The Crimes


Links: Fraud on the Court; Ex Parte Hearings (coming soon); Per Curiam Orders; Tampering w / Official Records; Kids For Cash

This Page will be a continuing Work in Progress!

“It is a fair characterization of the lawyer’s responsibility in our society that he stands “as a shield,” …, in defense of right and to ward off wrong. From a profession charged with such responsibilities there must be exacted those qualities otruth-speaking, of a high sense of honor, of granite discretion, of the strictest observance of fiduciary responsibility, that have, throughout the centuries, been compendiously described as “moral character”.” Schware v. Board  of Examiners, 353 U.S. 238, 239.

SCOTUS, in Schware, states with unequivocal candor what Congress codified in 18 U.S.C. § 1346, that Americans have an “intangible right to honest services” from government agents, especially those agents acting “under color of law” as judges and prosecutors in American courts. It cannot be argued that deprivation of this intangible right is not a “crime”. The statute is located under Title 18.
18 USC  § 1346. Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud”
For the purposes of this chapter, the term “scheme or artifice to defraud” includes a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.


Today our Nation is confronted by a government that has become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we declared our independence more than 240 years ago. 

Before naming anyone, especially judges, as “criminals”, it is imperative that we define “criminal” and establish a Crime or Crimes under which these perpetrators may be charged and prosecuted. Title 18 of the U.S. Code and Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes are known as the “CRIMES CODE” for federal and state crimes. Judges and prosecutors are Held to a standard of performance and excellence under Title 5 USC §  2635. 101,  and  Schware, supra.

USC Title V  —  Government Organization and Employees

Federal Law defines mandatory conduct of Public Servants as follows: 

  • 2635.101 Basic obligation of public service.

(a) Public service is a public trust.Each employee has a responsibility to the United States Government and its citizens to place loyalty to the Constitution, laws and ethical principles above private gain. To ensure that every citizen can have complete confidence in the integrity of the Federal Government, each employee shall respect and adhere to the principles of ethical conduct set forth in this section, as well as the implementing standards contained in this part and in supplemental agency regulations.

(b) General principles.The following general principles apply to every employee and may form the basis for the standards contained in this part. Where a situation is not covered by the standards set forth in this part, employees shall apply the principles set forth in this section in determining whether their conduct is proper.

(1) Public service is a public trust, requiring employees to place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws and ethical principles above private gain.

(b) (2) through (14) may be reviewed via the Link to Public Service

(c) Related statutes. In addition to the standards of ethical conduct set forth in this part, there are conflict of interest statutes that prohibit certain conduct. Criminal conflict of interest statutes of general applicability to all employees, 18 U.S.C. 201, 203, 205, 208, and 209, are summarized in the appropriate subparts of this part and must be taken into consideration in determining whether conduct is proper. Citations to other generally applicable statutes relating to employee conduct are set forth in subpart I and employees are further cautioned that there may be additional statutory and regulatory restrictions applicable to them generally or as employees of their specific agencies. Because an employee is considered to be on notice of the requirements of any statute, an employee should not rely upon any description or synopsis of a statutory restriction, but should refer to the statute itself and obtain the advice of an agency ethics official as needed.

Title 18 USC  § 1346, above defines the ‘crime’ of depriving litigants  [and all citizens] of their “intangible right to honest services” from all agents acting under color of law on behalf of the government. Using one’s office to deprive litigants of their Constitutional rights is a Crime under 18 USC  §§ 241 & 242. A list of other crimes appears below. It is imperative to define “criminal”.


When does a person become a criminal?
Is it when a jury convicts him of a crime? Or when the crime is perpetrated?

Take the case where a man rapes an 8 years-old girl. He is known as a pedophile, a criminal. Should the term “criminal” apply when he has been caught? or when he is convicted?

Let’s ask the 8 years-old girl. The same philosophy must apply to all crimes.
For the purposes of this web site, a “criminal” is any person who commits a crime against the People where the crime is defined by statute, state or federal.  
When a prosecutor brings knowingly false criminal charges against a person, a crime is committed. When a judge knowingly permits those false criminal charges to be prosecuted, the judge becomes an accomplice/ accessory to the crime, which is also a crime. Many, if not Most false prosecutions emerge in “retaliation” for efforts to expose criminal misconduct in government. 

Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250 (2006), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the pleading standard for retaliatory prosecution claims against government officials. Following a successful lobbying attempt by the CEO of a manufacturing company against competing devices that the United States Postal Service supported, the CEO found himself the target of an investigation by U.S. postal inspectors and a criminal prosecution, which was dismissed for lack of evidence. The CEO then filed suit against the inspectors and other government officials for seeking to prosecute him in retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights to criticize postal policy. The Court ruled, 5-2, that in order to prove that the prosecution was caused by a retaliatory motive, the plaintiff bringing such a claim must allege and prove that the criminal charges were brought without probable cause.

Neither the prosecutor nor the judge made any effort to defend “right” or to ward off wrong. When false criminal charges are brought, the prosecutor commits “fraud on the court”; egregious conduct that undermines the integrity of the judicial process.
Stone v. Stone, Alaska, 647 P.2d 582, 586.
Fraud on the court requires making false statements to the court (or by the court) which constitutes the “crime” of perjury. 

Both the prosecutor and the judge are “criminals”.
Never indicted, but criminals none-the-less!  See Readers Comment.

Judges, prosecutors and other court and law enforcement officers are required to provide “honest services” to the public at all times. All court officers must swear or affirm an Oath of Office  to perform the duties of their office “with fidelity”. Every judge named in this HALL of SHAME has violated his/her Oath of Office and has criminally denied We the People of our “intangible right to honest services”; a breach of trust. Ergo, each (every)  judge IS a CRIMINAL.
Notice. A person becomes a criminal  at the instant he/she perpetrates a crime.

“Conviction” only identifies the crime(s) they were convicted of … many “criminals” are never convicted because they have an insurance policy against being indicted. For judges et al, it is called “immunity”. Public office holders are rarely indicted or prosecuted. They remain, nonetheless, “Criminals”.

Over the past decades, courts (judges) have developed “tools” under which they knowingly and intentionally deprive litigants of honest and fair ‘judicial’ proceedings in a “court of LAW”.
These tools may be recognized under the following titles: Non-Entertaining Order; Per Curiam Order; Non-Appealable Order; administrative subpoena; warrantless subpoena; etc.
Another “tool” is the criminal alteration of the record. 18 Pa.C.S. § 4911 (Tampering with public records and information) is a crime. Editing / alteration of the audio / transcribed records of court hearings is one of the crimes frequently committed, but never investigated. See federal Code 18 USC  § 1519.
Judges control the court and therefore they control the record, influencing the outcome by limiting the admissibility of relevant evidence. Rules of Evidence are mismanaged [“corruption”] to favor one party over the other.  Judges also knowingly and intentionally misrepresent the “law” in their “Opinions” and/or jury instructions. When this occurs, the judge perpetrates a “fraud on the court”, a Crime under 18 USC  § 1346 that deprives litigants of their “intangible right to honest services”; incontrovertible evidence of “corruption“. 

This site refers to these judges as Domestic Terrorists! The site examines several instances that expose corruption in American courts, and offers those court officers an “Opportunity to Cure”! Specific guidelines are published regarding the level of performance for certain public servants. These are Rules known as the Uniform Bonding Code (“UBC“). All public officers must be bonded for the protection of We the People against corrupt government and rogue public servants.

The SCOTUS holding in Schware establishes the parameters for standards of ethics and morality under which courts (judges and prosecutors)  are required to perform the duties of their office “with fidelity”. The UBC provides specific duties demanded of court officers.

The term “fiduciary responsibility” is a legal term more fully defined on the pages of CONSTITUTION / The Contract.
“Trustees”, those persons responsible to exercise / administer /  execute a trust in behalf of ‘beneficiaries’, have a fiduciary responsibility to perform said DUTIES. Our Constitution establishes a “Contract” between the
government and the governed. Any person acting “under color of law” as an agent for the government is, a priori, a “trustee”.
Too many judges and justices, DA’s, prosecutors and other officers of the court disregard their Oath of Office in the performance of their DUTY to serve “We the People” as trustees under the Constitution. By violating their Oath of Office, the UBC, and Schware, supra,  these government agents are criminals because they conspire to, and do — inflict deprivation of rights of honest citizens beginning with deprivations of due process and equal protection of law and then graduating into crimes of “domestic terrorism”; e.g., retaliation, harassment, false arrest, malicious prosecution, etc., all crimes implemented “under color of law” and in violation of their “fiduciary responsibility”. All Violators should be subject to RICO statutes.


In a nutshell, Our government is guilty of “Tyranny and Oppression”. 

Black’s Law Dictionary contains the following definitions:

Tyranny.    Arbitrary or despotic government; the severe and autocratic exercise of sovereign power, either vested constitutionally in one ruler, or usurped by him breaking down the division and distribution of governmental powers.

Tyrant. A despot; a sovereign or ruler, legitimate or otherwise, who uses his power unjustly and arbitrarily, to the oppression of his subjects.

Upon digesting these definitions, the following question arises: Does the exercise of tyranny by a tyrant constitute a crime, and if so, is that crime sufficient of grade to qualify for impeachment as a High Crime or Misdemeanor? 

A more important question, How did the courts acquire the omnipotent authority to commit crimes against the People with impunity?
This question is discussed in “External Influence: ABA”.    

This page addresses many of the more frequent and egregious abuses by government agents.  Others are specifically exposed in the several “cases” linked below.

Fraud on the court occurs when the judicial machinery itself has been tainted, such as when an attorney / prosecutor, an officer of the court, is involved in the perpetration of a fraud or makes material misrepresentations to the court. Fraud upon the court makes void the orders and judgments of that court.

In Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated:
“Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. … It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function — thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.”

What Happens to the Trial If (When) Fraud on the Court Occurs?
Fraud on the court is one of the most serious violations that can occur in a court of law. If fraud on the court occurs, the effect is that the entire case shall be made void or cancelled. Any ruling or judgment that the court has issued will be void. The case will usually need to be retried with different court officials, often in an entirely different venue.

For the official who acted in fraud upon the court, they may very well be required to step down from their position and may even be subjected to criminal consequences such as a fine or a jail sentence. It could also result in other serious consequences, such as an attorney being disbarred, or a judge being removed from service.
If a court official is found to be biased or prejudiced even before fraud occurs, they are required to recuse themselves from the case, and a different official must be appointed. In some jurisdictions, a trial tainted by fraud on the court may be vacated or set aside for a certain time period (such as two years), to be “reopened” at a later date. A frequent weapon of “rogue” courts and corrupt government is FALSE ARREST. Although this weapon is not technically a crime, is provides the necessary access to criminal misconduct by the courts. 

False Arrest  
A tort (a civil wrong) that consists of an unlawful restraint of an individual’s personal liberty or freedom of movement by another purporting to act according to the law.

The term false arrest is sometimes used interchangeably with that of the tort of False Imprisonment, and a false arrest is one method of committing a false imprisonment. A false arrest must be perpetrated by one who asserts that he or she is acting pursuant to legal authority, whereas a false imprisonment is any unlawful confinement. For example, if a sheriff arrestsperson without any Probable Cause or reasonable basis, the sheriff has committed the torts of false arrest and false imprisonment. The sheriff has acted under the assumption of legal authority to deprive a person unlawfully of his or her liberty of movement. If, however, a driver refuses to allow a passenger to depart from a vehicle, the driver has committed the tort of false imprisonment because he or she unlawfully restrains freedom of movement. The driver has not committed false arrest, however, since he or she is not claiming to act under legal authority. A person who knowingly gives police false information in order to have someone arrested has committed the tort of Malicious Prosecution.
An action can be instituted for the damages ensuing from false arrest, such as loss of salary while imprisoned, or injury to reputation that results in a pecuniary loss to the victim. Ill will and malice are not elements of the tort, but if these factors are proven, Punitive Damages can be awarded in addition to Compensatory Damages or nominal damages.

Let us examine frequent conduct of courts to intimidate and terrorize persons who exercise courage to expose criminal misconduct by rogue prosecutors and   courts.  

What Is an Accessory to a Crime?

An accessory to a crime is a person who participates knowingly and voluntarily in the commission of a crime. An accessory can be categorized as before or after the fact (the commission of the crime).   They need not be actually present at the scene of the crime in order to be held liable. The person actually committing the crime is called the “principal”.


How Can One Be an Accessory to a Felony Crime?

An accessory before the fact is one who aids, abets, assists, incites, or encourages another person in the commission of the crime (such as one who prepares a weapon for an assault). An accessory after the fact is someone who shelters, relieves, or assists a felon after a crime has already been committed (such as the driver of a getaway car). Assistance can take the form of financial, material, or even emotional support of the principal actor.

The elements for one to be an accessory to a crime varies from state to state. In order to convict a person for being an accessory to a felony, a prosecutor must be able to prove that the following four elements:

  • The crime was committed by another individual
  • The defendant assisted, helped, encouraged, or aided the other person in the commission of the crime
  • The defendant acted with intent for the crime to be completed

In most cases, the crime does not have to be actually completed to completion. As long as the defendant aided the other person in committing the crime and had intent for the crime to be completed, then the defendant could be found as being an accessory to the crime.

What Is the Difference Between an Accessory to a Crime and a Conspiracy?

The differences between being a accessory to a crime and committing a conspiracy varies. During a conspiracy, the conspirator and another person plan on committing a crime in the future. The crime does not actually have to be committed or even have to be started. Once the conspirators make an agreement to commit a crime and both have intent for the crime to actually be committed, than a conspiracy has occurred.

On the other hand, an accomplice or a accessory to a crime has to actually take an active role in the commission of the crime by aiding or assisting.

What About an Accessory to a Felony Crime?

Felony crimes are very serious types of crimes and are punishable by sentences of over one year in prison. Common types of felonies can include homicide crimes, drug violations, sexual assault crimes, and serious property crimes.

An accessory charge is generally not in itself a felony. However, being an accessory to a felony crime can lead to non-violent felony charges, which will be noted on one’s criminal record. This is important, because having a felony charge on a criminal record can sometimes lead to a loss of various privileges, such as being able to own a firearm. An accessory to a felony crime will usually receive a sentence that is less severe than the sentence for the principal actor.

Federal laws state that the penalties for an accessory to a felony are not to exceed half of the maximum prison time or fine that the principal receives. If the principal receives a death sentence, the accessory may be incarcerated for up to 15 years maximum. States may also have their own individual laws governing accessories to a crime.

What Must be Proven for a Person to be Guilty as an Accessory?

A prosecutor would need to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the accused had knowledge that the crime was about to be committed, or has already been committed. Additionally, they would need to prove that the defendant intentionally acted to assist the criminal in their offense.

For example, one who unknowingly provides shelter to a person who committed a felon will not be held guilty of being an accessory after the fact. This is because they did not have knowledge that a felony had been committed.



Leave a Reply

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