JudgeGATE – Documentary on Judicial Corruption

In 2010, I experienced a foreclosure in Los Angeles, California, and in October 2011, after a long fight with CitiMortgage, the second mortgage holder who foreclosed on my property (I believe illegally) won an extended battle to evict me from my CONDO.  After LA County Sheriff showed up at my door to ILLEGALLY do a lockout, I left with as much as I could carry.  Fast forward a few days, I made contact with the Real Estate Broker, Mark E. Alston to retrieve my personal belongings.  And I contacted him, again, and again, and again, and he did not return my calls.
On October 30, 2011, on one of my many drive by’s of my old CONDO, where I would HOPING to find someone there, who could help me arrange to pick up my belongings, I observed through an open curtain, that EVERYTHING WAS GONE!  I immediately called the real estate broker, who was finally in the office to advise me my belongings had been discarded!
I filed a lawsuit against CitiMortgage (and the Real Estate Broker, Mark Alston), after CitiMortgage ignored a demand letter to pay damages for having discarded my belongings, believing this was an open and shut case.  Little did I know, I would open the case, and a single judge, judge Lisa Hart Cole, supervising judge of the Santa Monica, CA division of the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles would CLOSE it, illegally, ignoring all the rights which were supposed to be afforded me under California law, the California Constitution and the Constitution of the United States of America.
Anyone can put the pieces together if they want to read five years worth of litigation, here is the information on my cases:
If you read my Petition to the United States Supreme Court, you don’t have to have legal knowledge to know, SOMETHING went wrong.  That’s probably why SOMEONE, and I don’t know who, has attempted to scrub my petition from the google search results.  Go ahead and try it, I hope by the time anyone does, it will be remedied.  Put the case number, “17-8641” into a google search box and see what happens.
If you want an AUDIO overview (it comes from an earlier period, but still a good overview),listen to my hearing on Motion for New Trial here:
And read the ONLY ruling on the merits ever given in this case.
 
Additional can be obtained on the Superior Court case by doing civil case lookup of case #SC117126 at lacourt.org.  Also, there was a seven month removal to the Federal Court, chase number 2:14-cv-09780 which you can lookup on pacer.
Additional Information about the appeal can be found by searching Case #B277902 (primary appeal), B276843 (writ re: disqualification) and B267455 (writ re: discovery).
You can find information on the California Supreme Court Case Number S242248 here:
“But what about all the safeguards”, you might be asking.  Yes, there are safeguards, but those safeguards, are operated by the same people who are responsible for the failures.  The fox is guarding the hen house.
THIS documentary, through my own journey, will expose, how the system cheats, how they guard the safeguards to prevent you from having any real access to them, how they cover up the corruption, and how they have convinced you it’s not a big deal, and that you must trust the (corrupt) system, and safeguard, THEM.

In this documentary, I will break down, in simple terms, the statutes at issue, and present you with audio, transcripts and documents showing how the court willfully violated the statutes, AND my constitutional rights at EVERY STAGE of the process.  You will hear of their efforts to create cover ups to hide their corruption and the stories of the poor, bullied clerks stuck in the middle.  Finally, my hope is that I will have the chance to stick a microphone in the faces of those responsible and ask them to explain their actions to the viewers of this documentary.
This story represents a shocking (and intentional) case of denial of due process and, YES, CORRUPTION.  This systemic failure of the system CANNOT be fixed unless or until there is public outcry demanding it, so I hope this documentary will raise sufficient awareness and outrage to inspire people to action.

I filed a Petition with the US Supreme Court and learned….

The Supreme Court of the United States of America is CORRUPT!

YES, CORRUPT!  And if you take the time to read this petition, you’ll know this is a true statement.

I have been blogging about my case, which STARTED in Los Angeles Superior Court in 2012, and the legal system for several years now, and I have routinely avoided the term “corruption”.  Before I used that term, I wanted to make SURE, that I exhausted all of my “due process”, before I leveled such and indictment at our system.  I do NOT make this accusation lightly.

All of the benefit of the doubt I gave the system, is now gone.  All of the doubt I had about the system is gone.  I have uncovered sufficient evidence to show, the legal system is indeed corrupt.  With your help, in supporting my KICKSTARTER campaign, I will show the world, EXACTLY, how the “justice” system is rigged, for those who follow me on this journey, I’ll show you exactly what steps to take, to FIX IT.

Is every case rigged?  No.  Is every proceeding a sham?  No.  Is every ruling incorrect?  No.  They don’t HAVE to be.  What IS rigged, is the outcome of cases, where one party has power, and the other doesn’t.  THAT, I am sure of, and it has NOTHING to do with the quality of the attorney that is litigating the case.

A GOOD attorney knows how to settle a case quickly, so there is not real “litigation” work to be done, only settlement agreements, or, contracts.  That’s probably why, most of the attorneys I encountered didn’t know much about the details of the law.  That’s not intended to be an insult, it’s just the reality of the situation.  If you’re an attorney, who is litigating a medical malpractice case, the REAL work is done by medical expert witnesses.  Depending on what those witnesses say, or DON’T say, the attorney can negotiate a settlement amount for their client, and everyone goes home satisfied.  In criminal cases, a similar dance takes places.  Depending on how strong the evidence is, the defense attorney and the prosecutor will agree on a plea deal to avoid a trial.  As a result of this, many attorneys have never been to trial, and I’m perfectly okay with that.

But there are times, when justice demands that a case be fully investigated and litigated, and decided by a jury.  When that happens, we cannot permit the system to fail, as it does currently.

Thank You FBI Director Comey

During my LA Superior Court Case #SC117126, Judge Lisa Hart Cole repeatedly made up the law to support her findings and rulings repeatedly leaving me scratching my head and scanning the courtroom asking with my eyes, “you all hear that, right?”  As I wondered if any of the presumably bright legal minds (the courtroom was occupied primarily by lawyers), don’t you all realize that what she just said wasn’t consistent with the law?  But time after time, they were primarily looking at their own paperwork, or otherwise distracted.

I still wonder if the last time this happened to me was just a coincidence, or a gift from the God’s or both.  The reason I ask is because there was an attorney I knew in the courtroom.  Not just an attorney that I knew, but one who had worked on this very case for me, and had prepared the response to the first Motion for Summary Judgement, and this hearing happened to be the hearing on the Motion for Summary Judgement.  I had the chance to speak to him both before the hearing and after, and finally (and believe me, this attorney was reluctant to comment), I was able to ask out loud, if he heard the same thing I heard, the judge had just made up the law on her own.  What surprised me about our conversation was that he didn’t seem to be surprised at all, the more attorneys I spoke to, the more I realized they were not surprised by this, and I wondered why.  After many consults with attorneys, I now know the answer to that questions.  Many attorneys are not as bright and don’t know the law as well as you might think (I had to become an expert on the areas of the law that were specific to my case, but many attorneys don’t do their own legal research and therefore are not really experts on any area of the law, just on the spot), and second, they were use to this happening.

I don’t say this to disparage attorneys, but when you are being paid by the hour, win or loose, why do you need to be concerned about winning or losing?  That concern is reserved for the ambitions, looking to build a reputation as a winning attorney and those of high integrity (I’ll just leave that for the reader to decide).  But, lets be honest, most attorneys who are not paid by the hour work on a contingency, and get paid when they settle the case before there is ever a trial, and usually, before there is much discovery, since discovery is expensive.

In the few cases where there is a trial, twelve people will decide the merits of the case, and one attorney will win, the other will not.  Either way, an attorney has NOTHING to gain by becoming a “right fighter” or “crusader” against their own profession, and honestly, that’s just not the role of an attorney.  So, what you end up with is a very, VERY few attorneys who try (and generally loose) the battle against their state bar, or against the system in general.  If you have a family, kids in private school, or you are thinking about college tuition, who needs that grief?

So why do I thank James Comey?  He did exactly the same thing in his July 2016 statement regarding Hillary Clinton as the judge in my case did.  He made up a narrative, and a legal interpretation of the statute to convince America that what Hillary Clinton did was all a big mistake, and not criminal actions.  But I stress, it was made up.

I constantly challenge people to read the following laws, 18 U.S.C. §1505 and §1924 and compare that with just what we KNOW Hillary Clinton did.  You will realize that she was in gross violation of the law, and, we already know there are people in prison for doing far less than she did.  The most important thing James Comey said was the following “no reasonable prosecutor would pursue this case” (referring to a criminal case against Hillary Clinton).  What this actually means is that we have created a system where some people are above the law.  Of course in our system, “reasonable prosecutor” would say you can’t criminally prosecute the Democratic nominee for president, right?  WRONG.  The Democratic party shouldn’t have nominated someone who had committed such criminal acts as their candidate for President.  This was and is a tragic perversion of the law.  Should there ever be someone who is so rich and so powerful, that they don’t have to be accountable for their criminal acts, while an unknown patriotic soldier has to do prison time for the same or less?  I encourage any and everyone to REJECT such a society.  NO ONE should be above the law, Period.  That prosecutors have accepted this perversion wherein they consider it “unreasonable” to try and prosecute the rich and powerful, is some third world country shit (excuse my language).

I issue a challenge to anyone who thinks that James Comey “did the right thing”.  Consider what it means if your government is lawless?  Either you respect the laws or you don’t.  If you don’t like the laws, there is a process in place to change them, if you cannot get the support from the people to change the law, then you don’t get to ignore it.  It is a threat to any republic when the citizens have ACCEPTED open and blatant lawlessness of their leaders.  If they don’t respect the laws, then what protects you?  Where do you draw the line?  If a powerful person is drinking and driving and kills someone else, will you be denied justice?

Here is one of my favorite Obama administration gangsta administration congressional hearings.  I will try to add/update this post with different videos periodically to help people learn and truly understand what their government has been up to and how and why these actions are against the law.

 

Incentive for Preventive

CARE NOT COVERAGE – PROPOSAL TO STRENGTHEN HEALTHCARE REFORM

I have been encouraged by the health care reform initiatives I have heard over recent weeks by several legislators committed to the repeal and replacement of “Obamacare”. The proposals which call for health savings accounts, high deductible plans and transparent pricing draw from consumer driven healthcare practices which have been demonstrated to be effective, but there are provisions missing that must be included in both the narrative and the solution in order for the benefits we seek to achieve from PROPER healthcare reform can be realized.

First, we must eliminate the expectation and commitment that a person cannot be denied health insurance regardless of any pre-existing condition. It’s irresponsible, and is a red carpet to buy insurance only when you need it, which IS NOT insurance. Imagine trying to buy auto insurance after you total yours or someone else’s vehicle in an accident? No one would suggest that should be allowed and allowing for waiting to purchase health insurance until you have been diagnosed with an illness is no different.

This proposal required a DEFINITION of what a pre-existing medical condition is. It is a condition that has been DIAGNOSED by a qualified and recognized medical professional. You do not have a pre-existing condition of Hypertension because you have taken your blood pressure at Walgreens and the readings have been high, even if it’s been so repeatedly. In fact, while it could be a sign a lung cancer, you do NOT have a pre-existing condition if you are coughing up blood. It’s important for the public to realize this when discussing pre-existing condition exclusion and inclusions.

This proposal also requires a discussion of the significant protections offered to insured who suffered from pre-existing medical conditions by the passage of HIPAA, many years before the Affordable Care Act. Many people think of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in terms of medical privacy, but it also put in place SIGNIFICANT protections against insurers excluding coverage for pre-existing condition, and those provisions, in my professional and qualified opinion, are generous and sufficient and represent a proper RESPONSIBLE limit on the pre-existing condition coverage insurers are required to cover. The provisions of HIPAA REQUIRE that if you have been covered by a qualified health plan in the previous sixty days, a new group plan cannot exclude coverage for pre-existing conditions. Throughout the entire presidential campaign, I have heard no mention of this important protection which has been in place more than 10 years. I will not go into details about the provisions of HIPAA, but healthcare reform should not be discussed outside of the context of the HIPAA protections already in place, and anyone unfamiliar with those provisions should study them. It is popular and feel good, but irresponsible to continue to tell the American people that they can wait to buy insurance until after a tragic accident or unfortunate illness, or after years of less than responsible health care choices and/or behaviors have “wrecked” their body. Government should not encourage this sort of irresponsible behavior, and once reforms are passed, any provisions in healthcare reform legislation which requires insurance companies to cover “pre-existing” conditions beyond what is provided for in HIPAA (and I don’t believe such a provision should be required) should be phased out in 20 years, OR LESS.

The biggest failure of the so called Affordable Care Act was the damage it did to employer sponsored healthcare system. It caused under employment as employers reduced hours to employees to avoid mandates and discontinued sponsoring plans sending employees to the flawed Obamacare exchange to purchase coverage that was worse and more costly than almost any employer sponsored plan.

Conventional wisdom is that the insured (through individual and group plans) pay the cost of the uninsured because the ultimate healthcare they receive is the most expensive and inefficient method of treatment. Any reforms should include provisions to provide INCENTIVES for PREVENTIVE CARE, instead of mandating health insurance coverage. This can and should be done in a manner similar to that which was successfully used to eradicate many deadly and/or debilitating diseases through vaccinations.

1. STATES should select any number of access points where in individuals are given incentive to demonstrate they have undergone basic preventive care. The number of conditions which can be diagnosed early and treated inexpensively from a basic physical examination by a physician and basic blood panel & urine testing are numerous. The reality is that lack of insurance is NOT the primary barrier to a healthy 30y/o getting routine preventive care.

True Case Study
A 36 year old professional male goes to the ER after several weeks of illness which resembled severe nausea, vomiting and malaise. He is immediately admitted and ultimately diagnosed with end stage renal failure. Doctors determined that the renal failure was caused by chronic high blood pressure which had never been diagnosed or treated. By the time he was discharged, after a three week hospitalization, including two weeks in intensive care, his medical bills totaled almost $500,000. This man had worked for companies which offered competitive health insurance and had been insured most of his adult life through his employer plans, however, at the time he was diagnosed with Kidney failure he was uninsured because he failed to complete and return the proper paperwork to ensure his coverage. While the outcome of this story is separately unique, the discharge included instructions to continue dialysis several times a week, and instructions to begin the process of registration for a kidney transplant.

It is common medical knowledge that the silent killer know as high blood pressure is easily managed with diet, exercise and a vast array of relatively inexpensive medications. Further, in this specific case, while the young man had a history of struggling with obesity, he had managed to reduce his weight to healthy level through diet and exercise, but unknown to him, his blood pressure was not controlled due to, among other things, hereditary factors. Doctors hypothesized that a commitment by the patient to monitor his blood pressure at widely available public machines could have alerted him to the elevation in his blood pressure years earlier, and could have been controlled by very inexpensive medications, and simple blood and/or urine test as much as two years prior to the diagnosis of kidney failure could have alerted doctors to the patients reduced kidney function at a time when early intervention and treatment would have led to significant decrease in the associated long term medical cost.

Incentive for Preventive

At the outset of mandated vaccinations, children were required to be vaccinated prior to their ability to enroll in school and low or no cost vaccinations became widely available over time. As adults, opportunities to offer incentive to promote routine preventive care should be built into normal life events.

States should establish a Certificate of Health Responsibility that can be issued and renewed to and for adults who have obtained minimum preventative care, and must ensure that preventative care is never cost prohibitive, the same as vaccines.

a. Employers can ask for documentation of routine preventative care when starting a new job and can provide preventative care time off to employees for the express purpose of getting a basic physical. It’s important to protect the medical privacy by ensuring that employers are never informed of or privy to the medical information of their employees, but only that they demonstrate they have undergone preventative care. Again, I believe in incentives, not mandates, so all health tax benefits and credits and should be tied to an employer offering meaningful incentive to employees to obtain preventative care, and tax treatment on for employer sponsored health plans should be rewarded for high and increasing percentages of a health responsible workforce.

b. States that require driver licenses renewal or auto registration can require certification of health responsibility or an acknowledgment that you are aware of the availability of preventative care and consciously declining to be health responsible by getting such care, and they can also offer reduced cost of driver licenses renewal/auto registration to those who choose to become health certified.

c. Kids and teens have little if any control over either the health insurance coverage or the medical care which their parents provide for them, but most people are legal adults or almost legal adults when they graduate from high school, and this is another opportunity to encourage them to consider preventative healthcare as a responsible life choice as is arranging for coverage of unforeseen health care needs through health savings accounts, learning about the plan that may be provided to them by their parents or coverage available to them privately or through their own employer.

d. The cost of auto insurance is already adjusted in some states based on responsible life choices and the purchase of auto insurance is another excellent opportunity to provide reminders about the importance of health insurance coverage and to offer incentives and discounts to those who have certified their health responsibility.

Ultimately, states should determine which method and/or combination of methods would best encourage the people of the state to certify their heath responsibility by seeking appropriate preventative care, and the legislation passed to replace the failing Obamacare should structure tax treatment, tax credits and subsidies to reward states who certify the health responsibility of large and growing numbers of their population.

The INCENTIVE FOR PREVENTIVE provisions will begin to address the problem of healthcare cost. We already know that diabetes is the highest cost medical condition, so our ability to change the habits of increasing numbers in our population because a blood or urine test alerted them of pre-diabetic markers, has the potential to have a substantial impact on slowing cost. If a physical results in someone starting the proper medication to manage their blood pressure, imagine the impact this would have on cost associated with catastrophic heart disease in the population. We also know that chronic hypertension and diabetes are the leading causes of kidney failure, so we open up the possibility of reducing the instances of this costly, debilitating condition and imagine if we could finally eliminate the need for a kidney transplant list.

I look forward to sharing with you additional ideas I have documented over the years to improve health care education and I am excited over health savings account ideas that will ensure the solvency of Medicare and I hope so soon volunteer or work with congress and or health and human services to deliver true health care reform to the American people.

Bio
My name is Marina Boyd, and I have worked in Human Resources, employee benefits plans, and the systems that track and manage these cost from 1990 to 2010. I am a demonstrated expert on Section 125, COBRA, HIPPA, ERISA and have worked in the trenches on the cost side for employers, and the care delivery side for employees. I have been enrolled in at least 10 different employer group health plans during my career till I was sidelined due to disability from a chronic illness in 2010. From that time, I experienced enrollment in Medi-Cal (the California rendition of Medicaid, and the worst medical care of any plan I every have ever had, or administered) and Medicare (currently), and I have experienced the woes of consumers and medical providers struggling with claims administration, pre-approvals, complex plan rules and regulatory requirements. I know that market driven solutions such as health care price transparency and accountability, health savings account and an engaged, responsible health care consumer population is the ONLY healthcare reform that is sustainable in the long term.

Media Presstitutes Publish ‘Fake News’ List To Discredit Alt-Media, Control Public Perception

A seemingly blatant attempt to discredit the alternative media by lumping independent publishers into a contrived category of ‘fake news’ has begun.

Source: Media Presstitutes Publish ‘Fake News’ List To Discredit Alt-Media, Control Public Perception

The Revolution Must Grow Up

I am terrified that some of us will get left behind in this movement if our thinking doesn’t change. I will be doing everything I can to prevent this tragedy. I’ve found that the black community, although we are not the only ones, frequently insist, if not demands that everyone understand and respect our pain, our rights, our history, and our entitlement, and we DO NOT feel the need to offer even the slightest empathy in return to those millions of others who have real life struggles. We become offended, indignant, hostile and on rare occasions violent, when our apathy towards the pain of our perceived oppressors is even mentioned. While the latter is usually reserved for the most voiceless in our community, so many of the rest of us defend the resulting behavior and refused to require a focused agenda for change. We refuse to hold our own brothers and sisters accountable for what is unacceptable behavior, under any circumstances and media is intent on validating their complaints, and ignoring the legitimate complaints of millions of America’s quiet tribulations. To the extent communities, mostly inner cities, but not only, continue to fell stuck in a cycle of inequality, this is a problem which can ONLY be solved from within, with outside assistance. NOT the other way around. That people are resentful, fearful and angry because the tragically forgotten rust belt Americans, or “non-college degree white voters” as the media has condescendingly called them, decided they were going think of their self and their families first and climb aboard the Trump train, no matter how imperfect the messenger, is a natural consequence to decades of an oppressive demand that they repay some never ending social debt minority groups, and sadly, a new generation of people seem to be climbing aboard the victim bandwagon, to avoid finding solutions for normal life problems. Donald Trumps campaign is not about racism, sexism, misogyny, or hate. Hillary Clinton told us that throughout the campaign because it was her campaign strategy. A little independent thinking will show he want’s to revitalize the economy, bring back jobs that were lost to bad government policies, and most importantly, build a government that cannot disregard the will and or needs of everyday Americans, to work, care for their family, send their kids to college and have a sense of independence and security. That you, I or anyone should somehow expect that long forgotten group of working class white voter to miss the opportunity to vote for the only candidate who has ever campaigned on the idea that America’s interest comes first, and REALISTICALLY A ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY, to vote for someone who is a true political outsider (remember, that’s why we picked Obama) because WE think Donald Trump “suddenly became racist” when he decided to run for president, or because WE don’t believe (with no foundation what so ever) that he sincere about his desire to revitalize our inner cities is a giant middle finger to the millions of white working class voters who were a played an essential role in electing Barack Obama in 2008 and (undeserved, in my opinion) to a second term in 2012. How dare we be so selfish and judgmental to marginalize this group into a one dimensional racist, how dare we. ESPECIALLY, when the alternative candidate was Hillary Clinton. We don’t KNOW if Donald Trump will put for the efforts into revitalizing our inner cities he has claimed, or returning the government to the people as he has claimed, but we do know one thing for sure, if we allow, support or defend any “action” that results in Ferguson and/or Baltimore type violence and destruction of a community because Donald Trump was elected, then you will find that no companies want to come into your community and build, and be a part of helping that revitalization effort, just for you to have a tantrum and burn it down when something doesn’t go your way. Usually, before you have independently, fully informed yourself about the issue at hand. So to those who feel aggrieved that some people felt their best economic option for President was Donald Trump, I issue this challenge, before a SINGLE person takes to the streets to protest for some “non-specified” equality, that you sit down and write a well thought out letter, e-mail, blog, podcast, or video, whatever method of communication you prefer and ask the new President Elect, or President, and your state and locally elected officials, your Pastor, Priests, Rabbis or Imams tell them what you need/want to foster economic prosperity in your community. The angry street mob is is an antiquated method of protest from the 60’s when there was no facebook, twitter, instagram, youtube or spreaker. Today, you can build a virtual mob of followers, subscribers and friends, and use your collective voices to ensure you are heard. And in a resounding endorsement of the capitalist economy, you can get paid to do it. Make use of these powerful, independent media tools and give your representatives, specific, and I mean SPECIFIC request. FOR EXAMPLE “there is 20 empty acres in our community, can we meet and talk about what type of business we most need to serve our community? Can we meet with developers and see what it will take to build a strip mall on that land?. Can we negotiate with the developers to hire labor from our community when possible?. Can we meet with franchisers, and negotiate terms to allow people within the community to be trained and raise capital to own and run that business? Then make a documentary about your efforts to implement your plans. It’s time for us to seize this opportunity, and make the most of it, if things don’t work out, we will know without a doubt, we made our needs clear, we were part of the solution, not just an angry mob, making an angry mess, and making people care less and less about your struggle. To the extent you believe there are sixty million people who are looking to see you fail and return the country to some white supremacist utopia, you are wrong, but maybe you can push them to that point by continuing to pose a threat to the peace and safety of communities across the country, without being a part of the solutions you need. The election of Donald Trump was a very loud statement that we’ve done all we can, and we are moving on with our without you. I recommend that it be with you. #notantrums

Depends on What Winning Is

I’ve come to the conclusion that CitiMortgage thinks that beating me in my case means getting a judgement in their favor, but one day they will realize how very wrong that conclusion was.  No matter how malicious and egregious I believe their actions were in discarding my personal belongings, I always knew that a jury could see things CitiMortgages way, that they threw away a bunch I junk (they know full well I wanted my property, but I knew they would come to court and argue that I didn’t),  or they could see things my way, that what property was discarded was not relevant because it was mine, and their disposal thereof was a violation of my rights.  I didn’t have a dollar amount in mind because jury’s are not predictable.  By year two of prosecuting my case, the money didn’t matter any more, I was just enjoying practicing law and looking forward to attending law school and having a second career as an attorney.

But between July and December 2014, something changed; the opposition started cheating.   Sure, before that point, they had played a little dirty, trying to overwhelm me with paperwork, trying to make me quit, and had I not been enjoying the practice of law, it may have worked, but when the cheating started, I begin to wonder was this something that was expected of lawyers?  Aggressive, tactical, calculating?  Sure.  But outright cheating?  Yuk!  Now keep in mind, this case came about at the same I time I started to really learn about people, mostly those who were different from me.  I’ve always been empathetic to a fault, and that has for the most part ran interference in my doing intentional harm to others.  If I had a difficult boss, I would wish that person find a better opportunity somewhere, rather than hoping they got fired.  Up until about five years ago, I assumed everyone was like that, and when people acted contrary (meanies) to that philosophy, I assumed they just didn’t understand what they were doing.  Imagine my surprise when I realized that MOST people have little and any empathy for people they don’t have a personal connection to, and even that will diminish when their own well being is threatened.  Do you have any idea how frightening it is to realize you are the only empath in a room full of meanies and sociopaths?  You have to bear the burden of your own pain and fear, AND theirs.  This blog post would be way too long if I explained what that was like, so if you want to know, read my blog post “Pro Se Empath.”

I say all this to say, for me, at this point winning is relative.  No one can take away the legal experience I’ve gained, based on my studies so far, I’ll breeze through law school, and although I’ve heard some gnarly stuff about the bar exam, I don’t expect to have any trouble with that either.  For CitiMortgage, or really, for Citigroup, winning was making me go away.  By not making me go away, the will now find me whispering sweet pro bono legal nothings in the ear of every customer they foreclose on, or every employee they fire or lay off (it not practicing law if you’re just sharing your experience for free), telling them all I’ve learned about how to litigate and how to respond to litigation tactics intended to shut down pro se litigants.  I’ll be sharing my pleadings, and sharing my research, reminding them of deadlines and helping them start discovery early in the process.  It’s pretty difficult to help someone win if they are dealing with corrupt people or systems, but you can cost the company a lot of money, and force corrupt operatives into obvious mistakes, desperate actions and self exposure.

But now, I have a mission.  I’ve been planned to leave California in 2017 for many years, but earlier this year, I decided I’m staying.  I’m going to begin the work I should have started when Terri Asanovich scammed my family in 2005-2007.  I’m going to create a Civil Innocence Project that will take on cases where the rulings reflect judicial misconduct or corruption (beyond abuse of discretion or judicial incompetence), and attorney abuses of the system.  I want to be to the court system what Celeste Fremon was to the Los Angeles County Sheriffs department.

I’m putting together a coalition of activists which include private investigators, journalists and victimized litigants to research, correct and expose corrupted processes and individuals.  I wish I could have included lawyers, but it seems that their is a culture of retaliation against attorneys who go against the system.  Many think this is not possible without attorneys, but it is, and I will prove it, although I predict once I start doing so, the legislature will start to make laws against our strategies.

No problem, we will be ready.

Most Discourtesous Litigant Ever

On May 26, 2016, I filed a Verified Statement of Disqualification in the court clerks office against Judge Lisa Hart Cole, Supervising Judge of the LA Superior Court, West District, Santa Monica, California, Department O.  Pursuant to Civil Code of Procedure, I attempted to serve the judge directly, but her courtroom was closed on that afternoon, so I served it on May 27, 2016.  The clerk in her courtroom tried very hard NOT to receive the statement for service, but I insisted because the Statute is pretty clear, I needed to file a copy with the clerk AND serve a copy on the judge personally, OR, on her clerk while the Judge was in her Chambers.

First, my position is that she was not permitted to make that determination on her own, but the Appeals Court upheld her actions in their June 17, 2016 denial of my Writ of Mandate.  I decided to file a new Statement of Disqualification to clarify my grounds for disqualification, but when I attempted to file and serve the new Statement on June 17, 2016, I learned that Judge Cole was currently assigned to a different courthouse.  This was the first time the Clerks office at the Santa Monica Division of the LA Superior Court refused to file a document.

I made a couple of other attempts to file the Statement of Disqualification before finally just leaving the documet with the clerk with instructions to file the document on July 27, 2016.  Unfortunately, I was not able to leave with a Conformed Copy because they refusd to stamp one for me.

The hearing on my Motion for a New Trial was scheduled to be heard on July 28, 2016 at which time I served a copy of the Statement on the Judge’s clerk.  Afte about 30 minutes of in chamber discussions, the Judicial Assistant came out and advised me and opposing counsel that there would be no hearing that day due to my statement and that we would be notified by mail of next steps.

As we were leaving the courtroom, I attempted to advise opposing counsel that I would have liked to advise them earlier that I was filing the Statement of Disqualification, but that the clerk had been refusing to file it, but she turned around and cut me off as we walked down the courthouse hall and proclaimed, with finger pointing that I was “the most discourteous litigant ever”.  I think she repeated it twice, and angrily stomped off.

I was left thinking, wow, that was professional.  I’m not an attorney, but I know I’m being victimized by this judge, and now by this courthouse, so I’m sure she know that as well.  Clearly opposing counsel thinks I’m out of my lane by continuing to litigate this case, but the bottom line is I suffered a significant loss (the losses still continue to mount as time passes and I further learn how my rights were violated and the unreplacable things that they discarded) when their client disposed of my personal belongings.  I will continue to fight until there are no legal options left.  In fact, I am so committed, that I have decided not to leave California when my case is over, something I have been planning for more than five years.  Instead, I am going t stay, and fight the corruption that exist in the judicial sytem.  I know this isn’t the only state with such problems, but I know this system really well, and I am now well equipted to take it on.

Complaints to the Commission of Judicial Performance

In November 2015, I filed my first complaint against the judge in my case with the California Commission of Judicial Performance, and they declined to investigate.

On July 22, 2016, I filed my second one, and I haven’t heard back yet, but I did decided that I was not a fan of the “secrete” evaluation process of complaints, especially after I read the statistice on how they seem to disregard complaints from self represented litigants.

Secrecy is the best way to cover and continue corruption, so I’m not playing the game, and I encourage everyone else to do the same.  Complaint about your judges abuse of descretion (or abuse of you) early and loudly.  Waiting for them to get better is like waiting for an abusive spouse or significant other to stop hiting you.  Not gonna happen.

I invite you all to join my facebook group and volunteer your time to provide an independent investigation of judicial complaints and evaluate the Commission on their deciscion to investigate complaints or not.  I am specifically looking to build a coalition of volunteers to avoid the potential for a corrupt process that sometimes comes when money is involved.

Before the end of 2016, I am planning to make a constitutional challenge against the Commission on Judicial Performance for the manner in which they have implemented their secret process of deciding whether or not to investigate a complaint and the manner in which it has violated the due process and equal protection of self-represented litigants.

This system can only change with a bonafide movement in the image of Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump and I invite you all to join me.  I will be seeking support in the form or affidavits, copies of your court case documents etc., and will do everything I can end the secrecy that currently infects the judicial oversight process.

She refuses to follow the law

Once again, Judge Cole orderd my Statement of Disqualification stricken as opposed to allowing another judge to make the determination on her qualification as is required by California Code of Civil Procedure 170.3.  The Code in question is pretty clear, it states”

170.3(c) (5) A judge who refuses to recuse himself or herself shall not pass upon his or her own disqualification or upon the sufficiency in law, fact, or otherwise, of the statement of disqualification filed by a party.  In that case, the question of disqualification shall be heard and determined by another judge agreed upon by all the parties who have appeared or, in the event they are unable to agree within five days of notification of the judge’s answer, by a judge selected by the chairperson of the Judicial Council, or if the chairperson is unable to act, the vice chairperson.  

On May 25, 2016, I in fact did ask the judge to recuse herself and she (very unprofessionally) refused to do so.  She ordered the first Statement of Disqualification stricken, and did so again with the Second, opting instead, she has disregarded this section, has determined on her own that my Statement was not legally sufficient and has set to rule on my Motion for New Trial on August 16, 2016.

The good news is I will still file my writ of mandate with the appeals court and this time, I will seek review with the Supreme Court if they deny my writ.  As I’ve said before, I will never quit, and this time, I expect to deploy a few secret legal weapons that will change the narrative.

After filing my Statement of Disqualification on July 27, 2016 (I’m sure they want to say it was July 28, 2016), I sent this e-mail to the Manager of Operations at the Santa Monica Division of the Los Angeles Superior Court, he was supervisor of the Clerks office who repeatedly blocked my efforts to file a Statement of Disqualification.

I copied members of the assembly and senate judiciary committee, current non-judge members of the California Commission on Judicial Performance, the non-judge members of the Council of Judicial Ethics and the Judicial Council as well as a number of other public and private government oversight bodies on the e-mail.  Hopefully, someone actually cares.

If I’m wrong in my intepretation, I invite any legal explaination, citation or statute that say’s so.  I’m not to proud to say I’m wrong, and I would love to move on from this, but history has taught me that when injustice is not resisted, injustice will simply continue.

Accessibility
Close
Font Resize
A- A+
Close