriff – Edward Donnelly
Letter – June 25, 2015 – Bucks County District Attorney – David Heckler
Letter – July 6, 2015 – Bucks County Sheriff – Edward Donnelly
Letter – Feb 11, 2016 – Bucks County Sheriff – Edward Donnelly
Email – Feb, 16, 2016 – Judge Rea Boylan
Letter – February 18, 2016 – from Office of Court Administration (UNSIGNED)
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Bucks County Sheriff – Edward Donnelly
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Office of Court Administration – Douglas Praul
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Office of Court Administration – Robert Pollack
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Office of Court Administration – Thomas Stoehr
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Office of Court Administration – Carmen G. Thorne
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Office of Court Administration – Steve Watson
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Office of Court Administration – Rhona Nagelberg
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Judge Rea Boylan (cc)
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Judge Jeffrey Finley (cc)
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Office of the Attorney General – Jonathan Deucker (cc)
Letter – March 14, 2016 – Central Bucks Regional Police Department – Lance Carlen(cc)
Letter – March 28, 2016 – Pennsylvania Attorney General – Kathleen Kane
Email – December 8, 2016 – Bucks County Sheriff – Edward Donnelly
Fax – Decenber 8, 2016 – Bucks County Sheriff – Edward Donnelly
Notice – Email & Fax December 8, 2016 – Bucks County Sheriff – Edward Donnelly

THESE LETTERS AND DOCUMENTS HAVE ADDITIONALLY BEEN FILED AS NOTICES, HAND DELIVERED, MAILED, FAX’d, SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL, HAND DELIVERED TO JUDGES CHAMBERS.

BUCKS COUNTY PROTHONOTARY, PATRICIA BACHTLE

Meetings have been requested with Patricia Bachtle EACH time documents were filed in the matters. THE REQUESTS WERE IGNORED.

Prothonotary Staff regularly made excuses for the unavailability of the Prothonotary, and the inability to schedule a meeting.

Documents were served upon Patricia Bachtle. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE.

Prothonotary staff was challenged when documents presented to the Prothonotary were not posted to the docket on multiple occasions.

When time-stamped copies were presented, the Documents were then filed/docketed using an incorrect date on the Docket. Prothonotary staff insisted there was no way to adjust the date. Meetings were requested with Patricia Bachtle. THE REQUESTS WERE IGNORED.

When seeking to take a default where the plaintiff had failed to respond to ANY filings, the time-stamped documents had again not been entered. Second Deputy Patricia Zimmerman proceed to back-date the documents on the docket, and produce back-dated time-stamped bar coded stickers for the documents. A PRACTICE AND ABILITY WHICH HAD BEEN VEHEMENTLY DENIED IN THE PAST WHEN CHANGES TO THE DOCKET WERE INDICATED. Meetings were requested with Patricia Bachtle. THE REQUESTS WERE IGNORED.

Further, Terance Healy, a witness to the conversations with the Prothonotary staff, was removed from the Prothonotary at the direction of Patricia Bachtle by County Deputies. There was no reason provided by County Deputies acting on the direction of “the woman who’s name is on the door.”

County Deputies had come to know the Defendant, and Terance Healy, as they regularly accompanied each other to the Courthouse when filing and serving documents to county officials. Deputies indicated there had been no reports or incidents regarding their activities at the courthouse.

Filings related to the Defendant’s request for the Default, were not filed by the Prothonotary.

Filings related to the Defendant’s request for the Default, were not acted upon by the Prothonotary.

Filings related to the Defendant’s request for the Default, have reportedly been returned to the Defendant BUT HAVE NOT BEEN RECEIVED BY THE DEFENDANT, nor has any indication of the actions of the Prothonotary been filed/docketed in the matters..

The First Deputy Prothonotary, Nicole Waltman, has held that position for years.

A man believed to be her husband, John I. Waltman, has been named in an indictment (Attachment A) by the US Attorney.

The indictment (Attachment A) having included an ability to obtain ‘sham default judgments’.

The Prothonotary has provided and delivered ‘sham default judgments’ in the above named matters, while the Defendant HAS NOT DEFAULTED and has responded to each document filed by the Plaintiff and been prevented from any hearings on any issue.

The deliberate failure and negligence of Patricia Bachtle, Prothonotary, to perform (or supervise) the responsibilities of the elected office while providing improper, unsubstantiated and unlawful default judgments (sham default judgments) which deny the Defendant of real property is cause for investigation.

Prothonotary staff has become nervous and agitated at the Defendant when he presents documents to be filed in the matters.

Prothonotary staff has become defensive where the Defendant has asked to address the issues with Patricia Bachtle, Prothonotary.

Requests for Investigation have been made to the Bucks County Prothonotary.
THE REQUESTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

Requests for Investigation have been made to the Bucks County District Attorney.
THE REQUESTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

Requests for Investigation have been made to the Bucks County Sheriff.
THE REQUESTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

Requests for Investigation have been made to the Bucks County Commissioners.
THE REQUESTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

Requests for Investigation have been made to the Bucks County Recorder of Deeds. THE REQUESTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

Requests for Investigation have been made to the Pennsylvania Attorney General.
THE REQUESTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

BUCKS COUNTY SHERIFF, EDWARD DONNELLY

Improper and unlawful default judgments have been presented to Bucks County Sheriff Edward Donnelly.

The errors and problems with the judgments have been brought to the attention of the Sheriff and the staff within the Sheriff’s office.

The Sheriff has failed to acknowledge, or investigate, or respond to the reports of errors, problems with unsubstantiated default orders issued by the Prothonotary

Ignoring the ‘sham default judgments’, the Sheriff has proceeded to offer the Defendants property at monthly Sheriff’s sales.

Lieutenant Thomas Waltman, has been an employee of the Bucks County Sheriffs Department – her reports to the Sheriff and his responsibilities include supervising the sergeants who in turn supervise the deputies who comprise the department.

There is reason to believe that a relationship exists between Thomas Waltman and John I. Waltman, who has been named in an indictment (Attachment A) by the US Attorney.

The indictment (Attachment A) having included an ability to use ‘sham default judgments’ to obtain property or documents relating to concealing money laundering acitivites described in the indictment.

The Sheriffs department has been used in attempts to harrass, intimidate and slander the Defendant, including improper arrest and detainment based on an ‘imagined’ bench warrant; posting of the Defendants photograph at the entrance to the Courthouse under the title ****THREATS***THREATS***THREATS” and suggesting the Defendant has “harassed judges in the past” (ATTACHMENT N)

The Sheriffs Department has additionally harassed, intimidated and detained Terance Healy for over two hours based on the same ‘imagined’ bench warrant.

Even after producing a valid Pennsylvania Drivers License which indicated he was NOT the person named on the purported bench warrant, Healy was detained for over two hours, his drivers license was held while he was photographed, fingerprinted, subjected to inquiry, subjected to a line up, etc by Bucks County Sheriffs Department Deputies who refused to produce the warrant when requested, and who failed to provide any report of the incident when requested.

It is important to note that the Defendant and Mr. Healy were frequently at the courthouse to address the activites necessary for the above-listed matters. They were familiar, friendly, and known by the deputies and other courthouse personnel.

The fraudulent sales of the Defendant’s properties and the harassment and intimidation efforts of the Sheriffs Department have been reported to the Bucks County Sheriff. THE REPORTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

The fraudulent sales of the Defendant’s properties and the harassment and intimidation efforts of the Sheriffs Department have been reported to the Bucks County District Attorney. THE REPORTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

The fraudulent sales of the Defendant’s properties and the harassment and intimidation efforts of the Sheriffs Department have been reported to the Bucks County Commissioners. THE REPORTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

The fraudulent sales of the Defendant’s properties and the harassment and intimidation efforts of the Sheriffs Department have been reported to the Pennsylvania Attorney General. THE REPORTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

BUCKS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, DAVID HECKLER
BUCKS COUNTY FIRST ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY, MICHELLE HENRY
BUCKS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, MATTHEW WEINTRAUB

The Defendant has requested investigation of the fraud and corruption to the Bucks County District Attorney on multiple occasions. THE REQUESTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

The Defendant has filed and served the Bucks County District Attorney with documents which detail the fraudulent activities seeking investigation and prosecution of the crimes involved. THE REQUESTS HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

The Defendant has requested the escalation of the matter to the appropriate level of law enforcement where the Bucks County District Attorney lacks jurisdiction or has a conflict of interest in the matter. THERE HAS BEEN NO RESPONSE.

THE BUCKS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ROBERT LOUGHERY, DIANE MARSEGLIA, CHARLES MARTIN

The Defendant has provided copies of the documents delivered to the Prothonotary, Sheriff and District Attorney, and other law enforcement officials to the Bucks County Commissioners seeking assistance in resolving the matters. THERE HAS BEEN NO RESPONSE.

The Defendant has requested the assistance of the Bucks County Commissioners to obtain information about the actions/inactions of the Prothonotary, Sheriff and District Attorney. THERE HAS BEEN NO RESPONSE.

The Defendant has requested the assistance of the Bucks County Commissioners to escalate the matter to the proper level of law enforcement (including the Pennsylvania Attorney General, and the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania). THERE HAS BEEN NO RESPONSE.

BUCKS COUNTY RECORDER OF DEEDS, JOSEPH SZAFRAN

The Defendant has advised the Bucks County Recorder of Deeds of the fraudulent conveyance of properties, sham default orders and the fraudulent statements which appear on documents filed with the Recorder of Deeds office. THERE HAS BEEN NO RESPONSE.

The Defendant is aware that the Recorder of Deeds accepts responsibility only for the filing of documents and has no legal obligation to verify or confirm any detail information.

The Recorder of Deeds has no legal authority for refusing to accept documents which have been formatted properly regardless of the validity of statements in the documents.

The Recorder of Deeds is aware that he has no authority to restrict, deny or prevent the filing of fraudulent documents with his office.

DOCKET(s)

Bucks County Court of Common Pleas

ATTACHMENT O
Case# 2011-00193 (232 entries)

ATTACHMENT P
Case# 2012-05546 (91 entries)

ATTACHMENT Q
Case# 2013-07214 (179 entries)

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Case# 400 MT 2013
Case# 1767 EDA 2016
Case# 943 EDA 2014

United States Bankruptcy Court
15-14919-SR

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Case #13-4614
THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE OF RULE 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION

Incorporated by Reference
-served upon the state Attorney General(s) of the United States,
-copies to the state Governors of the United States
-distributed to Pennsylvania Government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary- Supreme Court), the Sheriffs of Pennsylvania,
-distributed to United States Government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary – Supreme Court),

United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals

Case #13-4591

Incorporated by Reference
-served upon the state Attorney General(s) of the United States

ATTACHMENT R –
“REPORT ON FRAUDULENT & FORGED ASSIGNMENTS OF MORTGAGES & DEEDS IN U.S. FORECLOSURES”

at Background paragraph#5
“you need to sue the layers, they are all in on it” meaning the scam and scheme of fraudulent and unlawful foreclosures being conducted in the name of the servicers who had no real ownership or interest in the note and thus no right or authority to conduct a foreclosure.

UNDERMINING JUSTICE

The lawyers’ creation of a “strawman” when coupled with the relentless pursuit of constant and exhausting unfounded litigation for a plaintiff without standing;
or without any requirement to produce standing;
or where standing is purportedly concealed by confidentiality, or privilege;
or where lawful standing has been excused by UNCONSTITUTIONAL and IMPROPER action of the state judiciary;
or where default authority is improperly delegated outside the judiciary;
or where a local rule
…enables a situation where any person may experience the theft of their property while denied their constitutionally protected rights and any protection of the law
WHILE GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS AND EVERY LEVEL OF STATE AND FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT STANDS IDLE only indicating that the crime is not within their jurisdiction – a misdirection which prevents law enforcement from indicating that the judiciary has endorsed the theft of property when perpetrated by lawyers.

A situation enabled and caused when the American Bar Association presented their unethical, unlawful and immoral rules to the state Supreme Courts – and once enacted by the Supreme Courts, the improper and unconstitutional laws were prevented from exposure pursuant to an aggressively enforced CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION (Rule 1.6) which similarly was improperly enacted and unconstitutional.

The situation further exasperated by the McDade-Murtha Act which was mocked for creating “THE CORRUPT POLITICIANS’ PROTECTION BOARD”, A stripped down McDade Murtha provision became the “Citizens Protection Act of 1998” which was included in H.R. 4276 the House Commerce, Justice, State, and Judiciary appropriations bill, preventing federal law enforcement efforts through improperly enacted and unconstitutional laws of the state judiciary(s).

McDade-Murtha is an unconstitutional delegation of the Legislative Authority of the US Congress to each state Judiciary – which is prevented from any Constitutional Challenge or review because of the UNDENIABLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST of the judiciary – the self appointed deciders of ‘constitutionality’ since Marbury v. Madison.

A conspiracy by the American Bar Association which undermined the authority of the state and federal judiciary. An act of treason against the American government concealed by the aggressively enforced mandate of Confidentiality of Information (Rule 1.6) – improperly enacted and unconstitutional in every state. An aggressive and violent rape of the public trust.

ANYONE WHO WOULD MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO EXPOSE THESE ACTIONS WOULD BE DESTROYED BY THE LAWYERS WHILE EVERY LEVEL OF LAW ENFORCEMENT IGNORED, CONSPIRED or PARTICIPATED.

The Criminal Prosecution of Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane demonstrates the use of false prosecution by several Pennsylvania District Attorneys for the purpose of concealing the conspiracy.

Bucks County Assistant District Attorney, Michelle Henry
Montgomery County District Attorney Risa Ferman
Montgomery County District Attorney Kevin Steele
Pennsylvania Attorney General Bruce Castor
Pennsylvania Attorney General Bruce Beemer

SUMMARY
The Defendant has no recourse. The Bucks County Judiciary has been removed from the matter.

The government and law enforcement officials with proper jurisdiction who are responsible for their duties defined by law have deliberately neglected their responsibilities which has resulted in the fraudulent conveyance of the Defendant’s property.

The Defendant has been subjected to harassment, abuse and the theft of his property; denied EVERY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT; and prevented from any protection of the Rule of Law.

The fraud is obvious. The failure of government officials to act is inexcusable.

The Defendant requests the immediate action by your office.

RESPECTFULLY.

2017
01.13

A Federal indictment of a Judge, Constable and Police Chief indicated their ability to obtain SHAM DEFAULT JUDGMENTS.

They each have immediate family members in positions which control Default Judgments (Prothonotary) AND SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT personnel who can sell your home right out from under you at Sheriffs Sale…. while you are denied hearings, any constitutional rights, and any protection of the law.

The District Attorney ignores complaints and does nothing… permitting fraud, burglary, threats, intimidation, harassment…

If anyone attempts to expose their corruption… THEY WILL DESTROY YOU. They have the resources in place and law enforcement in their control. They will ruin your life, destroy your finances, take your homes… because they can, and no one will stop them.

Apparently, Senator McIlhinney is very afraid. He was directed to IGNORE… and he has hidden ever since.

2011-00193

2012-05546

2013-07214

Attachments

Copies of the Documents set for filing and delivery to Bucks County Prothonotary, Sheriff, District Attorneys, etc…

Delivery to Bucks County President Judge Jeffrey Finley (Judges Chambers)

Delivery to Bucks County District Attorney Matt Weintraub (District Attorneys Office)
Copy delivered to Michelle Henry – First Assistant District Attorney, Former District Attorney, and (pending) First Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania

Delivery to Bucks County Sheriff Edward Donnelly

Delivery to Pennsylvania Senator Charles McIlhinney

2017
01.11


Extracted From LEGISLATORS AS THE “AMERICAN CRIMINAL CLASS”: WHY CONGRESS (SOMETIMES) PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF DEFENDANTS by
Craig S. Lerner

Citizen Protection Act

The McDade Amendment, also grandiosely known as the Citizen Protection Act (CPA), has been described as “Joseph McDade’s swan song—and a parting shot at the Department of Justice . . . .” The law requires that “[a]n attorney for the Government shall be subject to [s]tate laws and rules, and local Federal court rules, governing attorneys in each State where such attorney engages in that attorney’s duties, to the same extent and in the same manner as other attorneys in that State.” Simply put, the CPA imposes state ethics rules on federal prosecutors. However equitable that may sound, it has in practice proven highly problematic, and has been the subject of substantial academic criticism. Prior to 1998, for at least a decade, state and federal courts, as well as the local bar associations, had grappled with the problem of developing ethical rules for federal prosecutors. The CPA stunted any possibility of gradual development, neglected the panoply of conflicting interests at stake, and shackled federal prosecutors with a law that has proven difficult and costly to administer.

It originated just weeks after McDade’s acquittal, when he introduced the original version of a bill that would eventually become law. In a subcommittee hearing, Representative McDade was the first and principal witness, summoning his “first-hand knowledge of the overzealousness and excessiveness of federal prosecutors.” Although McDade alleged that the “problem” of prosecutorial misconduct was “serious,” he provided virtually no evidence to support this claim, other than anecdotal claims based on his own experience. Why, then, should the members of the House heed his words? Because, said McDade, he spoke “with the authority of one who has had his life turned upside down . . . .” He added:

So I come to you today with a bias borne of hard personal experience. I used to blindly trust that our system worked. Now I have learned that our law enforcement community has to some extent lost its way, strayed from its mission.

The Department of Justice dispatched the Solicitor General, Seth Waxman, to Capitol Hill to respond to McDade and to urge the House of Representative to reject his proposal, and the executive branch won a temporary victory when the subcommittee buried the bill. Undeterred, McDade reintroduced the bill in the next Congress. The bill made it out of subcommittee, but the House Committee on the Judiciary then failed to take any action.

McDade soldiered doggedly on. In March 1998, he introduced an expanded version of the legislation in the Committee on the Judiciary. At this point, the bill had thirty-three sponsors, virtually all of whom were, like McDade himself, Republicans. Yet a few members of the House crossed the political aisle. They included: Representative Murtha, whose run-in with the law during the Abscam investigation has already been noted; Representative Traficant, who had been indicted two decades earlier and would be indicted again in a few years; and Representative Ford, Jr., whose father (also a member of Congress) had been indicted for bank fraud and tax evasion. Although the bill claimed thirty-three sponsors, the House Judiciary Committee declined to take action on it.

At this point, the progress of the CPA becomes murky. It seems that McDade convinced the House Appropriations Committee to include his proposed legislation in an appropriations bill. After a perfunctory hearing, the Committee passed the appropriations bill, with McDade’s provision included, in July 1998. The McDade provision found its logical place in an appropriations bill, nestled immediately between a provision allocating $17 million for the maritime administration and a section amending the National Whale Conservation Fund Act. Support for the McDade provision swelled in Congress when it emerged that Independent Counsel Starr had engaged in allegedly questionable tactics during the Lewinsky investigation, including the questioning of a suspect outside of the presence of her counsel.

The bill was then collapsed into an Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill, and presented to the Senate on August 31, 1998. Although the House had been a congenial place for McDade’s law, the Senate accorded it a relatively chilly reception. Senator Leahy (D.-Vt.), the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, spoke out on the floor against the CPA, noting that the provision placed “unnecessary and ill-advised obstacles in the path of effective interstate and international prosecutions.” The ranking minority member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Hatch (R.-Utah), also criticized McDade’s measure as harmful to the legitimate interest of law enforcement. In addition, noting the remarkably unified opposition to the measure inside and outside the administration, Hatch and Leahy expressed displeasure that the Judiciary Committee had been bypassed, and they sent a letter to the Senate Appropriations Committee urging removal of the provision from the conference report.

Indeed, far from there being any groundswell of support for the measure, most outside observers were critical. Here again, as with the Hyde Amendment, Congress proved itself determined to enact a measure that satisfied no real constituency, and that few in the general public considered to be in the public interest. The Washington Post, for example, hardly a bastion of law-and-order conservatism, ran an editorial critical of the CPA. Although acknowledging that steps should be taken to check federal prosecutors, the editorial pointed out that the measure was too blunt to accommodate the countervailing interests in effective law enforcement. The Post editorial noted that “[o]ne might expect that criminal justice legislation that is opposed by the president, the attorney general and the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee would not be blithely slipped into the statute books.” But that was precisely what happened. And when push came to shove, Leahy and Hatch declined to hold up the entire appropriations because of their opposition to the measure.

Gloating over the act’s passage in his final days in office, McDade scorned even the veneer of even-handedness, and spoke of his handiwork in the tones of a caricature of a crusading ACLU lawyer: “The Department of Justice today is engaging in the most immoral activity I can imagine,” McDade pronounced. “They charge any citizen that they can get, and as it was once said, they don’t throw the book at them, they throw the library.” Ironically, if McDade’s concern was the prosecutorial penchant to “overcharge” in the drafting of indictments, a legitimate concern that does indeed warrant scrutiny, his measure does absolutely nothing to address this problem.

But what has the CPA accomplished? To their credit, Senators Leahy and Hatch have tracked the real-world consequences of the McDade Amendment, and urged its repeal. Indeed, even before the September 11, 2001 attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, the two leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee cataloged how the application of the vagaries of state ethics rules, and in particular the rule prohibiting contact with represented parties, have sabotaged one federal investigation after another. For example, Senate Leahy took to the floor of the Senate and described how the McDade Amendment worked in actual practice in an FBI child-murder investigation. Having obtained a reliable tip that an individual, who was in a county jail after conviction on an unrelated charge, was the culprit, the FBI sought to wire one of the suspect’s trusted accomplices. But prosecutors, fearful that this might run afoul of the state’s ethics rules prohibiting contact with represented parties, sought guidance from the State Bar Disciplinary Counsel. The Counsel, interpreting the state ethics rules, concluded that the suspect was still a “represented person” and, therefore, prohibited any direct contact by an agent of the police. Such a prohibition, one should add, is in no way required by the U.S. Constitution, nor any federal regulations, but the effect of the McDade Amendment here was to short-circuit a federal murder investigation.

The September 11th attacks have prompted a reappraisal of the costs of the McDade Amendment. FBI agent Colleen Rowley, the celebrated whistleblower who excoriated FBI headquarters for its refusal to approve a warrant application to search Zacarias Moussaoui’s laptop computer, specifically urged Congress to reconsider the McDade Amendment, precisely because of the hindrance it might pose in terrorism investigations. Indeed, it is relatively easy to imagine how investigations into terrorist cells stretching across states, and involving parties who may have had brushes with the law in the past, might be delayed or even jeopardized by the McDade Amendment. In response, as noted earlier, Senator Leahy included a proposal in the Patriot Act to overhaul the McDade Amendment. But the House steadfastly rejected the Senate’s call for its replacement with a more measured provision. Responsible for creating this monster, and apparently attached to its own handiwork, the House would not consent to its destruction.

2017
01.11

Picture the American Justice System as the game JENGA. The various injustices people experience are the peices. Remove a piece, the game continues. The piece is placed back on top. The game continues…

…and continues until it comes crashing down.

Surviving the injustice(s) permits the game to continue… UNTIL YOU DON’T.

Victims are (1) homeless/destitute, (2) incarcerated, or (3) suicides.

American Injustice has been ignored since 1984.

At the recommendation of the American Bar Association, their unconstitutional Rules of Professional Conduct – which lacked the ‘fraud provisions’ deliberately removed to conceal fraud and prevent resolution – became law through each state Supreme Court.

Included in those rules was an aggressively enforced mandated for Confidentiality of Information (Rule 1.6) – a confidentiality which permits lawyers and law enforcement to IGNORE the loss of rights and the denial of any protection of the law.

Where enacted by the Judiciary and where the only decider of constitutionality is the Judiciary, a HUGE conflict of interest prevents exposure of the problem.

Concealing the fraud and preventing resolution (acting under confidentiality) the members of the various affiliated bar associations interfere, undermine and prevent the judiciary ‘held hostage’ from addressing or correcting the error. The membership of the ABA profits from the futile lawsuits.

Federal law enforcement and lawyers are similarly prevented from action by a Federal law, improperly enacted by the Congress.

The McDade Murtha amendment was an improper delegation of the rule making authority of the US Congress (Legislative Branch) to the state Judiciary (Judicial Branch).

There was no evaluation of the constitutionality of each states Rules of Professional Conduct. Congress neglected to recognize the conflict of interest and confidentiality which prevents the judiciary from addressing any unconstitutional affects of the “Rules for Lawyers”.

EVERY AMERICAN INJUSTICE IS IGNORED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AND LAWYERS PURSUANT TO RULE 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY.
Improperly enacted and unconstitutional.
Injustice and the unconstitutional denial of Americans rights caused by deliberate acts of treason (in EVERY state) by the American Bar Association.

President Elect Donald Trump is NOT a lawyer mandated to conceal the cause of the Constitutional Crisis in the US.

JUSTICE IS COMING.

%d bloggers like this: