FACIALLY LAWFUL SINCE 1998
email

EMAIL

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

FUNDA MENTAL

KILLERCOP'S " FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ARE GOING TO BE PROTECTED, BUT NOT ALL" ~Judge Alvin Howard Matz, from 09.26.2003 Case# 02-350(A) AHM, Page 61, Line 24

JUDGE MATZ:

JUDGE MATZ: "Ms. Potashner, if you have an intelligent, sophisticated, deliberately functioning individual who can incorporate those kinds of qualifying terms and disclaimers into anything that's posted."

 

JUDGE MATZ:

"And the mere fact that they are included and incorporated would be on its face sufficient to take away the potential and otherwise clear significance of the threats or the invitations or the means of communicating danger to other people or subjecting other people to invasions of their security and privacy. Then what would be the capacity of law enforcement and of the courts to prevent this kind of "conduct?" "

MS. POTASHNER: "Of course. The disclaimers in and of themselves does not make something that is dangerous not dangerous.

But I think the disclaimers... I don't think that a weapon could be created to shoot bees across a space, to train bees to go after a particular target. It's a ridiculous weapon. It's not a weapon that exists."

THEY WERE BOTH WRONG.

SEEK TRUTH

SAY WHAT?

03.06.2009

"This kind of conduct is actually far more devastating than assaulting a Prison officer." ~Judge Alvin Howard Matz

Source:

Gee, it appears that Judge Matz is really a caring kinda guy, right? Going on about how much he cares about another Citizen being assaulted...and how devastating on the Citizen it could be to them...well then how come he covered up, along with the F.B.I. and the D.O.J., this torture of a handcuffed prisoner by the police? How about the fact that he has and continues to judge American Citizens, giving out ""substantial" illegal sentences."" Why is he allowed to violate my fundamental rights under the Due Process clauses of the fifth, and sixth amendment. Why don't I see the National Guard walking him out of the Federal Courthouse, in cuffs, at the point of a bayonet?

 

 

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."

 

"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."


"It is clear and well established law that a judge must first determine whether the judge has both subject-matter and in personam jurisdiction before hearing and ruling in any case, and further must continue to monitor the case to be certain that jurisdiction was not lost, due to any violation of a Constitutional Right, fraud upon the court, appearance of partiality of any judge, or any act which deprives the court of jurisdiction, by any officer of the court, whether attorney or judge, during the proceedings. "

 

"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

MIND OF A TYRANT

"And in the year 2022 we're still trying to figure out if you've got a lawyer that's going to be okay for you the way you see it. That's not going to happen because at some point I have the power and "the obligation" to find that you have waived your right to have a lawyer represent you. And then you're going to trial on your own. But either way, you're going to trial!" ~Judge A Howard Matz, 01.14.2003 Pretrial of Killercop.

A.K.A. The Nature & Cause Of A Case.


MATZ LINE OF THE TRIAL-IN- NAME- ONLY: Transcript of 12.04.2002, 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.” ~Judge A. Howard Matz

Judge Matz

It's complex. Okay, it's not! Okay, it is complex, and now it is not complex. And that's a fact. Probably! Around this crazy judge, anything is possible. Except justice.

It's complex

A. Howard Matz (born 1943) is a criminal.

Under Article VI, clause 3, of the U.S. Constitution, every judge or government attorney takes an oath to support the U.S. Constitution.

 

Whenever any judge or government attorney violates the Constitution in the course of performing his/her duties, then that judge or government attorney is acting without lawful authority, has defrauded not only the Defendant or the Plaintiff involved, but has also defrauded the government.

 

The judge or the government attorney is paid to support the U.S. Constitution. By not supporting the Constitution, the judge or the government attorney is collecting monies for work not performed. It is not a judicial function to attack the U.S. Constitution.

It is not a judicial function to issue a void order, an order issued without jurisdiction. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a judge who acts without jurisdiction, is engaged in treason.

It is not a judicial function to engage in a crime, especially a crime against the U.S. Government.

A judge may not engage in any act in violating a person's First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment Rights. When such an act occurs, the judge is deprived of total jurisdiction and his actions are not that of a judge, but are those taken in his personal capacity.

The law clearly and unequivocally states that all Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. The law clearly and unequivocally further states that no presumption of jurisdiction attaches automatically to any court of limited jurisdiction, but that the determination of jurisdiction of a court of limited jurisdiction must be affirmatively found within the record of the case that is before the court. 

In a Federal court hearing an appeal, it is the duty of the judges to be certain of their jurisdiction. They have a legal duty to inspect the record of the District trial court, sua sponte, to determine whether the District trial court held jurisdiction at all times, if a Constitutional Right was violated, and/or if any officer of the court, whether judge or attorney, engaged in a "fraud upon the court".

The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that a judge violates the U.S. Constitution whenever the judge issues an order without jurisdiction. The judge has committed a fraud upon the court and upon the Constitution.

He has sat on the United States District Court for the Central District of California since 1998.

Birth Place :Brooklyn, New York Date Of Birth, 1943

A. Howard Matz Photo Collection

Matz, A Howard reference * Short Description * United States federal judge

Comment * A. Howard Matz (born 1943) is an American lawyer and judge. He has sat on the United States District Court for the Central District of California since 1998.

Label * Howard Matz

Howard Matz

Category: Judges of the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Category: United States district court judges appointed by Bill Clinton

Category: 1943 births * Category: Living people

Given name Alvin Howard

Name * A. Howard Matz, A Howard Matz

Matz, A. Howard

Born 1943 in Brooklyn, NY

Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U. S. District Court, Central District of California Nominated by William J. Clinton on October 20, 1997, to a seat vacated by Harry L. Hupp; Confirmed by the Senate on June 26, 1998, and received commission on June 29, 1998.

Education:
Columbia University, A.B., 1965
Harvard Law School, J.D., 1968

Professional Career:
Law clerk, Hon. Morris E. Lasker, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, 1969-1970
Private practice, New York City, 1970-1972
Private practice, Los Angeles, CA, 1972-1974
Assistant U.S. attorney, Central District of California, 1974-1978
Chief, Special Prosecutions Unit, 1977-1978
Private practice, Los Angeles, CA, 1979-1998

 

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.