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

criminal complaint against a judge

Expand Messages
  • Barry
    This is a criminal complaint I either filed, or attempted to file against a judge. This judge immediately recused himself. COUNTY COURT, ------------ COUNTY,
    Message 1 of 8 , May 27, 2010
    • 0 Attachment

      This is a criminal complaint I either filed, or attempted to file against a judge. This judge immediately recused himself.

       

      COUNTY COURT, ------------ COUNTY, COLORADO

       

      CASE #_____________

       

       

      VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT

       

       

      THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO

        EX REL Barry Smith,                                                                      PLAINTIFF,

       

      v.

       

      ---------,                                                                                                DEFENDANT.

       

       

      The People of the State of Colorado, on the relation of Barry Smith, bring this Verified Criminal Complaint pursuant to Crim. P. Rule 4.1(b)(1)(II) and 16-2-105 & 106 C.R.S. and ask that the clerk of this court attach a Summons to this Complaint and serve it on the Defendant pursuant to the above statute and Crim.P. Rule 4.1(c)(1), under simplified procedure, that the above Defendant might be brought to justice, and show:

       

                  I, Barry Smith, having appeared before a duly authorized Notary Public, solemnly declare, under penalty of perjury that what follows is true in order that the above Defendant might be brought to justice:

       

      COUNT I

       

      Larimer County Court Judge ---------, a public servant, while acting in an official capacity committed official oppression when he, after having been given a solemn declaration in case #--T---- that my name did not appear on the summons and complaint in that case, and that my name was not and never has been BARRY SMITH, or SMITH BARRY, and having acknowledged having received that solemn declaration by a notation in the file of that case, and with knowledge that his conduct was illegal, issued a warrant for failure to appear for SMITH, BARRY  which subjected me, Barry Smith to arrest on March 1st, 1999 at about 1:30 p.m. in violation of 18-8-403(a) C.R.S.  Official oppression is a class 2 misdemeanor.

       

       

       

      COUNT II

      Count I is incorporated herein by way of reference as though set forth fully.

       

      On information and belief Judge ---------, in order to assist the State in prosecuting case

      THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO   EX REL Barry Smith pg. 2

       

      #--T---- in Larimer County Court, Colorado, issued a warrant for failure to appear in the fictitious name of SMITH, BARRY causing me, Barry Smith, to be arrested on March 1, 1999, even though he knew that the complainant's name was not SMITH, BARRY and had other contact information and an invitation to contact the complainant.  Such action constituted an act of bad faith and was unfair depriving me of a lawfully adopted rule set forth in the Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3C(1)(a) requiring a judge to disqualify herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned.  His actions constitute a violation of 18-8-404(1)(c) C.R.S. constituting First Degree Official Misconduct which is a class 2 misdemeanor.

       

      COUNT III

       

      Counts I and II are incorporated herein as though set forth fully.

       

      On information and belief, --------- has taken an oath to uphold the laws of Colorado.  Based on the above acts it is believed that he has failed to uphold his oath.  On information and belief, he took this oath fully knowing and believing that he could not and would not uphold constitutional provisions that he didn't want to because he believed that no other government official would ever prosecute him for his violations of law.  His failure to do so as indicated by the above cited and incorporated counts constitutes a violation of 18-8-503(1) C.R.S., Perjury of the Second Degree, which is a class I misdemeanor.

       

      The venue and jurisdiction of the Court is proper under 13-6-106(1)(a) C.R.S. as Counts I-III above were committed in ----- County, Colorado against the Peace and Dignity of the People of the State of Colorado.

       

      I, Barry Smith, solemnly declare that what is written above is true under penalty of perjury.

       

      Respectfully,

       

       

      _____________________

      Barry Smith

       

       

       

       

       

       

      THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO   EX REL Barry Smith pg. 3

       

      Barry Smith has appeared before me in ------ County, Colorado this ____ day of March, 1999 and has solemnly declared under penalty of perjury that what is set forth above is true.

       

       

      _______________________________

      Notary Public                                                                                      [SEAL]

      My commission expires__________________________________.

       


      COUNTY COURT, ------- COUNTY, COLORADO

       

      CASE #_____________

       

       

      SUMMONS

       

       

      THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO

        EX REL Barry Smith,                                                                      PLAINTIFF,

       

      v.

       

      ---------,                                                                                                DEFENDANT.

       

       

      THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO

      TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT: ---------

       

                  You are hereby summoned and ordered to appear to answer the charges stated in the attached Verified Criminal Complaint in -------- County Court, 200 W. Oak, --------, Colorado on the ____ day of ___________________, 1999 at ______ a.m./p.m.

                  If you fail to appear a warrant may issue for your arrest.

                  A Verified Criminal Complaint is served herewith.

       

      Dated this _____ day of ___________________, 1999.

       

      By:

       

      ___________________________

      Clerk of the County Court

       


      COUNTY COURT, ------- COUNTY, COLORADO

       

      CASE #_____________

       

       

      RETURN OF SERVICE

       

       

      THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO

        EX REL Barry Smith,                                                                      PLAINTIFF,

       

      v.

       

      ---------,                                                                                                DEFENDANT.

       

       

      I, ____________________, solemnly declare that I served a copy of the summons and criminal complaint for the above captioned case  upon --------- by:

      _________________________________________________________________

      ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

      _________________________________________________________________

      on the ____ day of ____________________, 1999 at __:__ a.m./p.m.

       

      Dated this ___ day of ___________________, 1999.

       

       

      _______________________

      _______________________

      _______________________

      _______________________

       

      ______________________, has appeared before me in ------- County, Colorado and has solemnly declared that the above is true on the ____ day of __________________, 1999.

       

       

      _______________________                                                              [seal]

      Notary Signature

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

      Phone Contact: 720-675-7230

      Best times to call: 8:30 am-9:00 pm MST

      www.legalbears.com

       

       

    • Balsaman
      What is the difference and which has more force and effect, a recusal or a disqualification? As I have witnessed, judges do not often like, nor adhere to
      Message 2 of 8 , May 27, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        What is the difference and which has more force and effect, a recusal or a disqualification?

        As I have witnessed, judges do not often like, nor adhere to being recused.









        _____
      • Pro Se
        Below is some case law I used to get rid of Federal Judges that were bias towards me, the key  & difference was I showed appearance of bias & prejudice - in
        Message 3 of 8 , May 27, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Below is some case law I used to get rid of Federal Judges that were bias towards me, the key  & difference was I showed "appearance of bias & prejudice' - in addition, I motion of substitution for judge for cause...of which he could not "rule on"...thus he recused himself.

          Disqualification of Judges


          Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a Federal judge under certain circumstances.


          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).


          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.S.C. §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.").


          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.”


          Our 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.


          One of our members not only did not receive justice from a prejudiced judge, but he does not believe that he received justice from the judge, as required by law.


          "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).

          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.

          Judges do not have discretion not to disqualify themselves.


            By law, they are bound to follow the law.  Does your judge follow the law?


           



          What is the difference and which has more force and effect, a recusal or a disqualification?

          As I have witnessed, judges do not often like, nor adhere to being recused.

          _____


        • galvindwgalvin@aol.com
          The Motion is to Disqualify and then the judge recuses himself. nor adhere to being recused. _____
          Message 4 of 8 , May 27, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            The Motion is to Disqualify and then the judge recuses himself.
            nor adhere to being recused.

            _____
          • Jake
            re·cus·al  –noun Law.  the disqualification of a judge for a particular lawsuit or proceeding, esp. due to some possible conflict of interest or
            Message 5 of 8 , May 27, 2010
            • 0 Attachment

              re·cus·al 
              –noun Law. 
              the disqualification of a judge for a particular lawsuit or proceeding, esp. due to some possible conflict of interest or prejudice.
              Origin:
              1955–60; recuse + -al
              Dictionary.com Unabridged

              Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.


              Typically, a judge "recuses" himself due to some potential conflict of interest, such as if he owns stock in a company which is a party to an action in his court, if a family member is a party to an action in his court, etc. & a "disqualification" would come from being removed from a case or from the bench altogether by somebody else.  The effect of either would be the same, regarding any case which the judge can no longer handle or rule on, for whatever reason.


              ~ ~ ~



              --- On Thu, 5/27/10, Balsaman <balsaman@...> wrote:

              From: Balsaman <balsaman@...>
              Subject: [tips_and_tricks] criminal complaint against a judge
              To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
              Date: Thursday, May 27, 2010, 8:42 AM

               



              What is the difference and which has more force and effect, a recusal or a disqualification?

              As I have witnessed, judges do not often like, nor adhere to being recused.

              _____


            • Frog Farmer
              ... A recusal says he is a judge and is impartial. A disqualification says he is no judge at all, if it is over his oath or bond. Otherwise, a
              Message 6 of 8 , May 28, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Balsaman axed:

                >
                > What is the difference and which has more force and effect, a recusal
                > or a disqualification?

                A recusal says he is a judge and is impartial. A disqualification says
                he is no judge at all, if it is over his oath or bond. Otherwise, a
                disqualification for another cause or no cause acts like a recusal.

                Regards,

                FF
              • Daniel Nieves
                Has anyone tried humbly asking a Judge not to commit a crime against them?  Most patriots have been identified as radical, mad and angry but Ive been dealing
                Message 7 of 8 , May 28, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  Has anyone tried humbly asking a Judge not to commit a crime against them?  Most patriots have been identified as radical, mad and angry but Ive been dealing with judges and officers and I very politely tell them and humbly say please do not "compell me to lie."  Subordination of perjury and Depravation of rights under color of Law is a crime.  If a judge compells someone to lie, they lose their immunity and can be sued in their individual capacity.  Why not just notify the judge politely? 

                  --- On Thu, 5/27/10, Jake <jake_28079@...> wrote:

                  From: Jake <jake_28079@...>
                  Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] criminal complaint against a judge
                  To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Thursday, May 27, 2010, 1:26 PM

                   

                  re·cus·al 
                  –noun Law. 
                  the disqualification of a judge for a particular lawsuit or proceeding, esp. due to some possible conflict of interest or prejudice.
                  Origin:
                  1955–60; recuse + -al
                  Dictionary.com Unabridged
                  Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.

                  Typically, a judge "recuses" himself due to some potential conflict of interest, such as if he owns stock in a company which is a party to an action in his court, if a family member is a party to an action in his court, etc. & a "disqualification" would come from being removed from a case or from the bench altogether by somebody else.  The effect of either would be the same, regarding any case which the judge can no longer handle or rule on, for whatever reason.

                  ~ ~ ~


                  --- On Thu, 5/27/10, Balsaman <balsaman@optonline. net> wrote:

                  From: Balsaman <balsaman@optonline. net>
                  Subject: [tips_and_tricks] criminal complaint against a judge
                  To: tips_and_tricks@ yahoogroups. com
                  Date: Thursday, May 27, 2010, 8:42 AM

                   


                  What is the difference and which has more force and effect, a recusal or a disqualification?

                  As I have witnessed, judges do not often like, nor adhere to being recused.

                  _____


                • Frog Farmer
                  ... Wow! Wish I could! Can t find any! Of course I don t look too hard; I just wait to deal with all these people who come to me claiming that that is who
                  Message 8 of 8 , May 28, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Daniel Nieves wrote:

                    > Has anyone tried humbly asking a Judge not to commit a crime against
                    > them? Most patriots have been identified as radical, mad and angry
                    > but Ive been dealing with judges and officers

                    Wow! Wish I could! Can't find any! Of course I don't look too hard; I
                    just wait to deal with all these people who come to me claiming that
                    that is who they are. It's so disappointing to find out that they are
                    mere neighbors of the scoundrel and knave class. They love those FRNs
                    and have no moral or ethical problem endorsing paychecks and circulating
                    fresh debt paper. And nobody prosecutes for impersonation anymore, now
                    that BO is a shining example of political behavior and character.

                    > and I very politely tell
                    > them and humbly say please do not "compell me to lie."

                    How do you remain polite after a tasering?

                    > Subordination of perjury and Depravation of rights
                    > under color of Law is a crime.

                    Subornation of perjury (NOT Subordination) is a legal term describing
                    the crime of persuading another to commit perjury.

                    Subordination in banking and finance refers to the order of priorities
                    in claims for ownership or interest in various assets.

                    There is a rare word spelled "depravation" which has to do with
                    something being depraved, corrupted, and perverted. But the spelling
                    you're more likely to need is "deprivation," which has to do with being
                    deprived of desirable things like rights or freedoms.

                    Did you misspell, or are you now saying that Goldman Sachs has found a
                    new way to create derivatives by using their depraved sense of morality
                    to obtain ownership of our rights as if we were chattel outside of the
                    normal channel of getting people to use Federal Reserve Notes and
                    fractional reserve banking accounts?

                    > If a judge compells someone to lie, they lose their immunity and can
                    > be sued in their individual capacity. Why not just notify the judge
                    > politely?

                    Where we have no judge to notify, how about just making a public
                    declaration that we claim immunity because we are prisoners under
                    duress? That's really the only situation I can imagine finding myself
                    in here where we have no real officers who are in conformance with the
                    laws.

                    Actually, we have an understanding here where I live: they outnumber me
                    and I have frogs to farm, so for the well-being of both sides, we agree
                    to disengage and go on with our lives, they fleecing the sheeple, and me
                    enjoying the freedom most Americans used to enjoy because I know I can.

                    Regards,

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