 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
||
 |
|
|||||||
|
“There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.” -1984 ALL OF THEM WERE WILLFULLY INCOMPETENT, BUT ONE.
"THANK YOU SO MUCH. YOUR HONOR, GOVERNMENT COUNSEL TRACKS MY THINKING AS WELL. I WANT TO ASSURE THE COURT. WE AGONIZED OVER THIS. WE SPENT WELL OVER AN HOUR ON THE PHONE FRIDAY. SPOKE AGAIN ON SATURDAY... ANTICIPATING THAT YOUR HONOR MAY VERY WELL WANT SOME FEEDBACK ON THIS VERY POINT, SO WE'RE NOT TRYING TO PUT WORDS INTO THE COURT'S MOUTH BY ASKING YOU TO MAKE A FINDING [OF A FACT] THAT YOU DIDN'T MAKE; HOWEVER --"
ELENA J. DUARTE: "HAVING REVIEWED THAT, WE ACTUALLY ARE OF THE
'OPINION' -- AND I'LL TAKE AS MUCH 'RESPONSIBILITY' AS I NEED TO FOR
THIS -- THAT THE ORDER THAT WAS SUBMIITED AND SIGNED ON MARCH
20TH, IS A LIITLE BIT OF A "HYBRID," AND IT NEEDED TO BE CLARIFIED.
IN THAT, IF IT'S GOING TO BE A 4241(D) COMMITMENT, IT
APPEARS THAT THE COURT
"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.” ~JUDGE HOWARD MATZ
MY "THEN" CONDITION? HOW ABOUT WE STAY IN THE PRESENT? AS IN, THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE REQUIRES AN ACCUSED TO BE "PRESENT" AGAINST HIS ACCUSORS. AND SO DOES THE LAW. TRY READING IT. You don't even have to be there to be judged and examined and "found;" pardon the expression, incompetent." Wish they could have found a law book instead. Maybe then they would have read it. Or did they? I guess we shall have to "agonize" over whether they did or did not, and whether my presense was necessary, under the law, "probably." But then again, that's probably not good enough. NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET: MORE DENIAL OF A RIGHT TO BE INFORMED OF THE NATURE OF THE CRIME. 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 US 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
CORRUPTION EXPOSED IN THE SECRET TRIAL OF KILLERCOP.com.
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? (c)1997-2023 |
When justice is done, it is a joy to the righteous but agony to evildoers. "I WANT TO ASSURE THE COURT. WE AGONIZED OVER THIS. WE SPENT WELL OVER AN HOUR ON THE PHONE FRIDAY. SPOKE AGAIN ON SATURDAY..."
A SECRET FROM THE KEY OF THE KNOWLEDGE THE FOLLOWING UNLAWFUL HEARING TAKES PLACE ON 04.07.2003 IN A DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT.
Judge A. Howard Matz: "The defendant's personal presence is not necessary, given that he's currently represented by Mr. Nicolaysen."
Nicolaysen: "Thank you so much. Your honor, government counsel tracks my thinking as well. I want to assure the court. We agonized over this. We spent well over an hour on the phone Friday. Spoke again on Saturday anticipating that your honor may very well want some feedback on this very point, so we're not trying to put words into the court's mouth by asking you to make a finding [of a fact] that you didn't make; however --"
Doctor Phil Says: Anything Coming Out Of The Mouth After "However," Negates Everything Before That Word. Just Keeping It Real. FOR THE RECORD "People need not be present in the room, or even the same state, before they 'find them' incompetent" AND are "sent off" for a mental "treatment." MOREOVER, said treatment may begin at anytime, before the finding of a fact!" TITLE 18, U.S.C. § 4241-4247 "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). TITLE 18, U.S.C., § 241 If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;...
THE TWITTER
THEY ALL IGNORED THEIR OATHS, THE FACTS, THE RULES,THE LAWS, AND THE 5TH AND 6TH AMENDMENTS AND PROCEEDED FORWARD WITH A SELECTIVVE 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 support this website from being censored. TO DONATE JUST SCAN THE VENMO OR ZELLE QR CODE
CLICK HERE FOR ALL SALES OFFERS. (c)1997-2023
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
