 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
||
 |
|
|||||||
|
Although a defendant may choose to allocate his defense to an attorney, "to thrust/force counsel upon the accused, against his considered wish ... violates the logic of the [6th]Amendment." Court directed activity by the attorney such as calling the judge's attention to matters,-could constitute an even more serious infringement of the right.
" "I notice for example, Your Honor expanded the options, not just psychiatric but psychological. "Presently?" AS IN NOW, NOT THEN.
" At any time after the commencement of a prosecution for an offense and prior to the sentencing of the defendant, . . . the defendant or the attorney for the Government may file a motion for a hearing to determine the mental competency. The court shall grant the motion, or shall order such a hearing on its own motion, if there is reasonable cause to believe that the defendant may "presently" be suffering from a mental disease or defect rendering him mentally incompetent to the extent that he is unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist properly in his defense. 18 U.S.C. § 4241(a)." “There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.” -1984 A.K.A. Its hard to dispell ignorance if you retain arrogance.
Evidence Relevant to Determining Competency. The court’s determination of competency is a 'factual,' rather than legal, determination. United States v. Makovich, 209 F.3d 1227, 1232 (10th Cir. 2000). Martin v. Settle, 192 F.Supp. 156, 159 (W.D. Mo. 1961) (competency hearing may not be conducted in absence of the defendant and doing so deprives the defendant of due process of law). A. Upon a judicial determination of reasonable cause to believe the defendant is incompetent, the court may order a 30 day in-patient examination under 18 U.S.C. §4241(b) and 18 U.S.C. §4247(b). The court cannot begin with a four month commitment under §4241(d) without this intermediary step. U.S. v. White, 887 F.2d 705, 710 (6th Cir. 1989). Clearly A. Howard Matz and company can an did. Clearly all it took was for them to deny the assistance of counsel... for 9 long months. He also ensured loss of discovery experts and reports to prove innocence. "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 |
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. -John 8:44
Judge A. Howard Matz: “I already did but I will repeat them. You were not there.”
“Integrity is what you do when no one is looking.” – Unknown
"May I inquire of Your Honor whether or not the court is planning to make any "factual findings" in regard to the reasonable cause standard" under the statute since there are no findings that have been submitted by the government?" -JANUARY 17, 2003
Watch for the ol' "inherent legal defect" in the ILLEGAL AND UNLAWFUL order. THE FOLLOWING TOOK PLACE ON APRIL 7th, 2003, BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 11:30 AND 12:30 A.M., IN A U.S. DISTRICT FEDERAL COURT-HOUSE. AMERICA.
"AND IT WAS A PETITION FOR REHEARING. THE COURT'S ALREADY BEEN AFFIRMED ON THE ORDER; AND I SKIMMED IT.
AND THE GROUNDS FOR THE PETITION FOR REHEARING WERE THE LACK OF THIS FINDING [OF A FACT] THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING. "IT'S PURELY A COINCEDENCE;" AND IT CAME UP AFTER HE AND I NOTICED IT, DISCUSSED IT, AND CAME UP WITH --"
HOWARD MATZ: "HE, MEANING, MR. NICOLAYSEN?" MS. DUARTE: "MR. NICOLAYSEN AND I NOTICED IT AND DISCUSSED IT. BUT THE 9TH CIRCUIT HAS NOT ORDERED ANY ACTIONS. FRANKLY, I DON'T EXPECT THEM TO."
THE COURT: YES. I SAW THAT. WELL, I WANT IT TO BE SENT BOTH TO THE WARDEN WITH SPECIFIC -- "IT" BEING THE TRANSCRIPT WITH SPECIFIC DIRECTTIONS THAT IT BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THOSE RESPONSIBLE, NOT ONLY FOR KILLERCOP'S TREATMENT -- DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT, BUT ALSO TO THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS CUSTODY; SO THAT IF HE, FOR SOME REASON, RESPONDS TO THIS, THEY'LL, AT LEAST, BE AWARE OF WHAT MAY HAVE BEEN IN HIS MIND. I KNOW THE LAW SAYS "PRESENTLY" BUT HEY, MY BUDDY IS ALEX KOZINSKI, AND HE TOLD ME TO NOT WORRY ABOUT BEING SUED. HE IS A GOD.
"BUT JUST IN CASE, I ALSO WANT IT TO BE SENT BY MR. NICOLAYSEN DIRECTLY TO KILLERCOP."
MR. NICOLAYSEN: "I WILL DO SO, YOUR HONOR, AS I DID THE MARCH 14TH TRANSCRIPT."
THE COURT: "AND PROMPTLY SO, AT DEVINS, PLEASE."
NICOLAYSEN:"I WILL DO THAT." NOTE: NICOLAYSEN WAITED 2 MONTHS. The word "Hybrid," from this point on in the rest of this true story, below, is now changed to reflect it's 'true' meaning and nature: "Hybrid = Illegal and Unlawful" “It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.” George Orwell 1984
DUARTE: “That’s where we all ended up with this ILLEGAL AND UNLAWFUL kind of order,...” Page 7, Lines 22-25 Page 8, Lines 12-14
Page 10, Lines 14-24 Matz: “Ok. Well, here are my findings. I think that, particularly, in light of what happened at the hearing, aside from the fact that I kicked killercop out of it (Chuckles softly), and the language in Dr. Backer’s supplemental report, there is a sufficient basis to find that Killercop is already afflicted with a disease or a defect that makes him incompetent for purposes of standing trial. The reason I didn't want to make that finding and declined to make that finding was primarily because I didn't want to inflame him; not because I had any doubts about applying the applicable standards to what I perceived to be his 'then' condition.”
"If there is reasonable cause to believe that the defendant may "presently" be suffering from a mental disease or defect rendering him mentally incompetent" ~18 U.S.C. § 4241(a)." So much for the word "presently."
Allow me to clarify and update y'all on my, "Then Condition." Federal prosecutors apply conspiracy to a variety of situations, making it one of the most commonly charged Federal crimes. Section II of this article outlines the basic elements of a conspiracy offense under section 371, namely, agreement; illegal goal; knowledge, intent, and participation; and overt act.
As in then I had rights, then they were removed, violated and then gone! Read the law. A) Judge Matz couldn't have "enflamed" me, since he "removed" me;" as did his handpicked attorney he forced on me, from the previous illegal competency hearing, before sending me off for "treatment," later to hold the secret "status conference" to try to get it right. With no contact. Or assistance of counsel. Deaf, dumb and blind. So Matz, and his gang, had this secret "status conference," to try and cover up this "hybrid," thing that they had concocted, out of the air, which I knew nothing about after "being removed," for objecting to the proceedings as of the kangaroo kind. B) They got away with it by not notifying me, or the warden, until months later. I know, 'cause our reports arrived the same time, months later. How y'all like that due process entitlement? Sure ain't a right anymore, unless you can see more then I do. Wonder what happened to it? I digress.
THEY ALL IGNORED THEIR OATHS, THE FACTS, THE RULES THE LAW AND THE 5TH AND 6TH AMENDMENT AND PROCEEDED FORWARD WITH THE SELECTIVVE PERSECUTION.
While at the mental treatment hospital, clear across the country, near Boston, to get my "daily dose of ordered mental treatment," I met a man named Dr. Thomas P. Patenaude, once. It was to be our only meeting of the minds. Later I would meet the Warden, once, too, and inform him of the secret hearing; that is, once Greg finally sent me a copy of the secret hearing, but only months later, and only after pressuring me to "take a deal, or they can hold you there forever!." To which I replied, "Byte Me!" Actually, I believe I yelled it at him . After I told the Warden what had happened those past months since the unlawful hearing, coupled with me in his office yelling, and going on about how his Doctor had not spoken to me but once, off I went, back to California!
So the Warden sent me back to California, forthwith, after knowledge of the secret unlawful hearing, like as in the next day, after I showed him the transcript of the secret hearing. 18 USC 4241(e) Discharge.— When the director of the facility in which a defendant is hospitalized pursuant to subsection (d) determines that the defendant has recovered to such an extent that he is able to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him and to assist properly in his defense, he shall promptly file a certificate to that effect with the clerk of the court that ordered the commitment. The clerk shall send a copy of the certificate to the defendant’s counsel and to the attorney for the Government. The court shall [then] hold a hearing, conducted pursuant to the provisions of section 4247 (d), to determine the competency of the defendant.
At he next "hearing," Dr. Who claimed he then cured me!! It was like, magic. A regular miracle. Hence, no certificate required by the law coming from the court of judge A. Howard Matz, Warden, prosecutor and the attorney she conspired with, and Matz forced on me, Greg. Why? They certainly were not about to compound it by filing a false certification that I was or wasn't now still "competent," when they all knew that to be false. (See Dr. Who, below) Oh the irony. Oh the shame. I should say sham. If they followed the law and produced the certificate, under the law, they would be lying. There could never be a certified paper of my miraculous recovery from my "treatment," especially from a Dr. Who! Just like they all knew the facts of the law, and they chose to break the rule and letter. But wait, there is more... See once you become a criminal, you have to continue being one...they won't let you out. The trial must go on!! Law and rules be damned!! A real "bank up job." And that's a fact. Ask any expert. Or even a God?
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 |
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
