Q: My sheriff is poaching... My judge is corrupt…
Is there anything I could do to stop it?
A: Not much, really... Am I stupid?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 03:55:50 +0300
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: joseph zernik
Back to the question itself: How to stop illegal conduct by a government official -
Some laws, which were specifically enacted during the Reconstruction Era, following the Civil War to stop unlawful conduct by public officials are:
From: joseph zernik
Back to the question itself: How to stop illegal conduct by a government official -
Some laws, which were specifically enacted during the Reconstruction Era, following the Civil War to stop unlawful conduct by public officials are:
· Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights, 42 USC 1983
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officers judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.
· Corresponding jurisdictional statute, 28 U.S.C. 1343
· Corresponding criminal statues 18 USC 242
However, as described previously, the US courts do not observe this section. For example, in Zernik v Connor et al (08-cv-01550) I duly filed under this section a complaint under 1983 against some 10 California judges in the US Distinct Court, Central District of California, for conduct amounting to racketeering.
In response:
· The clerk of the court refused to issue summonses, and
· The court went on conducting a simulated litigation under this caption, months after I refused to oppose a motion for dismissal...
For review of the true legal interpretation of the law you may read:
· Sword and Shield: A Practical Approach to Section 1983 Litigation
http://www.amazon.com/Section-1983-sword-shield-violations/dp/0897071107
This law pertains to unlawful conduct relative to deprivation of rights, poaching is unlikely to be addressed by this law.
JZ
P.S. Standard Disclaimer:1) The writer is not an attorney, and has no legal education.
2) The older I get the more I realize how clueless I am!
__________
This law pertains to unlawful conduct relative to deprivation of rights, poaching is unlikely to be addressed by this law.
JZ
P.S. Standard Disclaimer:1) The writer is not an attorney, and has no legal education.
2) The older I get the more I realize how clueless I am!
__________
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:36:38 +0300
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: joseph zernik
Here are some explanations regarding the de facto law of United States:
1) My understanding is that you might appeal only a valid appealable order or judgment of a US courts, not any hand-written piece of paper written by anybody, even if that person is represented as a US judge.
2) In a similar situation in the US District Court, Central District of California, the Clerk of the Court refused to issue summonses. When I petitioned the refusal to issue summonses to the 9th Circuit, the petition was denied, albeit, with an unsigned, unauthenticated order. The lower courts would not engage in such unlawful conduct, unless they knew that they were fully supported by the US courts of appeals.
3) In a similar situation - the simulated habeas corpus of Richard Fine - a simulated appeal was conducted by the 9th circuit court of appeals, and then a simulated petition in the US Supreme Court.
I lawfully filed evidence to the Supreme Court of the simulated nature of the proceedings in the US District Court, Central District of California and the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. Surprise, surprise, the papers were "returned" by SCOTUS court counsel Danny Bickell (neither a Deputy Clerk, nor a Justice of SCOTUS), after being stamped "Received". In short, SCOTUS as well supports the practice. [1]
4) In the US Court, Central District of California, I was even told directly by the Deputy Clerk in the Intake Department - the "Pro Se Clerk". - that any paper which included evidence against California judges would be denied filing. [2]
5) The experience is not only mine, William Windsor experienced the same in the US District Court, DC [3], and Richard Fine experience the same in the US District Court, Central District of California.
6) The practice can be summarized as a Federal Rule of Court:
Any papers, which include valid evidence of judicial corruption are exempt from First Amendment rights, and must be denied filing in the US Courts. [4]
I suggest that you read the links below, and update yourself regarding the de facto law of the United States.
LINKS:[1] 10-07-01 Complaint against US Supreme Court Counsel Danny Bickell for Alleged Public Corruption and Deprivation of Rights
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33772313/[2] 09-04-09 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) at the US District Court, Central District of California, Dkt #105: Compiled Records of Perverted Discrepancy Notices
http://www.scribd.com/doc/39773867/
[3] 11-05-30 PRESS RELEASE: Judge Richard Leon, US District Court,DC master of the Leave to file denied
http://www.scribd.com/doc/56612919/ [4] 10-10-20 The US Courts Established a Policy Excluding Any Papers Pertaining to Judicial Corruption from the First Amendment Right to File Petitions
http://www.scribd.com/doc/39788364/
__________
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: joseph zernik
Here are some explanations regarding the de facto law of United States:
1) My understanding is that you might appeal only a valid appealable order or judgment of a US courts, not any hand-written piece of paper written by anybody, even if that person is represented as a US judge.
2) In a similar situation in the US District Court, Central District of California, the Clerk of the Court refused to issue summonses. When I petitioned the refusal to issue summonses to the 9th Circuit, the petition was denied, albeit, with an unsigned, unauthenticated order. The lower courts would not engage in such unlawful conduct, unless they knew that they were fully supported by the US courts of appeals.
3) In a similar situation - the simulated habeas corpus of Richard Fine - a simulated appeal was conducted by the 9th circuit court of appeals, and then a simulated petition in the US Supreme Court.
I lawfully filed evidence to the Supreme Court of the simulated nature of the proceedings in the US District Court, Central District of California and the US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. Surprise, surprise, the papers were "returned" by SCOTUS court counsel Danny Bickell (neither a Deputy Clerk, nor a Justice of SCOTUS), after being stamped "Received". In short, SCOTUS as well supports the practice. [1]
4) In the US Court, Central District of California, I was even told directly by the Deputy Clerk in the Intake Department - the "Pro Se Clerk". - that any paper which included evidence against California judges would be denied filing. [2]
5) The experience is not only mine, William Windsor experienced the same in the US District Court, DC [3], and Richard Fine experience the same in the US District Court, Central District of California.
6) The practice can be summarized as a Federal Rule of Court:
Any papers, which include valid evidence of judicial corruption are exempt from First Amendment rights, and must be denied filing in the US Courts. [4]
I suggest that you read the links below, and update yourself regarding the de facto law of the United States.
LINKS:[1] 10-07-01 Complaint against US Supreme Court Counsel Danny Bickell for Alleged Public Corruption and Deprivation of Rights
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33772313/[2] 09-04-09 Zernik v Connor et al (2:08-cv-01550) at the US District Court, Central District of California, Dkt #105: Compiled Records of Perverted Discrepancy Notices
http://www.scribd.com/doc/39773867/
[3] 11-05-30 PRESS RELEASE: Judge Richard Leon, US District Court,DC master of the Leave to file denied
http://www.scribd.com/doc/56612919/ [4] 10-10-20 The US Courts Established a Policy Excluding Any Papers Pertaining to Judicial Corruption from the First Amendment Right to File Petitions
http://www.scribd.com/doc/39788364/
__________
At 04:39 AM 8/24/2011, W wrote:
I'm not sure that I understand, Dr. Jose. One does not require leave to file a petition such as you mention, if indeed, that is what it was.
Sooo, it sounds like under the guise of "leave to file denied" the judge dismissed your petition without hearing. And that is the appeala ble issue.
W
__________
Sooo, it sounds like under the guise of "leave to file denied" the judge dismissed your petition without hearing. And that is the appeala ble issue.
W
__________
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 04:02:45 +0300
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: jz12345@earthlink.netSubject: Re: citizen right to stop illegal conduct by public official
Not exactly addressing your question... but close...
I have sued in US District Court, Washington DC US DOJ, FBI and others, under "Petition to Compel US Officer to Perform his Duties." (Zernik v Melson et al - same Melson who later became infamous as Gun Walker)
By then, I had no surprise, when the outcome was simulated litigation, where my papers were returned to me, with hand inscription by US Judge Richard Leon "Leave to File Denied"...
JZ
LINKS:[1] 11-05-30 PRESS RELEASE: Judge Richard Leon, US District Court,DC master of the Leave to file denied
http://www.scribd.com/doc/56612919/ __________
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: jz12345@earthlink.netSubject: Re: citizen right to stop illegal conduct by public official
Not exactly addressing your question... but close...
I have sued in US District Court, Washington DC US DOJ, FBI and others, under "Petition to Compel US Officer to Perform his Duties." (Zernik v Melson et al - same Melson who later became infamous as Gun Walker)
By then, I had no surprise, when the outcome was simulated litigation, where my papers were returned to me, with hand inscription by US Judge Richard Leon "Leave to File Denied"...
JZ
LINKS:[1] 11-05-30 PRESS RELEASE: Judge Richard Leon, US District Court,DC master of the Leave to file denied
http://www.scribd.com/doc/56612919/ __________
At 03:05 AM 8/24/2011, JP wrote:
this is the core question
__________
On Tue, 8/23/11, DE wrote:
From: DE
Subject: citizen right to stop illegal conduct by public official
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
Date: Tuesday, August 23, 2011, 3:14 PM
i have info here in idaho that our local sheriff is poaching elk and deer. i have one eyewitness and possibly a second who is in alaska working at the moment. i sent in a public records request to see if the sheriff had any license to hunt the elk he was seen cleaning. the local fish and game state the info is confidential and exempt from disclosure.
is there any statutes either federal or local that address whether a private citizen can sue to stop illegal conduct by an elected official?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lawsters" group.
To post to this group, send email to lawsters@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lawsters+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lawsters?hl=en.
To post to this group, send email to lawsters@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lawsters+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lawsters?hl=en.
0 comments:
Post a Comment