 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||||||||
|
THE CASE OF AN INTENTIONAL, MATERIAL, VITAL "MISTATEMENT" OF A FACT.
KILLERCOP: I'm just asking, did you read those
reports, Your Honor? THE COURT: I looked at those reports. KILLERCOP: Did you note that in those reports
they were referring to "interstate threats," and there was also
the word "murder" in there? Did you see that, Your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes, I saw it.
KILLERCOP: Is it the Court's representation to
me that the local jurisdiction of the L.A.P.D. handles "interstate threats" alleging a murder, or the FBI?
THE COURT: Killercop, that's not an issue that I have to address and it's not a question I'm required to answer, so I decline to do so. " ~JUDGE MATZ, TRIAL OF KILLERCOP, 11.07.2003
He may not have had an obligation to answer that question, but his failure to answer this question turned him into a criminal, and committed Treason.
(Recess taken at 8:14 a.m. to 8:33 a.m.) (Jury in. ) THE COURT: The jury is in the box. Each person is in his or her respective seat. The witness is on the stand. F.B.I. AGENT JEFFREY CUGNO, GOVERNMENT'S WITNESS, PREVIOUSLY SWORN:
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY KILLERCOP: Did you learn on 12-28 that Killercop was in Mass,
based on the statement from Mrs. Greenwood that an e-mail--
THE WITNESS: I did.
BY KILLERCOP:
Q Did she indicate an e-mail that she was talking about?
Q Based on this e-mail from last week, the previous week?
BY KILLERCOP: Q Did Mrs. Greenwood tell you that an employee from the Denver office had sent a threatening e-mail to Killercop?
Q Can you tell me why your notes say, "An employee from the Denver office has sent a threatening e-mail to"... and then stops?
MS. DUARTE: Objection. It's irrelevant.
THE COURT: Sustained.
Q Did you white out that -- did you white it out in your
notes?
MS. DUARTE: Same objection, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained.
Q When you wrote this report, did you note that fact in here, that "An employee from the Denver office had sent a threatening e-mail to Killercop?
A I believe I did.
MS. DUARTE: Objection. Irrelevant, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained. BY KILLERCOP: A I don't believe I did. Q Now, you said you believed that you did write in this report that "An employee from the Denver office had sent a threatening e-mail to Killercop." Let's look at the report you typed up from Mrs. Greenwood. I'm going to direct your attention to this paragraph right here. One second, Your Honor. I'd like to direct your attention to this last paragraph -- the second to the last paragraph here. Do you see that paragraph where it starts at "however?"
A Yes, I do see that.
Q Did you write that?
A I did.
Q Does that reflect exactly what you just testified to and what's in your records here?
A I said I believed I had put that, but apparently I did not include that.
Q Isn't it a fact that you put, "Killercop threatened an employee in Denver?
A It looks like I wrote --
Q Did you type in here that "Global Crossing was able to locate killercop through an e-mail he sent -- 'he' being killercop -- "to an upset Global Crossing employee in the Denver office?
A That's what I wrote.
Q Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but your report that -- your handwritten note says, "An employee from the Denver officc sent a threatening e-mail to," and then it kind of stops there. It's missing.
But that's what you are talking about -- right? -- "An employee from the Denver office sent a threatening e-mail?
But the way you wrote it up here says, "Global Crossing was able to locate killercop through an e-mail 'he (meaning killercop) sent to an upset Global Crossing employee in the Denver office.' That's not exactly what's true, in your notes, is it?
A No. It appears I made a mistake.
Q That's a big mistake, isn't it?
A I made a mistake.
So the answer to the original question of, "when you wrote this report, did you note that fact in here, that "An employee from the Denver office had sent a threatening e-mail to Killercop?" would be No.
How nice to selectively ignore the words you choose to inforce. Twice.
"Well, Mr. Big Brother, F.B.I. man, let's try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well."
Page 1184, Lines 1-15 Jeff, aren't you taught to follow leads?
MS. DUARTE: Objection. Irrelevant.
JUDGE MATZ: Killercop, the [non] investigations culminated in circumstances that led us to this trial. Please focus on those circumstances. We are not here, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, because there is some claim that the FBI committed malpractice or negligence and it's important to understand whether they adhered to a reasonable standard of care. That is not what this case is about. And whether somebody thinks that the investigation could have been conducted differently or should have been conducted differently or had somebody else been in charge, would have been conducted differently, is totally irrelevant. Page 1197, Lines 2-6 Move on, Killercop. No sidebars, period. Zero, none. Move on. Page 1211, Lines 8-25 and Page 1212, Lines 1-14 No? How about a stupid one then? Definietly a mistake. A BIG mistake.
White supremacist group tied to attacks against [Hemet] police! Ahhhhh, who cares!
No State and Federal Investigation there, right? Just ask Chuck...
"Only one tribunal 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 U.S. 806 (1975) OUTSIDE IT'S AMERICA. When speech is compelled, additional damage is done. Individuals are coerced into betraying their convictions. Forcing free and independent individuals to endorse ideas they find objectionable is always demeaning. -Thomas Jefferson
REPORT A GANG MEMBER.
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? Still Baffled? Click image below for the answer to the question, "What is a person and what is the difference between a person and the person of another?"
(c)1997-2023 THIS SPACE FOR SALE |
When police get murdered, or even an allegation of a murder of a police officer is made, in America, the F.B.I. take tips and investigate. Or so you like to believe... would you belive they don't? It gets worse...
REWARD The FBI is offering a reward of up to $50,000 for information resulting in the identification and arrest of individual(s) responsible for the murder of Sergeant Reyka. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The vehicle is described as a late 1998 to
early 2000 Ford Crown Victoria or a 1995 to 2004 Mercury Grand
Marquis.
THE UNKNOWN SUSPECT(S) SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ARMED AND DANGEROUS. END OF EXAMPLE:
Now, when you couple a murder allegation to the F.B.I., by the police nonetheless, together with another allegation of the same suspect "selling weapons" (ITAR), then you can bet the F.B.I. will really take notice and investigate, right? Naaaaaaaa. It gets worse... MURDER AND THE ITAR DOCUMENT If that is not enough to get the Bureau of "Investigations" to investigate, how about on top of those we throw in another allegation of the same suspect doing Interstate Extortion, and, just for good measure, Interstate Threats all at the same time. Good Golly Miss Molly! That should get them to investigate, right?? Naaaaaaaa, according to Special Ken, an F.B.I accountant. He testified at my trial, in between making spiffy Power Point Presentations for his corporate masters, who have bought and paid for him.
So does anyone really believe this statement below, from F.B.I. Special Agent Kenneth G. McGuire, that the F.B.I. never opened an investigation into killercop.com back in 1998? Maybe he was too busy creating pretty Microsoft PowerPoint Presentations for the Corporation$ instead of conducting investigations? FYI: Sutcliffe's signature on there is a crime under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A. Are you guys now the Federal Bureau of Presentations (F.B.P.)?
JUDGE MATZ, IN THE VERY NEXT SECTION HELPED HIM COVER UP THESE HATE CRIMES. JUDGE MATZ, HELPED F.B.I. COVER UP THE COPS CRIMES AND THE FAILURE OF THE F.B.I. TO INVESTIGATE WHAT CLEARLY FALLS UNDER F.B.I. JURISDICTION.
WHY WOULD HE LIE TO A FEDERAL JUDGE AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ABOUT THIS, WHEN CLEARLY THERE WAS AN F.B.I. INVESTIGATION, AS SEEN AND NOTED ABOVE? ANSWER: BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THE F.B.I. WERE INVOLVED IN THE UNLAWFUL RAID OF THIS SITE IN 1998. AND BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO COVER UP WHAT THEY FOUND HERE AND HELP WITH THEIR SELECTIVE PROSECUTION. AND THE TORTURE. AND DEBBIE SURE DIDN'T CARE AND WHY WOULD JUDGE MATZ ALLOW DEBBIE'S ASSISTANT, ELENA DUARTE, TO LIE TO HIM? WHEN SPECIAL KEN FIRST LIED IN OPEN COURT THAT "THERE WAS ONLY A COUPLE OF LINES OF COMPUTER CODE RELATED TO THIS WEBSITE," ONLY TO BE CAUGHT AND BE MADE TO COUGH UP THE FILES, AND A LOT MORE WHICH YOU ARE NOW WITNESSING ABOVE? AND WHY DIDN'T MATZ CHARGE HIM WITH THE LIE?
MAYBE BECAUSE JUDGE MATZ DOESN'T FOLLOW THE LAW. NOBODY WAS FOLLOWING THE LAW BUT KILLERCOP.
IS THAT WHAT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT CALLS [EQUAL] PROTECTION AND [DUE] PROCESS UNDER THE LAW? HERE ARE THE PRE-TRIAL, TRIAL, AND APPEALS FILES AND OUR PERSONAL FAVORITE, THE SECRET HEARING. HOW WOULD YOU LIKE IT IF SOMEONE RAIDED YOUR FILES UNLAWFULLY? I KNOW YA'LL SAW THIS FILE, TOO
From - Sat Apr 11 19:57:39 1998 Return-Path: <jdarr@erols.com>Received: from smtp3.erols.com ([207.172.3.236]) by diane.netcbc.com(post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-14094) with ESMTP id AAA273 for <killercop@killercop.com>; Sat, 11 Apr 1998 16:23:31 -0700Message-ID: <352EC6BE.1DA3@erols.com> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 21:26:22 -0400From: John Darr > Reply-To: jdarr@erols.com To: killercop@killercop.com I still don't understand why people whine when the supreme race does the right thing and puts niggers in their place. Somalia was probably the best time of my life. Everyday we got to bust some niggers. Man, a .300 Win Mag opens there head up like a watermelon dropped on the sidewalk. Ah, but not long before we get to do the same thing here. But shoot straight nigger (yeah right) cause we don't miss. Hope ur enjoying ur collard greens and fried chicken, We have a secret too! You're corrupted. And racist 2 men accused of killing woman, while the F.B.I. were too busy making Power Point Presentations! Jackson said she sent the e-mails to the FBI agent who was investigating the deaths of Risken's two husbands, but never heard from him. "I'm pretty bitter about the FBI," she said. "They were handed, on a silver platter, information that someone was going to kill Sonia. All those e-mails sent to me were sent directly to the FBI, and not once was I contacted."
TWITTER (CENSORED 03.26.2023)
They all ignored their oaths, the facts, the rules, the laws, the 5th and 6th amendment and proceeded forward with a selective persecution in a secret hearing. "Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." -Elie Wiesel With the above in mind, could you please help and make a small donation. TO DONATE JUST SCAN THE VENMO OR ZELLE QR CODE BELOW.
MEDIA INQUIRES CLICK HERE. LEGAL INQUIRIES CLICK HERE. SALES INQUIRIES CLICK HERE. THIS SPACE FOR SALE |
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
