FACIALLY LAWFUL SINCE 1998
email

CONTACT KILLERCOP

MAYDAY IN AMERICA! SECRET THINGS CRIME SCENE NUTS AND EXTREMISTS
c

Circumstances do not make a man, they reveal him.” – James Allan

 

PRESUMED GUILTY

JUDGE MATZ SAYS:

The fact is that Killercop used not only ENTIRELY DIFFERENT LANGUAGE but was in a situation, was perceived to be in a situation, was none at the time of the indictment to be in a situation that there was no information suggesting Schmoe, whoever that is, was in.” ~JUDGE HOWARD MATZ, COVERING UP KILLERCOP'S SECOND MOTION TO DISMISS FOR A SELECTIVE PROSECUTION.

 

THAT SUCKS

JIVE TALKING TURKEY, THAT'S JUST THE MAN'S DENIAL OF THE ANSWER OF THE QUESTION OF THE JURISDICTION!


 

ONE CAN'T HAVE THE TARGET BECOME THE VICTIM. IT'S NOT GOOD FOR BU$INE$$!! SO SAY THE CORRUPTED COPORATE CEO. AND THE CROOKED JUDGE. IT'S NOT COOL! CHILDREN IN AMERICA LIKE COOL.

 

BUT, I BET THEY HATE LOCK DOWN PRISON DRILLS.

 

BUT AMERICA IS DOING THE BEST TO PREPARE THEM FOR LIFE IN AMERICA,

 

WITHOUT ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL, OF COURSE.

 

"ONLY ONE TRIBUNAL THAT EVER ADOPTED A PRACTICE OF FORCING COUNSEL UPON AN UNWILLING DEFENDANT IN A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING. THE TRIBUNAL WAS THE STAR CHAMBER." U.S. v FARETTA , 422 US 806 (1975)

OUTSIDE IT'S AMERICA.

WHAT WOULD BE THE CAPACITY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND OF THE COURTS TO SUPRESS THIS KIND OF SPEECH?" --Judge A. Howard Matz, PRE-TRIAL OF KILLERCOP

FAKE NEWS - LIAR

EPIC CORRUPTION EXPOSED IN THE SECRET TRIAL OF KILLERCOP.com.

ANOTHER PERSONPERSON OF ANOTHER

Look, you know you have to look, there!! ABOVE!! It's "a person, on the left," and "the person of another," on the right.

Do you understand?

NO?

ARE YOU STILL BAFFFLED?

WIKI

WOUNDED WIKI

FAQ 1 FAQ 2

FACEBOOK AND THE TWITTER

YOUTUBE

JOE SCHMOE, A.K.A. JOE COOL

JOE SCHMOE, A.K.A. JOE COOL, A.K.A TED? A.K.A. i THINK IT WAS GARY. OR MARK.


Trial of Killercop: Pages 2184-2185

JUDGE MATZ HAS HORNY FRIENDS

Closing argument by Elena Duarte A.U.S.A. on behalf of Debra Wong Yang, Trial By Matz and Appeal By Kozinski.

YANG

"And I also ask, when you consider Killercop's intent, which you will do, that you keep in mind the following:

When you consider whether Killercop knew what threats were and he intended to threaten, that he has made a great deal out of the Joe Schmoe threat. You remember Joe Schmoe? I'm going to personally [SHE INTENT-IONALLY OMITTS THE WORDS "Kick your ass,]... if you don't take my information down."

"He made so much of that Joe Shmoe threat, which you can see in Exhibit 76, and one of his as well, I think it is, that you heard evidence that on the seized computer from his house, he had constructed part of a website. It wasn't posted [transmitted] yet. "

"Our expert Mr. Siebert talked about it. And its hard copy is Exhibit 76. And in that portion of the website that was under construction but wasn't posted [transmitted] yet, [ Ignore that fact because I'll then have no power and then have no jurisdiction!]

Killercop had a whole category called "Threats of the death." Do you remember that? And the "threats portion linked to the Joe Shmoe that, "I will kick your ass," and the death portion linked back to the threat against Tracy Hall."

""Threats of the death, death threats," no reference to litigation, no reference to anything but "pure" threats, because he knew what he was doing and he meant to do it. Thank you. I have nothing [further. ]"

Transcript of 12.04.2002

Docket #71 & 73

Lists “Hillary Potashner” on behalf of the defendant, page 2.

Counsel appearing factually was “Bill” Harris, Esq.

 

Page 4, Lines 18-20

Judge Matz: “Killercop, one of Killercop’s e-mails itself noted that the antagonism which lead to these inherently threatening exchanges was very personal."  

Page 4, Lines 23-25

“The text of the letters(sic), all of those, of the communications, all of those in Counts 1 through 4 reflect ‘inherent [As opposed to ‘Fake,’ ‘False,’ and ‘Un-inherent’ threats, or any other such subjective-adjective.]  

Page 5, Lines 13-15

Judge Matz: “So I reject the notion that this pure speech. It is conduct. It’s inherently threatening and there is no basis … “   I KNOW IT WHEN I HEAR IT.

Page 5, Lines 21-22

Judge Matz: >“It’s conduct, it’s clearly proscecutable and that’s the basis for my ruling.”

See U.S. v. Cassel and U.S. v Brice, 926 F.2d 925, 931 (9th Cir. 1991)

 

 

Response to New Selective Prosecution Motion to Dismiss, Based on Joe Schmoe E-Mail

Page 6, Lines 3-5

Judge: “[t]hat single E-Mail [Joe Schmoe] which was a response to a provocative communication previously sent is not in any meaningful respect comparable or like the series of communications that underlie and that constitute Counts 1 through 4.”

 

 

MATZ LINE OF THE DAY: Page 6, Lines 8-12

“The fact is that Killercop used not only entirely different language but was in a situation, was perceived to be in a situation, was none at the time of the indictment to be in a situation that there was no information suggesting Schmoe, whoever that is, was in.”  

Page 6, Lines 14-15

The nature of the communications was different.. "

 

THIS IS WILLIAM HARRIS SPEAKING, NOT MATZ:   Page 9, Line 1-9

“I agree whether its true or not is relevant. But I think you’re failing to acknowledge that the Schmoe E-mail was a response to an E-Mail or to posting at least, not an E-Mail but a posting on the web site.”  

Page 9, Lines 14-16

Judge Matz: “But that’s not what Killercop was doing; these were messages and communications directed at specific people as well as others who chose to log on to the evilgx.com website.

Page 10, Lines 1

“But this [E-Mail from Joe Schmoe] isn’t ‘substantially similar.”

 

ITS EXACTLY SIMILAR!!

 

Judge Matz then proceeds to change the subject from substantially similar to, “Did the democrats control the Justice Department in the year 2002?” Lines 21-22, Ibid.  

Page 21, Lines 13-22

Judge: “It wouldn’t surprise me if the issues that Killercop chooses to emphasize at trial have to do with intent and context. [5]  Well, they could be affected by contents, some of these. If for example there was some evidence that on the next message he posted he said just fooling [6] or I thought that would get a rise out of you. And … [T]hat would be relevant evidence. That would be Brady evidence, that would be exculpatory evidence.” .

Response to Greenwood Count

Page 14, Lines 16-17 “These are constant and recurring First Amendment concerns.” [4]

BUT THAT IS ALL YOU GET FROM HIZZZ ODER REGARDING THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE BILL OF YOUR RIGHTS. A CONCERN.

AN APPEARENCE.

 

MATZ IS MAD

HE WANTS TO PLAY GOD. TO HAVE THE POWER TO SHUT DOWN THE INTERNET AND KILL IT WITH THE WORDS. LIKE A BLACK HAT WIZARD.  



[1] There is no such e-mail ever sent by Killercop. The only testimony was regarding Greenwoods webpage as well as in the beginning regarding McAfee and the statement ‘I have instructed Counsel … personal.”  This was never transmitted via e-mail, nor was it proven accused transmitted to website.

[3] There is no such provocative communication previously sent, by the defendant, ever.

[4] See Transcript of  11.21.2002, Page 10, Lines 17-20

[5] Intent changed from General Intent to Specific Intent. Further, Context was addressed in Motion to Restore Website to Original Context.. Denied by the Court.

[6] See judge’s comment to killercop about how he would ‘kick you in the shins and smack you upside the head,” if Killercop decided to represent himself.

 

ALEX KOZINSKI COMMITS AND COVERED UP CRIMES

THEY ALL IGNORED THEIR OATHS, THE FACTS, THE RULES THE LAW AND THE 5TH AND 6TH AMENDMENTS AND PROCEEDED FORWARD WITH A SELECTIVVE PERSECUTION IN A SECRET HEARING.

A COVER UP BY JUDGE ALEX KOZINSKI

POD SERVER

Sponsored By Psych Ward Entertainment.

TERMS OF USE

DISCLAIMER

PRIVACY POLICY

Copyright 1997-2022

THIS PREMIUM DOMAIN NAME IS FOR SALE.

EMAIL KILLERCOP

Killercop.com. All Rights Reserved.