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

Fwd: 5th arraignment attempt.....

Expand Messages
  • Al Cintra-Leite
    Message 1 of 5 , Jul 27, 2007
      Begin forwarded message:

      > From: Al Cintra-Leite <stonekutteral@...>
      > Date: July 27, 2007 7:59:27 AM PDT
      > To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: 5th arraignment attempt.....
      >
      > Dress code a ridiculous issue?? Sure it is , this whole freakin thing
      > is a ridiculous issue, how can I fail to bey an officer when he is not
      > an officer? but the court rules say NOTHING about a dress code and
      > they have signs all over saying no shorts or tank tops in court but no
      > one said ONE WORD about my being in shorts and tank top... the woman
      > acting as judge said I had already been arraigned and had waived my
      > rights, she said there is a doubt as to my mental competancy , then
      > set trial for august 22nd.... I said there is a doubt as to your being
      > a judge - I want to enter into evidence the fact that you have no
      > proper oath of office...she said dont talk over me or I'll have you
      > arrested .. I said you are trying to rush me to judgement "BAILIFF
      > CALL FOR BACKUP!!!!" the deputys came running in and surrounded me,
      > and told me not to interrupt, they were quite close to me so I shut up
      > and only talked when she wasnt, I said" disqualified and cant rule on
      > your own disqualification" , a few times , and "you are trying to rush
      > me to judgement a few times, she said come back on August 22nd
      > ,bailiffs get him outta here!!" So I left surrounded by deputys, and
      > laughed all the way home...... am working on my criminal complaint to
      > the Department of Justice . (aka DOJ)..... I'll post again...
      >
    • mobinem@aol.com
      Here is some stuff I have found on judges: III) Judge required to recuse self: 1) Judge ??????S was obviously biased and made no attempt to hide her bias
      Message 2 of 5 , Jul 27, 2007

        Here is some stuff I have found on judges:

        III) Judge required to recuse self:

        1) Judge ??????S was obviously biased and made no attempt to hide her bias yet refused to recuse herself, in violation of the law and her oath:

        (i) In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge's impartiality. If a judge's attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be disqualified." [Emphasis added]. Liteky v. U.S. , 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1162 (1994). The single observer in the court made comments to the court that Judge ??????S was committing, and admitted to, committing treason.
        (ii)
        Courts have repeatedly held that positive proof of the partiality of a judge is not a requirement, only the appearance of partiality. Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 108 S.Ct. 2194 (1988) (what matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance); United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191 (7th Cir. 1985) (Section 455(a) "is directed against the appearance of partiality, whether or not the judge is actually biased.") ("Section 455(a) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.SC. §455(a), is not intended to protect litigants from actual bias in their judge but rather to promote public confidence in the impartiality of the judicial process.").
        Judge ??????S behavior proved she was attempting to show partiality to intimidate me.
        (iii)
        That Court also stated that Section 455(a) "requires a judge to recuse himself in any proceeding in which her impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989). In Pfizer Inc. v. Lord, 456 F.2d 532 (8th Cir. 1972), the Court stated that "It is important that the litigant not only actually receive justice, but that he believes that he has received justice
        ." I formally state I do not believe I received justice, and in reference to the system no longer believe justice is aloud in Arizona courts.
        (iv)
        The Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the principle that "justice must satisfy the appearance of justice", Levine v. United States , 362 U.S. 610, 80 S.Ct. 1038 (1960), citing Offutt v. United States , 348 U.S. 11, 14, 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 (1954). A judge receiving a bribe from an interested party over which he is presiding, does not give the appearance of justice.
        Judge ??????S purposely attempted to intimidate me by blatantly withholding the appearance that I could receive justice in her court.
        (v)
        "Recusal under Section 455 is self-executing; a party need not file affidavits in support of recusal and the judge is obligated to recuse herself sua sponte under the stated circumstances." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989). Judge ??????S does not follow this rule, et al.

        (vi) Further, the judge has a legal duty to disqualify himself even if there is no motion asking for his disqualification. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals further stated that "We think that this language [455(a)] imposes a duty on the judge to act sua sponte, even if no motion or affidavit is filed." Balistrieri, at 1202. Judge ??????S refused to recuse her self when asked.
        (vii)
        Judges do not have discretion not to disqualify themselves. By law, they are bound to follow the law. Should a judge not disqualify himself as required by law, then the judge has given another example of his "appearance of partiality" which, possibly, further disqualifies the judge. Should another judge not accept the disqualification of the judge, then the second judge has evidenced an "appearance of partiality" and has possibly disqualified himself/herself. None of the orders issued by any judge who has been disqualified by law would appear to be valid. It would appear that they are void as a matter of law, and are of no legal force or effect. Even though Judge ??????S did not recuse herslf, she is recused by her behavior, thusly the fraudulent conviction should be cancelled.
        (viii) Should a judge not disqualify himself, then the judge is violation of the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. United States v. Sciuto, 521 F.2d 842, 845 (7th Cir. 1996) ("The right to a tribunal free from bias or prejudice is based, not on section 144, but on the Due Process Clause."). Judge ??????S should be charged with violating my due process rights, et al.
        (ix) Should a judge issue any order after he has been disqualified by law, and if the party has been denied of any of his / her property, then the judge may have been engaged in the Federal Crime of "interference with interstate commerce". The judge has acted in the judge's personal capacity and not in the judge's judicial capacity. It has been said that this judge, acting in this manner, has no more lawful authority than someone's next-door neighbor (provided that he is not a judge). Judge ??????S has therefore committed a Federal crime and should be charged.

        IV) Fraud upon the court:

        (1) A judge is not the court. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill.App.3d 477, 410 N.E.2d 626 (1980).

        (ii) Whenever any officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the court, he/she is engaged in "fraud upon the court". In Bulloch v. United States , 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated "Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. ... It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function --- thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted."
        (iii) "Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication." Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore 's Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶ 60.23. The 7th Circuit further stated "a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final."

        (iv) "Fraud upon the court" makes void the orders and judgments of that court.
        (v) It is also clear and well-settled Illinois law that any attempt to commit "fraud upon the court" vitiates the entire proceeding. The People of the State of Illinois v. Fred E. Sterling, 357 Ill. 354; 192 N.E. 229 (1934) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters applies to judgments as well as to contracts and other transactions."); Allen F. Moore v. Stanley F. Sievers, 336 Ill. 316; 168 N.E. 259 (1929) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters ..."); In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill.App.2d 393 (1962) ("It is axiomatic that fraud vitiates everything."); Dunham v. Dunham, 57 Ill.App. 475 (1894), affirmed 162 Ill. 589 (1896); Skelly Oil Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co., 338 Ill.App 79, 86 N.E.2d 875, 883-4 (1949); Thomas Stasel v. The American Home Security Corporation, 362 Ill. 350; 199 N.E. 798 (1935).
        (vi) Under Federal law, when any officer of the court has committed "fraud upon the court", the orders and judgment of that court are void, of no legal force or effect.

         
        John-Chester: Stuart: sovereign without subjects

        623-206-4339
        mobinem@...
        c/o postal service location
        21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
        Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf




        Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.
      • Frog Farmer
        ... And was she asked about each one of the 4 required parts of the arraignment, who did what when, and was the difference between a true copy and an
        Message 3 of 5 , Jul 27, 2007
          Al Cintra-Leite [mailto:stonekutteral@...] wrote:

          > woman acting as judge said I had already been arraigned and had waived
          > my rights

          And was she asked about each one of the 4 required parts of the
          arraignment, who did what when, and was the difference between a "true"
          copy and an unsigned photocopy discussed or raised by you? Who did the
          the record show was your counsel during the arraignment? Did they have
          a "TAHL" form showing that you knowingly waived your rights, or was she
          merely assuming you waived them as a result of some other action or
          inaction on your part? You know you weren't arraigned with counsel, but
          were you now somehow unable or reticent to prove it on the record being
          made?

          > she said there is a doubt as to my mental competancy

          There may be....they sent me for evaluation but I wasn't aware of the
          rules beforehand and so I went along with it to get the report. I
          myself was curious to see what constitutes competency in this mad mad
          mad mad world. You'd better prepare for that one, to avoid it or handle
          it as your choice dictates.

          > then
          > set trial for august 22nd...

          You didn't demand time to answer under 990, or file a demurrer against
          the complaint you never saw a true copy of? That's a waiver. Most
          important, you didn't file any paper to disqualify the "judge". BIG
          WAIVER!

          > I said there is a doubt as to your being
          > a judge -

          But not enough of it to follow simple rules to deal with it!

          > I want to enter into evidence the fact that you have no
          > proper oath of office...

          Who stopped you?! Why didn't you file and serve copies of her wrong
          oath on all involved!?

          > she said dont talk over me or I'll have you
          > arrested .. I said you are trying to rush me to judgement

          That was an admission and confession she was a judge, because a neighbor
          couldn't do such a thing. Only a judge could rush a person to judgment,
          and only you'd know if it were happening to you. You could have had the
          bailiff arrest a person impersonating an officer if you had been ready
          to prove it with a certified copy of her oath. You could have had the
          bailiff seal the courtroom and not let anyone leave so you could get the
          names and contact information of all the witnesses to the impersonation,
          so you could subpoena them as witnesses later, or you could let them
          escape.

          > "BAILIFF
          > CALL FOR BACKUP!!!!" the deputys came running in and surrounded me,
          > and told me not to interrupt, they were quite close to me so I shut up
          > and only talked when she wasnt,

          Did you really need bailiffs in order to be polite?

          > I said" disqualified and cant rule on
          > your own disqualification" , a few times ,

          Where was your paper to wave in their faces? WAVE, not WAIVE!!!

          > and "you are trying to rush
          > me to judgement a few times, she said come back on August 22nd
          > ,bailiffs get him outta here!!" So I left surrounded by deputys, and
          > laughed all the way home......

          You didn't continue to defend yourself using the available procedures in
          the codes. If you were challenging jurisdiction that might be the way
          to go, but after paying bail and waiving the jurisdiction issue, you
          have to use what's available and not waive one defense after another.

          > am working on my criminal complaint to
          > the Department of Justice . (aka DOJ)..... I'll post again...

          I'd be working on my Writ of Prohibition, and preparing for trial in
          case you aren't successful in getting it issued. You saw that in the
          statutes, right? You did have a problem with the complaint, didn't you?

          I doubt the DOJ is going to help.

          Regards,

          FF
        • Frog Farmer
          I m writing this post to eliminate any idea that I knowingly violated any list rules. ... I never looked up what the letters meant...they refer to it verbally
          Message 4 of 5 , Jul 29, 2007
            I'm writing this post to eliminate any idea that I knowingly violated
            any list rules.

            Frog Farmer [mailto:frogfrmr@...] wrote:

            > a "TAHL" form showing that you knowingly waived your rights

            I never looked up what the letters meant...they refer to it verbally as
            a "tall" form, and it's on 14 inch paper, so that's what I thought it
            was, a colloquialism for a long paper, until I saw one and saw "TAHL" on
            it. Let me Google it for everyone and we'll all learn:

            First few uses was the name of a Jedi master in Star Wars.

            Second was TAHL Temperature Alarm High-Low

            Third use was " tahl is a force of pure malevolence. Abandoned as a
            baby, tahl was discovered and raised by a hive of European Wasps."

            Fourth use: Tahl Raz-News and commentary relating to events in Israel,
            the occupied territories, and the world, along with an archive of past
            issues.

            ...on page 11 of the results I see "The creation of new Tasmanian
            Aboriginal Heritage Legislation will affect many people throughout the
            Tasmanian community."

            ...on page 22 of the results, the acronym dictionary didn't have it...

            I've been looking now for twenty-five minutes. It makes me wonder if I
            should have just said, "form" instead of "TAHL form" but then I thought
            being forewarned of the meme might be an advantage...

            On page 45 of the results, and 43 minutes after starting the search for
            the meaning of this acronym, I found this:

            [PDF] COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE 101 Howard Street, Suite 300
            ...File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
            When Judge Sheldon signed these Tahl forms, he had not questioned the
            defendant to ... stamped the Tahl forms with his signature, Judge
            Sheldon had not ...

            It appears they don't even know what it stands for, or that all four
            letters should be capitalized, and at this point I don't care (never did
            anyway!). However, that article shows how important they are, and also
            shows how "judges" routinely violate rights of defendants who don't know
            their rights. It would be worth reading if you are in California and
            you like to move forward in your case to where it would come into play.
            I like to end my cases earlier.

            > You didn't demand time to answer under 990,

            That was PC 990, a.k.a. California Penal Code Section 990, which is
            right in there with the whole sequence that basically spells out how to
            initiate and conclude prosecutions for the prosecutor. An elliptical
            understanding would provide the accused with every possibility for
            defense.

            > I doubt the DOJ is going to help.

            Here's why: I received this from a friend of mine who became an
            attorney without knowing they were bad...you know how family pressure
            works, right? Anyway, he sent me a message yesterday from which I
            excerpt this:

            "Resignations and the ongoing furor over politicized hiring and firing
            at the Justice Department have left so many top positions vacant that
            the department is all but operating on autopilot. There is open contempt
            between the field and the main DOJ headquarters. Field professionals
            just do as they want or have to do."

            In case everyone is focused only on their own immediate interests, The
            Empire is collapsing. Don't be the last on your block to be host for
            the parasites. Remember, the Commies never got a courtesy call not to
            report for work the next morning when the USSR. then the world's worst
            totalitarian dictatorship, collapsed. America now leads the world in
            that category, with the highest percentage of its citizenry imprisoned
            (most unlawfully) than any other country in history! Congratulations
            for a job well done!

            Regards,

            FF
          • Legalbear
            Al: You can recover from what happened in court at the appearance described below and make a record while you are doing it. In the package at
            Message 5 of 5 , Aug 6, 2007

              Al: You can recover from what happened in court at the appearance described below and make a record while you are doing it. In the package at www.judgeonaleash.com there are 14 samples of how I have helped others do this in the past. The ones I think are most applicable to your situation have to do with aiding the opponents counsel. When the judge makes it easier for the state to prosecute you, isn’t that exactly what he/she has done? Of course it is. When a judge tries his/her best to intimidate you that is evidence of her bias against you and in favor of the state. Bear

              From: Al Cintra-Leite <stonekutteral@...>
              Date: July 27, 2007 7:59:27 AM PDT
              To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: 5th arraignment attempt.....

              Dress code a ridiculous issue?? Sure it is, this whole freakin thing is a ridiculous issue, how can I fail to obey an officer when he is not an officer? but the court rules say NOTHING about a dress code and they have signs all over saying no shorts or tank tops in court but no one said ONE WORD about my being in shorts and tank top... the woman acting as judge said I had already been arraigned and had waived my rights, she said there is a doubt as to my mental competency, then set trial for august 22nd.... I said there is a doubt as to your being a judge - I want to enter into evidence the fact that you have no proper oath of office...she said dont talk over me or I'll have you arrested .. I said you are trying to rush me to judgement "BAILIFF CALL FOR BACKUP!!!!" the deputies came running in and surrounded me, and told me not to interrupt, they were quite close to me so I shut up and only talked when she wasn’t, I said" disqualified and cant rule on your own disqualification" , a few times , and "you are trying to rush me to judgement a few times, she said come back on August 22nd ,bailiffs get him outta here!!" So I left surrounded by deputies, and laughed all the way home...... am working on my criminal complaint to the Department of Justice . (aka DOJ)..... I'll post again...

               

              PHONE #s: 970-330-3883/720-203-5142 c. 

              For mailing:  Excellence Unlimited, 2830 27th St. Ln. #B115,  Greeley , CO   80634  

              BEAR'S WEB PAGES:

              www.irs-armory.com

              www.irslienthumper.com

              www.legalbears.com

              www.legalresearchvideo.com

              www.cantheydothat.com

              To subscribe to Tips & Tricks for court send an email to:
              tips_and_tricks-subscribe@yahoogroups.com


              From: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com [mailto: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Al Cintra-Leite
              Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 9:05 AM
              To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [tips_and_tricks] Fwd: 5th arraignment attempt.....

               



              Begin forwarded message:

            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.