The Case of: "It would be totally against your interests."
pru·dent
/pro͞odnt/
adjective: prudent
acting with or showing care and thought for the future.
A prudent thing to do...for whom?
Darn good thing Judge A. Howard Matz didn't tell me it was provocative!! That would be overstating it. Probably. I mean, it's possible.
"The wise in heart shall be called prudent: and the sweetness of the lips increaseth learning." -Proverbs 16: 21
PROMPTLY ON THE RECORD WITH FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, A. HOWARD MATZ

SUMMER 2002
"For you to go to bat and take the case to trial or
even to pursue a plea, if that's what you were alluding to
before, with these lawyers is going to be totally against your
interest and against my duty to assure that you get effective
assistance of counsel." ~Howard Matz. Summer of 2002, pre-trial of Killercop.

"Indeed, it is the
duty of trial courts to protect an accused's right to counsel..." See Sandoval v. Calderon, 241 F.3d 765, 774 (9th
Cir. 2000)
08.22.2002
Page 20, Lines 16-19
Judge: “If you had said to me judge, I want to be my own lawyer, I would have spent a half hour explaining to you why that would be an absolutely mistaken decision on your part.”Page 20, Lines 24-25
Judge: “If you are not seeking to represent yourself you're making a wise decision”
Page 32, Lines 13-14
Judge: “What about you, Killercop?”
Killercop: “I’m just a cog in the wheel at this point.”
ENTER TOTALLY INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE IN A COMPLEX COMPUTER CASE.
WINTER 2002
"So that's one alternative. You get another lawyer.
But you get-that lawyer, and it could be a man or a woman, on
the basis and in the manner I just described. In principle, the
alternative to you having another lawyer derived from that method is
to represent yourself. I don't know whether that's
what you're seeking.
I really don't understand what you're seeking.
But if
that's what you're seeking, then I would do my best to bang you
on the head and kick you on the shins, and I'm speaking
figuratively, I don't mean that literally, talk you out-of-that, Because it would be totally against your interests." ~Howard Matz. Winter of 2002, pre-trial of Killercop.

Note: Matz Lost Me @ "I really don't understand...,"
A MISUNDERSTANDING?

08.27.2003
Page 62, Lines 14-17
Judge Matz: “Okay. Well, I’ve already told you, as you acknowledged earlier today, KILLERCOP, that any individual who chooses to proceed on his own was taking enormous risks and subjecting himself to a considerable disadvantage.”

THIS PAGE SPONSORED BY FARETTA AND THE JUDGES WHO FOLLOW IT.
"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?"

WHOIS
WSJ
2023 HIT LIST
TERMS OF USE
DISCLAIMER
PRIVACY POLICY
(c)1997-2023
THIS SPACE FOR SALE |
TRUE STORY

"So a prudent thing to do for somebody in your situation would be is I'll take my best shot at it. You can take your best shot at being your own lawyer, if you want, or you can be a lawyer." ~Judge A. Howard Matz. Sept. 26, 2003, right after having me committed for a mental treatment in his secret hearing.
Prudent to take my best shot? Okay! Don't duck!!
It is too bad he wasn't in the same mood to make me that offer when he FORCED a lawyer on me.
Matz likes secrets, a
more stupefyingly, cryptic euphemism I have yet to behold. Oh, I spoke too soon.
HMMMMMMM, SOUNDS TO ME LIKE HOWARD MATZ IS "PROVIDING LEGAL ADVICE"...AND ISN'T THAT AGAINST THE LAW? LET'S DOUBLE CHECK OUR FACTS, YEP.
BUT LET'S BE PRUDENT AND CHECK ONE MORE TIME...YUP, IT STILL IS. NO LEGAL ADVICE FROM THE BENCH ALLOWED. JUDGE MATZ CLEARLY NEVER READ THE LAW.
AND HE IS MOST LIKELY A CRIMINAL.
SCRATCH THAT, IS A CRIMINAL.
IS THAT CRAZY OR WHAT? "CAUSE I KNOW THEY ALL READ IT.
HECK, HE WROTE IT, TOO! SO NOW THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE FOR HIZZZ ODER IS WHY?

The law of unintended consequences is an adage or idiomatic warning that an intervention in a complex system always creates unanticipated and often undesirable outcomes.

NOT ONLY IS HOWARD MATZ INCOMPETENT, HE IS “@#$%^ RETARD HANDING OUT ILLEGAL SENTENCES. ASK FARETTA.

"If a wise man behaves prudently, how can he be overcome by his enemies? Even a single man, by right action, can overcome a host of foes." ~Saskya Pandita

FACT: KILLERCOP HAS 6500 ADDITIONAL FACTS YOU MIGHT WANT TO SEE TO UNDERSTAND, AS I PROVE MY CASE TO YOU THE PEOPLE, THAT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT LIED TO YOU, TOO.
BOLDLY LIED, AND WORSE, I MIGHT ADD.
NOW ASK THEM WTF WERE THEY THINKING??? BEFORE SOMEONE DIES.
08.27.2003

FRAUD ON THE COURT. LIE #1
08.27.2003:
Page 60, Lines 15-17
Judge: “Killercop, as the record amply demonstrates, has gone through four attorneys; he’s fought with all of them; he’s insisted on firing all of them. Page 62, Lines 14-17
01.14.2003

Page 14
Judge Matz: In principle, the alternative to you having another lawyer derived from that method is to represent yourself. I don’t know whether that’s what you’re seeking. I really don’t understand what you’re seeking. But if that’s what you’re seeking, then I would do my best to bang you on the head and kick you on the skins(sic), and I’m speaking figuratively, I don’t mean that literally, talk you out of that. Because it would be totally against your interests. Now you really need to tell me what you want as between those two alternatives. It’s no longer a question of you or Mr. Harris.”

Page 18
Judge: “You don’t think you have the ability to defend yourself against the United States of America, and you’re right about that. I agree with you 100 percent.” “It would be crazy to do it…”

Actually and factually KILLERCOP begged the court to not remove the original first attorneys at the September 23, 2002 hearing, page 18, Line 7-10.
September 23, 2002
“I would therefore request respectfully this court order the Public Defender’s Office to BE prepared to try the case on October 22 [2002] as so ordered and to deny any motion to be relieved.”

MOTION DENIED!!!!
A FRAUD UPON YOUR COURT, AMERICA

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.
NY TIMES HIT PIECE
FOX NEWS HIT PIECE
NBC NEWS HIT PIECE
MEDIA INQUIRES CLICK HERE.
LEGAL INQUIRIES CLICK HERE.
SALES INQUIRIES CLICK HERE.
FAQ 1 - FAQ 2 - CONTEXT.
THIS SPACE FOR SALE
All Rights Reserved. |
 |