 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
||
 |
|
|||||||
|
BOP ME ONCE THEN BOP ME AGAIN @ THE END OF THE GAME! [The Computer Expert, Not!]
Central District, California [Re]Public Defender William Harris: "This is a computer case where counsel for Killercop is like a child learning the scales and Killercop is playing Beethoven piano sonatas. It's like if he spoke -- if it was in Chinese and he spoke Chinese and I didn't." Even if present counsel is competent, a serious breakdown in communications can result in an inadequate defense. United States v. Musa, 220 F.3d 1096, 1102 (9th Cir. 2000) (cert. denied, Musa v. U.S., _______ U.S. _______, 121 S.Ct. 498 ( 2000)). Similarly, a defendant is denied his Sixth Amendment right to counsel when he is "forced into a trial with the assistance of a particular lawyer with whom he [is] dissatisfied, with whom he[will] not cooperate, and with whom he [will] not, in any manner whatsoever, communicate." Brown v. Craven, 424 F.2d 1166, 1169 (9th Cir. 1970).
Page 5, Lines 1-2 Killercop: "I will stand on my paperwork."
"In a [complex] computer case where you've got all sorts of computer evidence coupled with the problem that the client has technical expertise that the lawyer doesn't, it just compounds the issue."
"I don't mean to minimize what I think you're telling me because I'm in the same boat as you, but I construed you to tell me that you need some kind of tutelage about the niceties of computer technology and Internet usage..." ~Judge A. Howard Matz, in reply to Bill Harris.
ANYONE SEEN MY NICETIES? I HAD THEM BEFORE I ENTERED!! MAYBE THE GOBLIN ATE IT ALONG WITH THE CERTIFICATE REQUIRED BY THE LAW?
"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) REASONABLE DOUBT "Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. (c) 1995-2026 |
THE LAW OF 1 = 2
Judge Howard Matz: "You have one choice. Meaning, there are two things from which you can choose. It’s either Mr. Harris or yourself."
YOU TELL ME IF IT WAS THE MI$$ING EXPERT$ OR THE GOBLIN WHO STOLE THE CERTIFICATE REQUIRED BY THE LAW. DO NOT FAIL TO COMPLY!!! BOP ME ONCE THEN BOP ME TWICE. BIG BROTHER WAS WATCHING, BUT NOT HARD ENOUGH!! AND LORD MATZ DIDN'T GIVE A RATS ASS ABOUT DUE PROCESS OR WHAT GOT LOST. WHILE KILLERCOP WAS IMPRISONED, THESE FILES WERE LOST BY THE PUBLIC PRETENDER AFTER SOMEONE STOLE THEM ENROUTE, WITHIN THE B.O.P THEN THE LOCAL BOP ATTORNEY NAMED A. RODELL, WITHIN THE B.O.P, TRIED TO GET ME TO BREAK THE LAW BY ANTE-DATING A DOCUMENT. NUTS!!
WATCH AN ACT OF "AGONY," OVER, AND AFTER, THE FACT.
BUT THEY STILL IGNORED THE FACTS, THEN BROKE THE RULES, THE LAW, AND VIOLATED DUE PROCESS, INTER ALIA, WILLFULLY AND WITH "SPECIFIC" INTENT.
YOU LIKE AGONY???? YOU GONNA GET IT THEN, U.S. WHEN YOU LEAST EXPECT IT!
Page 22, Lines 3-6
Saavedra: "Excuse me, Your Honor, Killercop is correct. They did send him a 100-Megabyte ZIP. Now, stating that his are 250, he is correct. He won’t read it. Judge: "How long have you known that the Zip disk has not been useable by Killercop?" Saavedra: "When he told me that a couple of weeks ago. He didn’t even have a ZIP disk. And of the evidence that I was sent in to MDC, there was not one ZIP disk anywhere."
Accused: "That’s correct." Suspicion that viewpoint discrimination is afoot is at its zenith when the speech restricted is speech critical of the government," Ridley v. Mass. Bay Transp. Auth., 390 F.3d 65, 86 (1st Cir. 2004) FILE A COMPLAINT
TO PURCHASE KILLERCOP.COM™ CLICK HERE (c) 1995-2026 | |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
