Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

J.A.I.L. -- Useless & Time-consuming Noise! - by David R.

Expand Messages
  • jail4judges
    J.A.I.L. -- Useless & Time-consuming Noise! - by David ... From: jail4judges To: David L. Reed Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 12:21 PM
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 23, 2001
    • 0 Attachment

       

      J.A.I.L. -- Useless & Time-consuming Noise! - by David

       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 12:21 PM
      Subject: J.A.I.L. -- Useless & time-consuming noise??

      Dear David:
       
      Thank you for writing. No, we don't want to "jail judges."  We want to have them held accountable to the People for willfully violating the law from the bench. They should be heard before the People-- not by their colleagues who themselves should be likewise held accountable.
       
      As a matter of fact we have used ยงยง241 and 242 against three judges who conspired to deny me access to the court for redress of my grievances and due process. I cited cases directly on point, and yet the U.S. Attorney's office said they were "unable to prosecute." No reason given, as usual.
       
      David, I have spent over 15 years trying every way I could to obtain redress, especially against law-breaking judges-- federal as well as state. I haven't left a stone unturned. Sure, there are occasions when the system will execute the laws on the books against judges and others, but they are few and far between, and done only to deceive the people into thinking that "the system works." And, unfortunately their tactic works! Far too many people think we have redress in the judicial system, and that we have recourse to other judges against errant judges. If they hear of one or maybe two cases that "win", that's enough to convince them that everything is fine-- we have remedies available to us-- and they WORK!
       
      David, I didn't write the JAIL initiative from a position of ignorance. I have tried all the remedies out there and have found, in fact and by personal communication with people working in the system, that as a general rule, there is a conflict of interest in the system going after law-breaking judges. Yesterday I put out an email discourse to our readers which I entitled "Judges Are Not Subject to Law." That explains much of what I explored before being motivated to write J.A.I.L. If you didn't receive that, let me know.
       
      You talk about the federal system. I have found the federal judiciary to be even more corrupt and vicious than the state system, mainly because they are supposed to be a check against corrupt state judges, and when called upon to do so, the federal judiciary come down hard on such complaints, especially as a pro se complainant. The system can't stand to have a lowly individual approach the "high and mighty" and dare complain about their "state sibling judges." Apparently they view such complaints against state judges, as well as other federal judges, as a threat to the judicial system as a whole, and the so-called "guardians of your constitutional rights" sitting as federal judges will not allow the remedy to which the complainant is entitled, and they turn around and treat the complainant as the enemy. I have experienced my most egregious treatment in the federal judicial system. I have written numerous emails and articles about that.
       
      One of the worst experiences was with Los Angeles Federal District Judge William Keller. I had a serious case of police misconduct by the LAPD, and Judge Keller at one point even said that if the City didn't cooperate in the discovery process, that he WOULD sanction them for failure to comply with discovery rules. Sure enough, the City continued to refuse to comply with discovery and I brought the motion to compel discovery, with all my evidence attached as exhibits.
       
      Federal Judge Keller EXPLODED!! He just couldn't face up to the fact that I, a measly pro see plaintiff, had legitimate grounds for sanctions against the City (the police department) and its counsel for failure to comply with discovery rules. I brought up the fact that he himself said that he would sanction them if they failed to comply-- supposedly putting the City on notice that they should comply, or else!! But when it came time to pay the piper, Judge Keller went berserk!  He started yelling at ME for not obeying the rules, of course without being specific-- what rule didn't I obey??? He called me a rogue elephant, choosing to go my own way instead of the right way--  again, nothing specific. Just all this steam and venom being aimed at ME and my character!
       
      Needless to say, the federal court destroyed my case and because I wasn't allowed discovery and my evidence on the record was ignored, the jury didn't have the truth to work with, and according to "plan" I lost my case-- thanks mostly to Judge Keller and the cover up by all upper courts on appeal, through the US Supreme Court with their two famous words "petition denied."
       
      I have recently found out that Judge Keller is personally politically involved with LAPD and other law enforcement agencies and is very pro-police. One time a famous lawyer, Stephen Yagman, who represents people against police brutality in federal court, asked me "Who's the judge in your case." I said "Judge William Keller" and he said "That's unfortunate."  He didn't explain why, but now I know why he said that. Keller had raked him over the coals too, even though he's a high-profile lawyer in L.A. That even reached newspaper and television coverage.
       
      That is just one situation-- I've had other cases, one where the federal judge stopped me cold in my tracks in open court from completing my presentation of the key case on point in my argument saying,  --after I cited the case (Zinermon v. Burch) and started reciting the facts and rulings made-- "I've heard enough" before he heard the crux of my case.  I looked up, startled, and asked "Don't you want to hear my evidence?"  and the judge yelled "NO! I've heard enough!"  The judge then, after refusing to hear the facts of my case, skipped over to the subject of sanctions against me alleged by the other side for a "frivolous action,"  the common "toss-out bin" used by the courts to throw out cases brought by pro se plaintiffs. The other side never opposed the Zinermon case, or other cases I cited. The facts of my case weren't important-- just "throw the bum out."  That was Federal District Judge Edward Rafeedie in L.A.  My 241-242 case involved yet another federal judge, Manuel Real, along with two state judges. That is a long complicated matter involving conspiracy that I need not get into now.
       
      So David, I don't think that the J.A.I.L. initiative and testimony given about the need for it is "useless and time consuming noise." Apparently my experiences with the court systems, both state and federal, over the years, as well as with California legislators and the California Attorney General's (then Dan Lungren) office not knowing what to do or how to handle my facts and evidence showing repeated judicial corruption in this state, and helplessness shown by the Governor's (then Pete Wilson) legal staff in Sacramento on how to resolve the problem, is different from your experiences with the system.
       
      You refer generically to an unidentified case about a judge being filed on and found guilty. I would be interested, out of curiosity, in more specifics. Can you cite me the case and give me the particulars? That will tell me a lot more about it.  J.A.I.L. was written based on my own personal experiences over many, many years, after trying every which way to get a remedy in several cases involving official wrongdoing. Whether I was right or wrong wasn't even the question-- did I receive an opportunity to be heard on my evidence? And were the judges who violated principles of due process in my cases held accountable for their willful, knowing, and intentional judicial violations?  You can guess what the answer is to both questions. Prior to J.A.I.L., I even wrote Press Releases and distributed them to every door at the Capitol in Sacramento. The silence was "deafening."
       
      The time came for me to break that silence and "make some noise" about the necessity of establishing a system of judicial accountability controlled by the People, and not the judicial system against itself. But, based on what I have personally experienced, and on what many thousands of others have similarly experienced and told me by email, my "noise" is certainly not "useless and time consuming!"  Please-- don't be misled by the system.
      Ron Branson
       

      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Monday, August 09, 1999 9:01 PM
      Subject: JUDGES IN J.A.I.L.

      RON BRANSON AND FRIENDS;

      IF YOU REALLY WANT TO JAIL JUDGES, WHY DON'T YOU USE THE FEDERAL LAWS THAT PERTAIN TO DOING SO INSTEAD OF MAKING USELESS AND TIME CONSUMING NOISE?
      WHEN ANYONE REALLY WANTS TO MAKE A JUDGE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, OR OTHER OFFICIAL SIT UP AND TAKE NOTICE, JUST INFORM THEM THAT YOU WILL SEE IF FEDERAL CODES WILL STOP THEIR MANNERS OF TAKING YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AWAY IN WRONG OR ILLEGAL WAYS.
      PLEASE INVESTIGATE 18 U.S.C. SECTIONS 241 AND 242. YOU WILL SEE THAT YOU CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS BEING TROMPED ON.
      IN THE LATEST CASE, A JUDGE WAS  FILED ON AND WAS FOUND GUILTY. HE RECEIVED SENTENCE BUT APPEALED. THE FIRST APPEAL WAS IN HIS FAVOR BUT IT WAS REVIEWED BY THE SUPREME COURT, WHO REVERSED THE JUDGES APPEALS AND ORDERED THE FEDS TO ARREST HIM FOR PRISON TIME. THE JUDGE FLED AND AS FAR AS IS KNOWN, HE IS STILL RUNNING.

      Dave and Laura in Nipomo, Ca.
       
       
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.