2017-01-06: Just to be sure people know this… at the time when I first posted this, I had not at all explored the Judicial Conduct Commission process. They have not fairly had time, as of writing this paragraph into the top of this blog post right now, to review the complaint that this represents. I have sent them the link, but have not heard back from them.
2017-02-01: They've proven themselves to be exactly what we knew they are. They have exploited procedural blockade or procedural wizardry and plausible deniability to get their way. They prosecuted me with no evidence and made procedural moves to block any evidence from being put forth throughout this entire trial by ordeal of legal abuse. Despite clear evidence of her abuse of our son, the court did not ever prosecute his mother for that. The entire court is run by women in a secretarial pool. It's all about getting money from men. They don't breast feed males and expect them to work or go to steal war from other places while they get everything they want. I have heard back from the JCC, once, from a secretary… who said that I would be given a case number, but then never heard back again from her. I am taking out the link from this page to the Google Drive directory in two weeks, to give you time to mirror the new documents added. I'm giving up on this and going back to my real life.
I tell you three times. They cheated. They abuse the “protective” I hesitate to call it a “law” when it's really a crime against humanity… to prosecute males and put them in jails while they allow women to perjure; they ignore every thing I bring to prove that and act like I'm the criminal while she abuses our child and the “judicial” process, with members of the bar as accomplices to that malicious prosecution and abuse of process. I recommend not ever moving to Utah, where they have such high standards of injustice that even the court cheats.
This blog item is hastily prepared and not the full thesis by any means.
This blog item is a hastily prepared “Full”[*] disclosure to the Grandest Jury, the People, per se, as well as those who are presumed to represent us, of the Google Drive directory: Alleged Violations of Protective Order. I realize that it is not redacted as is expected. There just isn't enough time in a day to do everything! The primary purpose for posting this is that I just plain don't know what to do and I need help from the community. The breach of privacy is the lesser of (at least) two evils, in that I feel certain that there is less injustice in this breach of privacy than there is in allowing the courts to continue to perpetrate crimes against rights. People who live in glass houses should not throw stones; people who live in teepees should not have loud quarrels. If somebody wants to perform the labor involved in that redaction, while I continue with the legal research and writing of the next set of documents, please contact me so I can co-ordinate in the case of multiple offers, and set up a shared directory to place the redacted data set into. Otherwise, it's just plain lower priority than appealing the bogus child custody determination!
It is a large amount of data, fairly raw and not fully curated at this point in time. I have yet to crank out a full evidence summary document, for example… and so it's not easy to see—at a glance—what it all means. Below, you will will find a short briefing list of some of the most important documents within it, which I am certain are likely to hold the greatest amount of public interest. The rest is like some kind of reality TV… real honest to God grandest jury evidence placed here for public inquiry. I did not want to publish it this way, but find that the officials are not doing what they should with it. The common law must be held in multiple custody. We have to ensure that they do their jobs right. When they don't, we need to impeach them. But don't blame the elected officials when it's their subordinates who are the perpetrators!
Absence of evidence is evidence, when the evidence was shown to them and they failed to accord it proper consideration. See, e.g., Brady v. Md., 373 U.S. 83 (1963); Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972); Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U.S. 103 (1935). Similar thing apply, of course, in the civil court context... The Public Law arises from Private Law through the Contract with Society… I say that somewhere in one of my legal documents. It was pretty good. Can you find it?
[*] It is difficult to concentrate on writing when there is obstruction of Justice taking place and when I'm feeling very rushed by deadline pressure. Even with total peace of mind, it's not easy to get all of the important details written down, and all of the caselaw and other background research completed enough to know what to say and how to say it. I'm doing everything I can; I'm doing everything mostly right, and from what I can observe, the officials are not doing their duty in good faith. There is “honest service fraud” documented in here! Yes, I am aware this may sound cryptic or non sequitur due to the fact that I'm feeling rushed and not filling in the betweens from initio to these conclusory remarks here on this too-quick and rough blog article.
I ask that a few good citizens mirror that drive directory for backup in case it gets taken down. This evidence folder was originally up on a LaCie.com “Wuala” (Switzerland) site. It was shown to law enforcement here—Salt Lake City, Utah, the former Olympic village—before Wuala was no longer available… The Wuala directory contained just about the same things you see in this Google Drive directory, except for newer items and newly entered ones from prior times; there's a lot left to do. It's not all there yet. I am being kept very busy with multiple suits at the same time! As far as I can tell, those law enforcement people failed to do anything at all about any of this… They simply did not appear to do their duty… (But see the error coram nobis petition, linked below.)
There's a lot of competition in the cloud storage industry, so I guess it's paranoid to think that a site outside of the US is no longer available due to somebody wanting to “firewall” it away… why I say that is that police, DCFS, and the bench-trial court officers used every excuse in the book to ignore the evidence, one of them being that it was firewalled and they could not read it from inside the courthouse or police department; or that the disc I'd brought it to court on and sent it to DCFS on was not readable… The DCFS claimed that my disc did not work, then failed to, in good faith, contact me for a copy that they could read.
Also see: My Zotero.org references collection, and more specifically, the subcollection for this case. It is meant for use via the Juris-M fork of Zotero, which provides multilingual legal-citation support in addition to the base functionality of Zotero. In order to insert the citations into my documents, which I write using GNU TeXmacs, I created zotero-texmacs-integration and the associated propachi-texmacs. The propachi-texmacs provides a “monkey-patch” to Juris-M that modifies the output format of it's LibreOffice integration to a form compatible with TeXmacs. The zotero-texmacs-integration is a plugin for TeXmacs that borrows the LibreOffice integration wire-protocol, so that citations and bibliographies can be inserted into and maintained in documents. Because citations and bibliographies are formatted via Citation Style Language (CSL), it can be used with any CSL style supported by Juris-M or Zotero, and is thus generally useful, not just for legal writing.
Please, again, I hope for at least one person to please back all of this up (but don't tell me), just in case somebody rips off my laptop. If somebody paranoid or angry enough about my having posted all of this got physical control of this laptop or any of my devices, they could potentially cause it all to disappear. I'm sort of hoping that anybody working for them “didn't sign up for this shit” (alluding to the movie Avatar). Improper adminstration of justice within the court makes the job more difficult and more dangerous for the beat-cops on our streets, most of whom “don't want to be that cop” who did the bad thing we all saw on the news. In God We Trust, eh? Perhaps the moon is a harsh mistress?
A short briefing list, of some “starting point” documents:
It is glaringly obvious that I am not an attorney at law, and that I don't have very much experience with paralegal work. I'm taking this stuff to court pro se and learning as I go. I'm getting better at it, but have still not read all of the rules, for example… There's only so much time in a day! This is not a comprehensive list! The actual directory of files is… approaching that.
- 2016-02-16 Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis
- a.k.a. A Memorandum in Support of Petitions for Relief under the Post Conviction Remedies Act, or “the error coram nobis petition”, which challenges the constitutionality of the Cohabitant Abuse Act, among other things.
- 2015-02-25 Motion of Respondent to Dismiss Protective Order
- a.k.a. “the long affidavit” for dismissal of the protective order. I entitled it as a motion because I did not know that I was expected to fill out a form for the motion. The document really is an affidavit. The supporting evidence is the stuff in the main directory, linked at the top of this blog post, and there's a directory of evidence that was put on a disc that I tried to file with the document, but the court would not accept it.
- 2016-04-20 Answer to Motions of Respondent for Summary Judgments (with exhibits)
- a.k.a. Answer to the State's “Motion to Deflect”. This has a lot of attachments, and may be a good one to grab for an all-in-one starter document. The Post-conviction Relief, URCP 65C petitions were deflected by the state's attorney. She actually lied to the court! (See the associated transcripts, etc., found near this file in the Drive directory, for both these and the associated appellate court cases!) The summary judgment was granted in both PCRA cases, and then in the appellate court, she lied again, and they dismissed also, as though the case was not justiciable; but it's obvious that it is. That was the action that prompted me to post this all here.
2016-12-04: I have an appellate court “Docketing Statement” due tommorrow, Dec. 5, 2016, and so must now turn my attention to that task.
Update: I've been granted a time-extension, to the 20th of December for the docketing statement.
2017-01-07: I created a Zotero.org group to make it easier for investigators and jurists to follow and view my research. I've edited the page, above, to show the location. I'll try and keep that up to date, perhaps by simply working there instead of in my own library. Notice the link to the Dropbox storage for the annotated PDF's, since they are not on Zotero storage. Thank you for mentoring me, Anon. I realize that normally lawyers don't display this sort of stuff. I think most people aren't going to be interested enough anyway, and people who are would be likely to be given access by me… and opening it up makes that access relatively anonymous.
2017-01-07: I have removed the group because it does not make it easier after all. Sorry.
«Absence of foreskins is evidence of human rights abuses. Humans who are abused are not happy, they become despondent, they malfunction, they go on strike, they will mob you and kill you if they can. People do not tolerate it very long before they change order and change caste-role. It is not acceptable to threaten them, setting the example by harming them. They will protect themselves and their offspring from the evil perverts who cut up their children. It is animal nature. You who have been doing this are warned. It is natural law.»