Hall of Shame

I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
of The UNITED STATES of AMERICA

HALL OF SHAME

A minority of 1 Speaking TRUTH is more powerful than Millions striving to conceal IT  (paraphrase Gandhi)

Thomas Jefferson warned of the threat to our Republic which threat remains ever present from a rogue, corrupt judiciary.  Jefferson also stated:
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the Blood of Patriots and Tyrants.” 

The blood of “judicial” Tyrants Mark Ciavarella and Michael T. Conahan, former Luzerne County, PA,  judges is scant “refreshment” when compared with the blood shed by oppressed victim patriots due to the iniquities inflicted upon them from the bench. This Hall of Shame lists other Tyrants for whom I shall not weep should their future sentences permit them to join Ciavarella and Conahan where they exchange their black robes for prison garb.

In the Beginning there was Justice, the product of an Honest application of Law with Truth. The search for truth is the unending task of the judicial system for without Truth there can be No Justice.

“INJUSTICE anywhere is a THREAT to JUSTICE everywhere.” — MLK, Jr.

 A court of law has three tasks / Duties:
ONE: to search for TRUTH.
TWO: to apply the Truth (evidence) to the law to obtain a JUST
decision.
THREE: to serve the People in conformance with the terms of their fiduciary responsibilities under the Public Trust with fidelity and integrity.

From Truth Tables, Philosophy 101:
If the hypothesis is TRUE: Then JUSTICE may be found.     

Where the hypothesis is FALSE [UNTRUE]:
Then INJUSTICE Must Prevail. 

“Our adversary system depends on a most jealous safeguarding of truth and candor,” Jones v. Clinton, 36 F.Supp.2d 1118 (E.D. Ark. 1999) citing U.S. v. Shaffer Equip., 11 F.3d 450 (4th Cir. 1993).  

“A single lie destroys a whole reputation of integrity.” Baltaszar Gracian. 

We the People have a right to presume that in all judicial proceedings the court will search for TRUTH, and will not distort or alter facts presented to the court. A court that “manages” admissibility of evidence neglects its duty to search for TRUTH. A court that alters the record to remove admissible evidence CONCEALS TRUTH and commits “conflict of interest CRIMES” against We the People. Justice is unattainable without TRUTH. 

“Public officials, officers of government bodies politic, in all branches/ departments, executive, legislative, or judicial, being of oath of office, bonded to fidelity, are under ministerial duty.” Supervisors v. United States ex rel, 71 U.S. 435, 4 Wall 435, U.S.  v. Thomas, 15 Wall 337, U.S.  v. Lee, 106 US 196, 1 S.Ct. 240.
“The implication of a trust is the implication of every duty proper to a trust  … . Whoever is a fiduciary or in conscience chargeable as a fiduciary is expected to live up to them.”  Buffum v. Peter Barceloux Co.,  289 US 227, 237; 77 L.Ed. 1140, 1146, cited Braun v. Hansen, 103 F.2d 685 (1939), wherein it further states “being fiduciaries, the ordinary rules of evidence are reversed”, must obey the law,  Butz v. Economou,  438 US 478, 98 S.Ct. 2895, Davis v. Passman,  (1979, US) 442 US 226, 99 S.Ct. 2264.

 


The only reasonable conclusion for a court to conceal Truth must be that TRUTH interferes with the “pre-determined outcome.”
These courts have become as “venal and oppressive” as the government from which this country divorced ourselves in 1776. 

“The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body – working
like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the
checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.” – Thomas Jefferson, 1821

These Pennsylvania courts are corrupt! … and ONLY capable of dispensing INJUSTICE.  

Intentional misapplication of law must qualify as a “corrupt act or practice” for which a judge is subject to discipline, including impeachment / removal from office. See MISSION: Title 11 PACODE 11.8-806.
CORRUPTION: An act done with an intent to give some advantage inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others. The act of an official or fiduciary person who unlawfully and wrongfully uses his station or character to procure some benefit for himself or for another person, contrary to duty and the rights of others.  Black’s Law Dictionary.

This HALL OF SHAME nominates Public Officers who, like vermin, war with the Constitution and commit Crimes against WE the PEOPLE including  JUDICIAL ATROCITIES  and criminal acts “under Color of Law”.
Members of the supporting cast receive recognition as “Honorable Mention”.

We the People must exercise our right under Article I, Section 2, Constitution of Pennsylvania to change our Government in order to provide protections against future atrocious and despicable conduct from within a Government that steals our Property, our Freedom and our fundamental rights supposedly secured under this Constitution and the U.S. Constitution.

Public office is a position of TRUST and INTEGRITY. Office holders must be held to the highest standards of Honesty, Integrity and personal character in the performance of their duties as well as in their private lives. Each “nominee” to this “Hall of Shame” is required under their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitutions of the United States and Pennsylvania as a condition precedent to performing the duties of their office.

“Any person refusing to take the oath or affirmation shall forfeit that office.” Pa.Const., Article VI, section 3.

Is there any reason why this penalty, to “forfeit their office”, should not be enforced against prosecutors and judges  who knowingly and intentionally violate their Oath of Office with absolute disregard of their fiduciary responsibility to We the People?

Public officials, officers of government bodies politic, in all branches/departments, executive, legislative, or judicial, being of oath of office, bonded to fidelity, are under ministerial duty.   Supervisors v. United States ex rel, 71 U.S. 435, 4 Wall 435, U.S. v. Thomas, 15 Wall 337, U.S. v. Lee, 106 US 196, 1 S.Ct. 240.
“The implication of a trust is the implication of every duty proper to a trust  … . Whoever is a fiduciary or in conscience chargeable as a fiduciary is expected to live up to them.”  Buffum v. Peter Barceloux Co.,  289 US 227, 237; 77 L.Ed. 1140, 1146, cited Braun v. Hansen, 103 F.2d 685 (1939), wherein it further states “being fiduciaries, the ordinary rules of evidence are reversed”, must obey the law,  Butz v. Economou,  438 US 478, 98 S.Ct. 2895, Davis v. Passman,  (1979, US) 442 US 226, 99 S.Ct. 2264.

Every elected official [fiduciary] or officer subject to removal may be impeached, suspended or removed from office in the event of mental incapacity, incompetence, neglect of duty, malfeasance, mismanagement or for any corrupt act or practice. 
Title 11 PACODE   Sec. 11.8-806
. Grounds for Removal;  Impeachment.

Our Constitution and Laws provide for ‘removal from office’ of public officers whose conduct includes “corrupt acts or practices”. Knowing and intentional ‘Dishonesty‘ or ‘Neglect of Duty‘ by a public officer in the performance of his/her duty is a “corrupt act or practice” and breach of Trust. We the People must demand that all public officers found guilty of “corrupt acts or practices” be removed from office.

Under this premise, this site exposes despicable acts by persons in whom the public places their TRUST, i.e., Distributors of Injustice, and also those public officers who provide a “safe harbor” for the perpetrators.  The Administrator contends that “intentional” violations of their fiduciary duty under the Public Trust is, in and of itself, grounds for removal from office.

Nominees to this Hall of Shame are persons who, in the performance of their DUTY either perpetrated a vast assortment of ‘conscious and knowing’ despicable acts, or by intentional failure to act, provided safe harbor to the perpetrators. Nominees may include judges, prosecutors, appellate court judges, political figures, custody or domestic relations officers, or other officers of the court who commit acts of moral turpitude that violate Laws, their oath of office, the Constitution and that deprive  citizens of their fundamental rights via a breach of Trust.

Nominees to this Hall of Shame commit:

Crimes AgainstWe The People”.

Most of these crimes violate civil and constitutional rights of litigants. The crimes are acts of “thuggery”; i.e., perpetrated by thugs.*
* Thug.  noun  …  A tough and violent man, esp a criminal, cruel or vicious ruffian, robber, or murderer. One of a former group of professional robbers and murderers in India who typically strangled their victims.
… from Hindi thag thief, from Sanskrit sthaga scoundrel, from sthagati to conceal ..

Ad hominem attacks on the character and integrity of individuals nominated to this Hall of Shame are necessary to raise public outrage over corrupt practices within Pennsylvania’s “judicial” system. The injustice dispensed by these individuals is very personal to the victims of crimes committed “under color of law” by the government.

Let the punishment fit the crime.

Can there be any disagreement that the integrity of the courtroom is paramount? Any judicial or pseudo-judicial acts that undermine the integrity of the courtroom and court records are DESPICABLE.

“The operations of the courts and the judicial conduct of judges are matters of utmost public concern. LANDMARK Communications v. Virginia, 98 S. Ct. 1535, 435 U.S. 829.

“Our adversary system depends on a most jealous safeguarding of truth and candor,” Jones v. Clinton, 36 F.2d 1118 (E.D.Ark. 1999) citing United States v. Shaffer Equip. Co., 11 F.3d 450, 463 (4th Cir. 1993).

Alteration of court records, in whatever form, undermines the integrity of the courtroom. These acts are both criminal and despicable; the manifestation of INJUSTICE, CORRUPTION and ARROGANCE. See 18 Pa.C.S 4911.

All persons involved in the criminal act of altering court records or covering up the criminal misconduct must be held accountable because those criminal acts undermine the integrity of the judicial process and protection of We the People against the tyranny of a corrupt and despotic government.

Criminal alteration of audio records of court hearings were reported to judges William E. Ford, Edward D. Reibman and Alan M. Black in Lehigh County, PA and also to District Attorney James B. Martin among others. Reporting these crimes conforms with Rules of Professional Conduct, 8.3. Instead of demanding a thorough investigation into the charges, the Office of DA and the judges embarked on a mission to stonewall the investigation and to discredit the whistleblower. The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (“AOPC“) was instrumental in the deprivation of defendant’s rights.  Asst. DA Douglas Reichley appears to be the only person involved who made any effort to search for truth. 

DA James Martin, Judges Ford and Reibman and Licia Ano, Ford’s law clerk were properly served with a subpoena by this Administrator to testify before the Disciplinary Board Hearing. All four were “excused” from obeying their subpeona. They were excused from appearing and testifying contrary to settled law for their “duty” to honor subpoenas and in violation of the U.S. Constitution, Amendment VI rights of the defendant, the party who issued the subpoenas.
NOTE: Licia Ano (an attorney) was identified as a person who unlawfully had custody of an audio tape in question prior to being transcribed into “the “record”. 

… the law gives “[judges] as persons, or courts as institutions . . . no greater immunity from criticism than other persons or institutions”.” BRIDGES v. California, 314 U.S. 252, 289 (1941) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting).

Illicit and despicable actions of judges undermine the protections of the Public secured by the Constitutions of the United States and this Commonwealth and are the manifestation of INJUSTICE and CORRUPTION. Qualified immunity afforded to judges and other court officers is forfeited whenever criminal misconduct can be shown. Bridges, supra.

There is sufficient [prima facie] evidence to support the argument that these despicable acts are organized crimes by the judicial branch of government against “We the People”.

Persons listed in this Hall of Shame have shown their disdain and disrespect for the TRUST of the public and are therefore UNFIT to hold public office. Nominees include court officers and public figures or others acting under color of law who aid and abet MISCONDUCT in our courts, some by their INACTION and failure to perform the DUTIES OF OFFICE WITH FIDELITY, others by ACTION which may include assisting in a COVER-UP of judicial atrocities which include criminal misconduct.

The question may arise  “Which is more despicable  —  the perpetrator of a despicable act? or the public officer who knowingly provides safe harbor for that perpetrator?”

Is it too inflammatory to label each of these public officers as “loathsome vermin”?

Inflammatory language is necessary to convey public outrage against the egregious disrespect for the rights of We the People. Decorum and Civility are dispatched in favor of “plain language”. Nominees to this Hall of Shame deserve to be publicly exposed and humiliated for their arrogant, despotic and tyrannical conduct.
Identification of corrupt public officers is not “name-calling”, it is simply a 
statement of fact per their conduct, engaging in corrupt practices while serving in office. 

Remedies under the Constitution of Pennsylvania must include removal from OFFICE and from the public payroll, including forfeiture of retirement benefits. Where criminal acts are discovered, prosecution must be demanded.   

A widely held belief is that there is but ONE GOD who resides in Heaven. This belief is being seriously challenged by those who Act [or think] as if there are Gods among us on Earth — “a judge in his courtroom”.

Judges who impersonate God must be removed from office.

 Nominees wishing to express discontent or disagreement with the materials published in these pages may respond under terms as specified in MISSION: Declaration of Truth. Failure to respond within 30 days constitutes acquiescence to the TRUTH of all statements as published.

“Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or when
an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading.” 
U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F.2d. 297.

All responses must be sent to ” PA Court Injustice, c/o Eugene Wrona,
2040 Virginia Street, Allentown,  PA  18103″
.

  <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

List of Nominees.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *