Five Major Problems Facing Pro Se Litigants in Court

n.h. state lawyers and court system [bar ass.] are so corupt it sickens me ' my lawyer [p.d.] in 1978 signed seven indictments against me (fictitious charges) in 2000 forced me to plea bargain or go to jail immediatly and if you don't take the plea the judge will be mad now i read this peice of worthless flesh resigned after dening my pro se motion to preserve all evidence motion to re-concider as well as a motion to clearify so i could apeal to a higher court. someone please help and look this way sincerly kevin paul fraser

It happened to us. As a pro se litigant without a transcript, but with exceptional hard evidence, the judge still ruled against us, calling something a contract that didn't contain ANY of the esseential elements... price, description of work, terms of payment, etc. We appealed to superior, and lost. We appealed to Maine Supreme Court (briedfs filed by an attorney however) and lost. Now I've been told by the clerk of the U.S.Supreme Court I cannot represent our corporation in this matter. Anyone reasonable person could see that we should have been awarded something.

Wow, you summed it up pretty nicely. How many women and children souls are being ruined by what these people are getting away with. There is no one to turn to. And it is hard when you can only earn a little more than minimum wage when the Father earns almost 2 million per year +. The games the attorneys play that are in no doubt unethical, but one must, absolutely must know the ins and outs. How do other women do it. For I am exhausted and drained and soon to possibly be homeless. The Judges skim the courtroom to make sure there isn't anyone auditing him and definitely isn't looking out for the child's best interest but the money man's money. It is taking a toll on my children's only family (me). And now affecting my health. We need leaders in this country that have been through something. Suzanne, I wish you were in Texas or Colorado. Your article was the first I have come across of its kind. Very, very good. May God bless you.

This is my new email address. I am located in Ohio, a business owner, founder of Electro Well, Inc.

Put it this way! Pro Se, latin, what ever it means, is "fundamentally misconstrued" to mean, "Not one of us." Welcome to discrimination that is equivalent to the animus generated toward the blacks by Ku Klux Klan, or the Jews by the Nazis. The only Pro Se cases I found that win are indigent cases, and this, in my opinion, creates a fallacy for those sympathetic to the courts to maintain the dehumanizing of Pro Se litigants under the logic of a straw man or red herring fallacy, that also misses the point. We can argue and seek credibility as pro se or former pro se. However, the rebuttal by those who adopt Nazi and KKK willful disparate treatment of self appointed lawyers, whose lack of finances mandates “Pro Se,” will simply point to the incremental cases that may exist, and the proletariat will agree with them, out of lack of knowledge of Aristotle’s philosophy that is barred from main stream curriculum. Study Philosophy, but I prefer to call it, “secret knowledge on how to make populace believe a lie.” Rhetoric is the key to revealing truth, or to deceive.

Soooo Having stated that. I posted the Hebbe case, because, even though Iqbal has been viewed by hasty generalization, it is clear that the error is apparent because Twombly
“…did not alter the treatment of pro se filings.” Pssst, look at the word “filings.” Okay so Pro Se, in my case, a county defense attorney could have photo copied Madison v. Marbury, changed the caption and called it a motion to dismiss, and the Magistrate, who, BTW, refused our lack of consent, would have dismissed it. Why the magistrate added testimony and false statement that could not be supported by the record is unclear, other than to show me that if he wanted to make allegations of any nature, he would, and he would get away with it, see case 2:08-CV-02269-KJM-EFB. One colleague of mine, in the civil right movement was arrested and had her bones broken simply for who she was. The Judge was only admonished, and allowed to continue violating the rights of others.

In a nutshell, we claimed that a § 1983 a first amendment violation occurred after a web site I published was criticizing a board of supervisor that caused her to be barred from running for a campaign as a state legislator, on Sept. 13 2007. Additionally we claimed, “but for” the web site, the defendant, with overt vindictive animus, in an attempt to regain confidence in the political party, she illegally fabricated written instruments of deceit, in the form of false arrest reports. She did this not in the capacity of a Board of Supervisor, but a private citizen using her power in office, clear abuse, to engage in racketeering political influence evidence by wire fraud and mail fraud. I cited exhibit A1, letter from late Senator Dave Cox, as the source of the evidence, with his state seal attached, qualifying it as “judicially noticed evidence.” I stated Exhibit A1, contained a rare form of evidence, not required to prove a conspiracy, but we had the rare form, see Dckt. 22 ¶ 22:
See, e.g., ES Dev., Inc. v. RWM Enters., 939 F.2d 547, 553-54 (8th Cir. 1991) ("it is axiomatic that the typical conspiracy is 'rarely evidenced by explicit~ agreements: but must almost always be proved by 'inferences that may be drawn from the behavior of the alleged conspirators"') (quoting H.L. Moore Drug Exch. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 662 F.2d 935, 941 (2d Cir. 1981), cert. denied 459 U.S. 880 (1982)), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1097 (1992).

The letter, wire fraud, included an “agreement” among my state and local officials that I was to be discredited, and it was ratified by all but Senator Dave Cox. It was bradcasted by fax to private parties, and all my elected officials requesting they “agree” to this illegal conspiracy. State Legislator Ted Gaines was the highest elected official, and he had our home raided by more than a dozen police, not to charge us with a crime, or arrest us, but the police said, “you can no longer contact your representatives, or we will return and it will not be so nice.”

No, I am in the U.S.A., not Afghanistan. [The press is not interested in informing society this behavior occurs. Go figure, but Sullivan v. New York Times explains how the press will no longer expose the corrupt workings of local government, to avoid being tossed by influenced judges to “instructed jury verdicts” that would remove dividends from stockholders. Pravda isn’t the only propaganda since Sullivan, and guess what, the USSR abandoned old school and caught on to USA abuse of power. Don’t force potential civil right advocates under ground, make them believe they have free speech, and they will walk right into the courts and receive intentional infliction of emotional distress via irrational court orders]. This is what the courts consider “Meaningful redress” for Pro Se Litigants.

I digress, but it was necessary. So even though I stated a prima facie first amendment case, for the first 2 years of 120 documents, were every plaintiff document was not addressed and ignored, violating rule 8, 12, 56, etc, though we had “genuine issues of material fact,” and the motion “undisputed facts” was unopposed, the court dismissed the case after 3 years, and we never saw the inside of the courtroom or met this disgusting Magistrate. It was a reversible rule 12(6) because the defense “fundamentally misconstrued” our stated claim, the “substantial motivating factor,” to a non alleged claim that we did not seek redress for. Though every objection noted this, they were ignored, along with genuine issues of material fact. I was amazed that the Magistrate direct quoted statements as a basis for dismissal and made citations to documents as evidence, that didn’t exist, and cited documents as further evidence that didn’t’ exist. Apparantly, subconsciously, he saw that the district court, absent this fabrication may question this. Otherwise, it seems unnecessary over kill, that is evidence that should put him in prison, if Gandhi is correct with his assertion, “There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall. Think of it--always.".

My judicial counsel complaint, stringently excluded the disallowed “MERITS” of the case. It was based upon over bias and tenet violations, for instance one complaint was the denial of a request for time extension that was denied, even though my surgeon stated in a filed affidavit, “due to recovery of an operation with serious “complications” the patient is unable to perform duties.” But when the magistrate and the defense wanted postponements, they went on vacation, and treated each other like they were in an amusement park. I thought that was “outside the merits of the case” and was rational. However the appallate judicial counsel stated that my post lawsuit surgery, was a “merit of the case” and a basis to deny.

So this isn’t just district court nullification of Appellate court stari decisis, the courts despise us with impunity, and they have no deterrence. Abuse of power, though criminal under 18 USC 242, has been waived for judges, not by immunity, but by the awareness of the noted ignorance of the proletariat. Power is a synonym within the meaning of discretion, but does not spell out the word “power” in the statute. Remember Bill Clinton’s “the meaning of is?” Well abuse of discretion is not criminal, so Judges are allowed by law to be excluded from abuse of power, simply because we citizens are inept. I like to use the analogy Monty Pythons “Holy Grail” akin to the proletariat in the “knights” [law enforcement] explanation of “witch drowning” as a proper rationale to the peasants, “why do witches float, asks the good night?” One peasant retorts, “cause witches are made of wood and they float?” “Of course not” cries the Kight! “Aha,” proclaims the peasant, “because they are ducks!” Judges who are attorney’s, who are required to focus to a high degree; have been lead down a path and have abandoned humanity, who cannot focus. This diferrence though it is in intellect, has elements identical to skin color discrimination but invisible, therefore a lucky charm, magically delicious that disallows a focused discretion! Those who posses this power view us as dirty little crawly animal thingies. It’s not their fault!

But there is a trail that is very dark and in fact, the Ninth Circuit has identified elements where officials can engage in arbitrary denial of the 14th amendment equal protection and be the “cause of murder” by proxy. This happens when crime victims, disgruntled by police or court common bureaucratic negligence, certain of the worst of officials can orchestrate retaliation through the crime victims alleged perpetrator by ignoring rational basis facts. If they are being accused excusable negligence they take offense. One by product results by allowing the perpetrator to carry out crimes against the annoying crime victim failing complaints to superiors. Because any valid response to the victims redress validates the victims claim of negligence, another magically delicious power. I doubt this is common, but here is a case I will share, and there are more. I think the Ninth Circuit regrets making these implications, but it was upheld on 2010. Macias v. Ihde, 219 F.3d 1018, 1028-29 (9th Cir. 2000):

The Appellants contend that the district court "fundamentally misconstrued" the constitutional deprivation at issue in this case. They maintain that the alleged constitutional deprivation occurred when the defendants failed to provide Mrs. Macias with equal police protection in the months leading up to her death. Their brief states: 35

The district court erred in determining that there was insufficient evidence of actual causation in part, by misconstruing [the Appellants'] constitutional injury as `murder' rather than `lack of equal protection.' By so doing, the court ignored the evidence that [the Appellees'] arbitrary failure to enforce the law caused [Mrs. Macias] to suffer not only her murder on April 15, 1996, but the three months of harassment, stalking, and death threats that proceeded it.

This is how the courts perpetrate fraud, as a reversible error, even if it is maliciously done. Though, in our case, the content of the web site, explained that we, along with a large number of community members were being stalked at gun point by a mentally ill individual, according to court records. Other affidavits and signs on the individuals property reveal that this nut was as a campaigner for a District Attorney who after he got elected, dismissed attempted murder, vandalism, inter alia, contradicting his predecessor, who filed charges and gained preliminary hearing basis on indictments. The newly elected D.A. stopped making the previos 4 sepearte arrests and turned a blind eye to more violent crime spree, including a robbery of a store where the man threatened to murder employees and the assistant manage. He also refused to prosecute and enforce 5 separate restraining order contempt violations. If that is not the, “'inferences that may be drawn from the behavior of the alleged conspirators,” supra, you’d think, exhibit A would have done the trick.

But never was any of our complaint addressed or opposed. Instead a straw man fallacy was built by the defense, and it was obvious that the magistrate was influenced and obstructed justice by ratifying the straw man in spite of the record that showed they did not address my complaint and the did not provide a rational basis for denying constitutional right to “MEANINGFUL” access to the courts.

Even more horrifying to us was the discovery of another neighbor, at the same time, who filed a civil right claim against the same D.A. as a defendant and he had the Same Magistrate. I checked, and the Pro Se civil Right cases were funneled to this magistrate in a “course of conduct” that can be shown to be RICO violations. Though at one point he violated 636 usc provision by dismissing the injunction absent a District Court judge, a motion for protective order when violence was occurring against us resulting in assaults, and murder threats to our employees by the individual they were using to intimidate us.

We were shocked when, at the time of our motion for a protection order, John O’Sullivan the other civil right plaintiff, also was being disfavored as a Pro Se litigant, his stalker murdered him. Now go back up and read the Macias case. Magistrate Edmund F. Brennan was fully aware of the facts of both cases. Allegations were similar in that the D.A. defendant was favoring individuals arrested by former D.A.’s or in O’Sullivans case, his stalker was a retired Sheriff, and the favoritism was professional courtesy. O’Sullivan, after failed attempts to get Magistrate Brennan and other law enforcement agencies to abandon willful arbitrary denial of the 14th amendment, was murdered by the retired Sheriff, who is now serving life imprisonment.

We appealed, but then the county filed a motion for attorney fees, 3 weeks after their deadline. Though this is a willful frivoulous motion, and was a violation of code of attorny ethics, our rights were "chilled" and we had no evidence that that District Court would change their over abuse of discretion. We believe they would have granted a replevins to take what was left of our property, so out of intimidaiton and fear, the opposing attorney agreed to drop the request "if we dismissed the appeal with prejiduce." Why would an attorney throw away 26 thousand dollars in guaranteed fees?

Mahatma Ghandi
"When I despair, I remember that all through history the ways of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall. Think of it--always."

Pat Hamer

The following story can be made into a documentary and it will promote awareness of an irrational basis used by our countrymen/women in our government that makes corruption a protected constitutional right only enjoyed by government officials via a Constitutional amendment that destroys the equality doctrine. This makes our constitution unsound, and Ruth Bater Ginsberg affirmed this unsoundness, when she told Egypt not to look to the United States Constitution as a model. The good news, that we can simply repeal this amendment which would cull many officials who do not belong in their positions! The Doctrine of Immunity was not part of the original constitution and bill of rights. The Doctrine originates from Dark Age Dogma, and is a model, solely designed to protect corrupt money holders from a democracy, which is premised on the theory justice would remove individuals who choose to abuse power under the color of law. Though, turning a blind eye to injustice was codified by dark age theocracy (Bartolis of Sassoforatus 14th Century) perhaps with original good intentions, it has been streamlined into a personal gold mine, allowing officials to steal property and civil rights from citizens. It is part of the code of silence kept secret a under a motive to avoid outrage by our society.

The First Official Act Congress did, after the Bill of Rights was to figure out "ways and means" of how to get around the bill of rights, without the people realizing they were initiating the most brilliant diabolical coup ever conceived by the human mind to undue the benefits gained by those who fought and died in the Revolution. This is the sickest of perversions of justice that exists, when undue influence is used to steal power while wading in the blood of humans who fought for liberty from tyranny! These are the molesters or human rights, and they defend the doctrine of immunity under the most absurd premises.

In fact, the idea of immunity was presented to congress, "anonymously." The Documentary, will provide all the fact finding and data that reveals this recorded history. If this subterfuge was discovered, the shame would have been so devastating to the author, and thus history calls this Bill as an "anonymous" amendment to the Constitution. Unlike the 13th amendment, whose author proudly proclaims his "so called" achievement, which is non other than an atrocity. Yet 200 years later, what in reality was the worlds most secretly successful coup to have been perpetrated on a sleeping society, is only manifested by measuring and defining logic, akin to the adage, "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a duck! Thus, inserting the "doctrine of immunity" as a constitutional right, ended the ability to redress a grievance, and put the citizen, at the mercy of a kind decree, by potential tyrants, instead of the orders of the constitution, where, prior to the 11th amendment those rights were inalienable, and there was no defense for violating them in the federal courts, see Chisholm v. Georgia 1793, the end of justice for citizens violated by officials. But look at simple definitions. Most people do not understand that Sovereignty exists as U.S. Policy. The Supreme Court Justice, James Wilson understood it quite well, and in Chisholm, he stated, [as an author to the constitution] "the word sovereignty is totally unknown to the constitution of the united states." Understanding who James Wilson was, and the relationship between Congress and overturning the Constitution and the bill of rights with an amendment, is shocking, and created this conundrum in our democracy, that remains un-discussed and still controversial! Sovereignty is supreme power that excludes democracy. Yet our Supreme Court has thousands of decision excusing abuse of power claims solely based upon "sovereign immunity." As a rare proponent of this discovery, I find the majority of my audience fails to understand or perhaps does not care that their beliefs in justice are unfounded. But this is to their detriment, one person at a time! Injustice is as significant to humanity as pine cones falling killing an ant in a swarm, it goes unnoticed. This is the beauty of this diabolical dilemma, there is no advocacy at all! In fact exercising the First Amendment, is financial and social suicide, created from the bureaucracy designed like a booby trap as soon as you open the door to the halls of justice. Personal victimization laid the groundwork to the research that makes this documentary cogent and necessary. History shows that German citizens allowed the rise of Hitler with the doctrine of Immunity, and in 1945, Jurgen Brohmer, Proffesor of University of Saarland, Germany, Author of "State Immunity and the Violation of Human Rights," cites that, "Germany adhered to the absolute doctrine until 1945. That is, the Germans who were not hung in Nuremburg for war crimes that ended this doctrine. In his book, he also states, "The former communist states, however, by and large remained principle defenders of the absolute doctrine of immunity (citations to USSR. . .and their allies) (pg 20)."

Yet another cogency issue arises when rogue United States officials, hijacking without any objection, democracy and justice, vehemently a critic of the Human Right Violations, originating solely because of a "Doctrine of Immunity" adopts this doctrine, in order to immunize themselves for Human Right Violations they commit.

But this amendment used to forgive official corruption, see Bogan v. Scott-Hariss Scotus 1998, arises out of a Dark Age Maxim, "par en Parem non Habet Imperium," meaning, "an equal has no power over an equal," and settles the question by its own definition. If one citizen is immune from corruption because they are employed by the state, then there is no equality. Surely immunity suggests in that a public servant has power over their non equal private citizen, who are excluded from the equal protection received under benefactors of Sovereign Power! But then corruption does not make logical sense. The doctrine of immunity affectively reversed the First Amendment, if not the entire bill of rights. Our country is making decisions under a strong delusion that they are in a free part of the world! It hasn't happened and cannot occur under a doctrine of immunity.

Why there is no discussion about this fact has caused me to raise the alarm to bring awareness of the devastating affect the "doctrine of immunity" has on justice and democracy! This transcends political ideology! It is not partisan politics. Partisan politics loves to own the doctrine of immunity and control it. Those who discovered they can be immune, and be elevated from the risk takers called the Private Citizen, enjoy this, privilege, or what the Declaration of Independence referred to as a "right inestimable and formidable to tyrants." Yes, it is good to be the king, but it sucks to be the kings subjects, if he is a sociopath! PhD Robert Hare, author of "Sociopaths in Suits, uses scientific empirical data showing traits and explains how non violent sociopaths gravitate to public office, basking in delusions of grandeur, and feeding their sickness with Sovereign Power able to escape public scrutiny by claiming sovereign immunity. This is becuse the amendment is misconstrued today as a "get out of jail free card" in certain jurisdictions who have occupied justice with their own form of authority, under Sovereign Power, provided by this constitutional amendment.

This creates a feudal system, made palatable to a numb society whose under standing of it stops at the ability to at least identify a red hearing fallacy as a standard operating procedure of a "good ole boy club." What needs to be understood, is that all of the wrongs perceived in the political arena, are justified within the constraints of the Doctrine of Immunity. There is no deterrence for decisions that confound ethics or outright violation of law, particularly 18 USC 242 abuse of power under the color of law, commonly referred to as human right violations.

Under a strong delusion, though we boast of a democracy subject to republic oversight. But in reality our officials govern under "Sovereign Power." The same abusive power used by King George III, who btw was diagnosed by his own physicians, as mentally ill, but sovereignty was the sole reason for the Revolution. Sovereign Power was reinstated into the Constitution within 5 years of the end of the Revolution as a "ways and means" for officials to breach war debt contracts without suffering the consequences of debtor prison. This fact is hidden from our education curriculum which is a vital part of history and social studies. This is evidence that propaganda replaces reality, and our country blamed this abusive government behavior on communist countries, yet they are the worst hypocrites! Civil Right plaintiffs learn this behind the courtroom doors, where public scrutiny is avoided at all costs, and the perfect cover. How can such a devastating doctrine be Supreme power in our "so called" democracy when it contradicts "equal justice" as a foundation? When in fact Sovereign Power destroys equal justice res ipsa loquitur, by definition itself? Sovereign Power is reflected in an amendment to the Constitution that controverts the Revolution itself, a conundrum uncogent, unsound, thus defying logic taught by Aristotle; Nevertheless, the American Scholastic Society is void any credence to this dilemma. This is odd to me. Feedback on this is desired. This discovery of this has touched my humanity, and I strongly believe that it could be a solution that could end most of human suffering, making the espoused second coming virtually unnecessary! If heaven is what we are seeking, the Doctrine of Immunity is the only obstacle to the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Removing this amendment would ultimately mimic the accolade of the paradigm shift that occurred when society finally overcame the dogma created by ignoring and even executing dark age scientists for espousing that there were no sea monsters and the earth was not flat. Copernicus's dilemma is the case in point. This tyranny and inquisition of those who object to illogical premises being perpetrated on members of society attempting to kill the "over-deterrence" theory used to grant immunity to corrupt officials and allow the courts to cover up and seal evidence. This is as illogical as when societies officials convinced the proletariat that drowning inquisition could prove innocence by succumbing to lack of oxygen under water.


Though all revolutions ended the policy that caused the revolution, it is however, quickly thwarted by congresses or parliament officials in vaguely worded amendments only discussed behind closed doors of the court rooms. Then that act becomes a brilliantly diabolical coup transfer of power transferring sovereignty from society back to a few in the government, which is what the Revolution ended. Yet today, actually the amendment is 200 years old, and nobody I talk to is aware of its existence, and there only 27 amendments. This willful ignorance of a whole society is a sad revelation of societies intellect in simple democracy, our job is to change that!

To buttress these facts that I state, the Declaration of Independence, called this ability to inspire a revolution, "a right inestimable and formidable to tyrants." Consequently, they further declared that it cultivates wide spread "mock trials" and "judicial tyranny." Ultimately ending silently one at a time any citizens hope in their right to have the "wrongs done to them made right," when all they did was object to abuse of power. Hence a first amendment petition clause! But this is removed by the amendment I speak of by the silent mechanics of the amendment. Very clever "smoke and mirrors" that have deceived very intelligent individuals, but if you join them you can profit! Herein is the policy of feigning ignorance to our immunity doctrine by officials. This abuse of power is only found in a feudal system that protects those with propensity to abuse ("Sociopaths in suits;" PhD. Robart Hare) and not a democracy in our republic. This "inestimable right" was designed in the dark ages to protect wealth from democracy who by all rights is entitled to stop financial power abuse from overt abusers of human rights. Even an assumption is given, involving protecting those who suppress and "chill" free speech by unlawful vindictive animus violently inflicting intentional emotional distress by retaliatory means that discount "due process," barred by words used in the Supreme Court to simulate justice, that is allowed to be nullified in the lower courts, i.e. the First Amendment and arfully expressed poems the court gives their appoligists to use as a fallacy straw man to discount folks such as I who say Nay Nay!

After every Revolution, those who reinstate this policy are allowing themselves to remain free from scrutiny and escape liability under a false guise that originates from the Dark Ages, At the least an ethical dilemma, that no one in power dare to discuss. Nobody has affectively presented this phenomenon to the public! We can communicate this, and I believe it will change the world. I learned all these from researching facts and case law by personal experience in a civil right litigation in this territory or jurisdiction. I am not an attorney but I am an Honor Graduate with a Social Science Degree, and Graphic Comm. degree, so I do have some credentials that should give confidence for personal due dilligence to move another credible player to catch this vision and realize the potential. J=(PHRV2)[squared]) (Justice equals punishment for Human Right violations squared)! In other words this formula is deductive, becuase Justice cannot be equal, if any punishment is excused, and the USA claims they removed Sovereignty in the 1776 Revolution, however, in 1795, congress reversed the Supreme Courts insistence, that, "to the constitution the word sovereign is totally unknown." Below is a brief outline of some particulars I am allowing to be made public in this forum. If you would like to get a vision on this project and be part of a real solution to ending corruption, by all means contact me.

I have become a modern day, not a “civil right activist,” but for human rights. I don’t really know why “civil” has a right, other than to dehumanize those who object to abuse of power. Abuse of power is rampant in the Sacramento, El Dorado, and Placer counties. The recent imprisonment of the Governor of Illinois for corruption, along with the recent prison sentence of elected Sheriff Mike Carona in Orange County for obstruction of justice charges, reflect overt jurisdictional differences in treating officials with equal justice.

I am part of a group who has identified prima face evidence that certain elected officials, i.e., sheriffs, Judges etc...are committing the crime of obstructing justice and witness intimidation through another crime, 18 USC 242 abuse of power, claiming “discretion,” authorizes inaction or criminal conduct. Action or inaction by official investigators, according to the supreme court, requires a rational basis to either investigate, or dismiss investigations. Yet we have mounds of paper and cases where officials are ignoring the crimes committed by local government. Call 3, and the other news teams also turn a blind eye to these cases.

An interesting case arises out of the Ninth Circuit were officials who ignore crime victims, violate constitutional rights under “equal protection.” Those who have objected to negligence in their case become disfavored. This disfavoring is unconstitutional discrimination if there is no rational basis, see Enquist v. Oregon, and you can show this irrationality caused you to “be treated differently than similarly situated individuals.” As a result, the Ninth circuit has identified an unconstitutional pattern of practice were officials who engage in arbitrary and capricious discrimination in retaliation to first amendment complaints, vindictive animus in retaliation, manipulates barring of equal access to intangible government services, to the victims, particularly law enforcement in compliance with Proposition 9, Crime victims bill of rights, inter alia.

One untried avenue may be the Private Attorney General is sort of a Quasi "citizens arrest" authority provided by the Civil Rights act of 1964. It is the right of a private citizen to act as a grand jury, and gather evidence and sue on behalf of the people in civil court. The results can lead to criminal indictment, and the case Bogan v. Scott-Harris though contradicts civil remedy, mandates that “if corrupt officials be indicted.” Indictments in Sacramento and foothill communities have been barred by influence peddling aided by Sacramento and El Dorado County political party. We have correspondence from them containing claims that "they may lose their career for after attempting to remedy our problem." This is a RICO intimidation, that we also experienced. Two of the county level elected officials were allowed to stop down were barred from the party due to their behavior as a direct result of my persistence in justice.

But their political party, unpopular in California, is covering up a scandal by a sudden desire to ignore my further attempts at amicable solutions. Thus, creating an undeserved stigma against me, though I have affectively caused the punishment of 3 elected individuals, and ended 2 of their careers.

Nevertheless, State Level "assemblyman and senator "shot callers" are being protected by corruption and influence peddling of the courts. Federal Courts are dismissing claims against officials in the Civil Courts, by not addressing the claims but "fundamentally misconstruing the claims by ignoring evidence," see Macias, infra. This is a pattern Also they based dismissal my misusing an immunity defense designed to protect officials who may have breached a duty of care that harms citizens in "traditional legislative" decisions. But immunity is only authorized, if the stated claim, ". . .may have prospective implications that reach well beyond the particular occupant of the office," see Bogan v. Scott-Harris." I was instrumental in causing the now Governor, but former A.G. Brown to fall into this trap of overtly abusing his power. As a matter of fact, the Bogan case was introduced by Brown, and clearly it was a personal indictment, not the defense! But with corruption, they could have introduced a page torn out of a phone book, and the Judge would have adopted it without knowing he did. They don't read civil right claims, they dismiss them! The Ninth circuit appellate courts have ratified and adopted the Supreme Court Bogan case as controlling law. This was in a recent case where the county of Santa Cruz's opposition to this was rejected by the Supreme Court in September of 2011, appealing for their defeat in Norse v. Santa Cruz, a speech retaliation case, where the Supreme Court authorizes public association of officials whose smug arbitrary abuse as "NAZI's," as long as it is equal to the disturbance of group agreements or "thumbs up" interruptions in a city counsel meeting, See Norse v. County of Santa Cruz 2010. They said, "ad hoc" decisions that only affect individuals are not given immunity. The Ninth Circuit en banc panel stated, "we will not allow you to rewrite the first amendment." The problem is it took Norse 10 years for the panel to tell the county this, and there is no punishment for the county if they choose to ignore the Ninth circuit. Its just tax payers money being deferred from human right abuse to the pockets op private attorneys who have influence with district courts to "fundamentally misconstrue" civil right claims, ending scrutiny of the officials who continue to cultivate corruption for their own profit.

But district Court Judicial Tyranny, similar to what the Declaration of Independence stated as a grievance, for the Revolution, is ignoring the precedence and jurisdictionally sociopaths who manage to get elected, are cultivating further corruption by giving "ad hoc" abuse of power the green light. Those officials we have caught engaging in actual wire fraud deceit have fulfilled the necessary elements of fraud and deceit and campaign fraud, they are escaping prison sentences, only due to sympathetic Judges, not wanting to offend their campaign contributors have converted their paychecks into bribes, granting wide spread "get out of Jail Free cards" to party members who got out of hand. We have direct evidence of this. See AE JA Elliot-Park v. Jarrod Manglona 592 F.3d 1003 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 723:

"Would-be criminals will act with a great impunity if they believe they have a get out of jail free card if they commit crimes against the disfavored group." Estate of Maria Teresa Macias v. Mark Ihde 219 F.3d 1018, 1028 *'2000 U.S:"

Amazingly the Macias case, shows officials "cause murder" by proxy in "arbitrary" acts of vindictive animus when crime victims complain about negligence leading to violence and murder, and are "denied equal police services" violating the 14th amendment.



According to the courts, finding the actual evidence for these type of conspiracies is rare:

See, e.g., ES Dev., Inc. v. RWM Enters., 939 F.2d 547, 553-54 (8th Cir. 1991) ("it is axiomatic that the typical conspiracy is 'rarely evidenced by explicit~ agreements: but must almost always be proved by 'inferences that may be drawn from the behavior of the alleged conspirators"') (quoting H.L. Moore Drug Exch. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 662 F.2d 935, 941 (2d Cir. 1981), cert. denied 459 U.S. 880 (1982)), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1097 (1992).

However, after 4 years of research, we find that Sacramento, and surrounding counties are engaging in Racketeering wire fraud and deceit, a 18 USC 1961 violation, see http://www.ricoact.com . We have the evidence, provided from a State Senator, and several Political Party Committees. One suit was filed, and the court ignored the claims, which according to Rule 8 FRCP failure to address or oppose claims and motions, admits the claims as valid, and this creates "genuine issues of triable material fact for a jury." However, this court aided and abetted government colleagues caught by a Senator, and their own political parties attempting to defraud them. The court also disallowed any hearings and failed to respond to objections. The record shows it violated every civil procedure it could to keep our claims from the record, which is absurd, because we made the claims, but yet the record shows they failed to respond to them. This is the above, is explicitly evidenced by the record, or lack of the record, exhibits not addressed by the court are the "rare evidence" called res ips loquitur, that is not necessary to put these cases before juries! However, simple economics comes into play when the local jurisdictions frustrates redress with futility.

This implicates several federal judges in Sacramento, one who actually recues himself. At the State Level we recently perfected two admonishments against Superior Court Judge in two separate cases for personally arresting or obstructing justice outside of his jurisdiction, see Stump v. Sparkman. It should be noted that the admonishments were done by the counsel on judicial performance in San Francisco, and these counties were not able to influence peddle the commission to obstruct justice which are federal and state crimes. The same complaints in this jurisdiction was handled with fraud and deceit by Magistrate Judge, who actually may have allowed a civil right plaintiff to be murdered by not remaining unbiased in his office, similar to the Macias case explained below; another violation of judicial tenets, but causing murder that he could have prevented by following the law and being unbiased? This is what we have acquiesced to, allowing murder to occur to cover simple negligence, that originates these cases, in order to hide the embarrassment of inept officials who may have just made a correctable error in judgment. "Oh what tangled webs we weave. . ."

My wife and Ihad to leave our home that I designed and built, and were forced to maintain 2 residences, because we were suing one of the same official who authorized the release of a man held on $230,00.00 bail, by his predecessor who refused to be influenced by a criminal who hired the most expensive lawyer! The accused stalker that our county turned loose on us then engaged in $5000.00 Vandalism, assaults, murder threats to a supermarket Office manager and employees in the commission of a crime, and stalking for 5 years, intimidating witnesses and those suing this official who is an elected official who has authority to release violent criminals. He was not prosecuted! The person who was murdered, had his case dismissed, obviously, after he was murdered, affectively stopping scrutiny and justice of the official. This is what organized crime did in the hey day of the Mafia, and our officials are committing murder by proxy as shown in the Ninth Circuit Macias case, through arbitrary plausible deniability, which was a defense for them!

We moved from our home and the county, and are still alive, as you can see. Here is the ninth circuit decision that explains how officials can be the "cause of murder" by proxy, through arbitrary vindictive animus in retaliation to those seeking valid redress of grievance by filing criminal complaints. Had we not of complained, better stated, "but for" [the BUT FOR Causation test] our complaints against this official, we would not have been stalked and vandalized, nor lost thousands of dollars in exercising a futile first amendment right that does not in reality exist! Not in this jurisdiction anyways! They arrested the vandal, and immediately released him when they found out who he was, and he then assaulted us and threatened to murder our employees and stated in a police report that "because we complained about sheriff services, the officer would not make the arrest." They were that blatant! However, it is evidence that eventually will sink them, unless of course, we too become murder victims. The murder threats are on videotape, so it is possible, and we are operating within the reasonable person doctrine! But when a criminal is in charge of justice, well you get the picture These are not my theories. See the Estate of Macias v. Ihde, 219 F.3d 1018, 1028-29 (9th Cir. 2000):

" The Appellants contend that the district court "fundamentally misconstrued" the constitutional deprivation at issue in this case. They maintain that the alleged constitutional deprivation occurred when the defendants failed to provide Mrs. Macias with equal police protection in the months leading up to her death. Their brief states: 35

The district court erred in determining that there was insufficient evidence of actual causation in part, by misconstruing [the Appellants'] constitutional injury as `murder' rather than `lack of equal protection.' BY SO DOING, THE COURT IGNORED THE EVIDENCE THAT [THE APPELLEES'] ARBITRARY FAILURE TO ENFORCE THE LAW CAUSED [MRS. MACIAS] TO SUFFER NOT ONLY HER MURDER ON APRIL 15, 1996, BUT THE THREE MONTHS OF HARASSMENT, STALKING, AND DEATH THREATS THAT PROCEEDED IT."
[end quote]

This is what my family is a victim of and there is nothing we can do about but leave the state and everything we worked for! However, the newly appointed Eastern District Court Judge assures us that it is constitutional for officials to ignore the Ninth Circuit, and there is nothing we can do, but attempt to recruit concerned citizens. Under The District Court Judge, the county threatened to bankrupt us filing a motion 2 weeks past their deadline for filing that motion. However, we saw for three years, the court need not obey the law, and we dropped the appeal, otherwise, we know This Judge who blindly adopted, the Magistrates Fraud and deceit, would have continued the abuse of discretion, which has no legal consequence. They did this in what the Appeals court calls the "chilling affect" of the First Amendment, which is of course unconstitutional. So you see, we need to root out these corrupt judges who acquiesce to judicial nullification of constitutional rights. We would have lost everything, and they never responded to our claims in our complaint! This is not justice! These are dirty officials, and they will take you out if you cross them. Simply complaining about bad service is all it takes. They showed us that if we claim a First Amendment right, we could end up murdered, and if we appeal outside of the district, they will use the government to steal our assets not worrying about a 10 year battle to get it back in the appellate courts. This is justice for civil right victims! Does every body know this, and are they okay with it? Or am I just unreasonable, and over-reacting?

That is just a brief synopsis of our evidence that there needs to be a Dept. of Justice or FBI investigation, but not in this jurisdiction, as they all here have turned a blind eye, and murders have occurred, which the Local DOJ and FBI have ratified through inaction, turning a blind eye to their colleagues in law enforcement and politics. The murderer of the man who also complained about the same defendants, is now serving a life sentence, and the officials who failed to act, failed to act willfully and received a payoff of silence regarding their disproportionate influence peddling and opbstruction of Justice! Sheriff Mike Carona and the Illinois Governor should have been paying attention to our jurisdiction. The culprits I have dirt on and can put in prison if only there was justice, are not losing a wink of sleep! Please help me bring justice to our part of the world here in this potentially wonderful country!

We need sharp individuals who can contact media and help fund marketing campaigns to expose this!

Thank you. Email us if you can offer some assistance or are interested in doing a Documentary or forming a Private Attorney General group to bring the law to these abusers in power.