MS. POTASHNER: "Of course. The disclaimers in and
of themselves does not make something that is dangerous not
dangerous. But I think the disclaimers... I don't think that a weapon could be created to
shoot bees across a space, to train bees to go after a
particular target. It's a ridiculous weapon. It's not a
weapon that exists."
Gee, it appears that Judge Matz is really a caring kinda guy, right? Going on about how much he cares about another Citizen being assaulted...and how devastating on the Citizen it could be to them...well then how come he covered up, along with the F.B.I. and the D.O.J., this torture of a handcuffed prisoner by the police? How about the fact that he has and continues to judge American Citizens, giving out ""substantial" illegal sentences."" Why is he allowed to violate my fundamental rights under not only the Due Process clause of the fifth, and sixth amendment. Why don't I see the National Guard walking him out of the Federal Courthouse, in cuffs, at the point of a bayonet?
"Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication." Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶60.23. The 7th Circuit further stated "a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final."
Under Article VI, clause 3, of the U.S. Constitution, every judge or government attorney takes an oath to support the U.S. Constitution.
The judge or the government attorney is paid to support the U.S. Constitution. By not supporting the Constitution, the judge or the government attorney is collecting monies for work not performed. It is not a judicial function to attack the U.S. Constitution.
It is not a judicial function to issue a void order, an order issued without jurisdiction. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a judge who acts without jurisdiction, is engaged in treason.
A judge may not engage in any act in violating a person's First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment Rights. When such an act occurs, the judge is deprived of total jurisdiction and his actions are not that of a judge, but are those taken in his personal capacity.
The law clearly and unequivocally states that all Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. The law clearly and unequivocally further states that no presumption of jurisdiction attaches automatically to any court of limited jurisdiction, but that the determination of jurisdiction of a court of limited jurisdiction must be affirmatively found within the record of the case that is before the court.
In a Federal court hearing an appeal, it is the duty of the judges to be certain of their jurisdiction. They have a legal duty to inspect the record of the District trial court, sua sponte, to determine whether the District trial court held jurisdiction at all times, if a Constitutional Right was violated, and/or if any officer of the court, whether judge or attorney, engaged in a "fraud upon the court".
The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that a judge violates the U.S. Constitution whenever the judge issues an order without jurisdiction. The judge has committed a fraud upon the court and upon the Constitution.
"It is clear and well established law that a judge must first determine whether the judge has both subject-matter and in personam jurisdiction before hearing and ruling in any case, and further must continue to monitor the case to be certain that jurisdiction was not lost, due to any violation of a Constitutional Right, fraud upon the court, appearance of partiality of any judge, or any act which deprives the court of jurisdiction, by any officer of the court, whether attorney or judge, during the proceedings. "
SAY WHAT?
03.06.2009
"This kind of conduct is actually far more devastating than assaulting a Prison officer." ~Judge Alvin Howard Matz
"what would be the capacity of law enforcement
and of the courts to prevent this kind of SPEECH?" -Judge A. Howard Matz, PRE-TRIAL HEARING OF KILLERCOP.COM
Prosecutor Zeidenberg was equally anxious to exonerate Hillary Clinton, telling Judge Matz, "You will hear no evidence that Hillary Clinton was involved in any way, shape or form. In fact, it's just the opposite. The evidence will show that David Rosen was trying to keep this evidence from the campaign." This case is being referred to in the media as a “mother of all cover-ups.”
CLERK: “How do you plead to Count 1 of the First Superseding Indictment, guilty or not guilty?”
ACCUSED: “I cannot make a plea at this time until I know the nature of this crime, as that, and the nature has seemed, has seemed to have changed in the past. So if this court could answer a question or two I might be able to make a plea at this point. Will this court answer a question or two so I can ascertain the nature of the crime so I can prepare a proper defense?”
Judge Matz: “No!
Judge Matz: The court will construe the response to be a plea of not guilty. The plea is applicable to each of nine counts of the First Superseding Indictment. So Mr. Sutcliffe will be deemed to have plead not guilty to the charges in the First Superseding Indictment. That concludes the arraignment on the charges.”
ACCUSED: “Let the record reflect the court is proceeding in a - - “
JUDGE: “You and Mr. - - “
ACCUSED: “ Secret jurisdiction. I demand my right to be informed of the...“
JUDGE: “Sit down at the table.”
ACCUSED: “Nature of this crime.”
JUDGE: “Sit down. This is not going to be a debate.”
Accused: “You changed the nature once. You going to change it again?”
“How can I prepare a defense here, if you won’t even tell me the nature of the crime?”
Judge: “The first order of business - - “
Accused: “They told me the nature was something once. Now they have changed the nature after almost a year.”
Page 13
“Accused: Are they going to change it again? How many - -“
Judge: “Now I am ordering you to be quiet.” The first order of business is to complete the competency examination. I have received the motion and will grant the motion, although I’m going to change slightly the language in the proposed order that the government has lodged with the court and filed.
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 that you didn't make; however --"
Image that ...a Star Chambers hearing, live...in America. You don't even have to be there to be judge and examined, they just make it look like you were there for the record by forcing representatives; who refuse to assist, and quacks who pretend to assist, examine and treat you, but don't. Some don't even exist!!
Crackers, if ya ask me. But remember, ""that's not an issue that I have to address
and it's not a question I'm required to answer,
so I decline to do so."
“The fact is that killercop used not only entirely different language but was in a situation, was perceived to be in a situation, was none at the time of the indictment to be in a situation that there was no information suggesting Schmoe,... whoever that is, was in.”
A. Howard Matz (born 1943) is an American lawyer and judge.
He has sat on the United States District Court for the Central District of California since 1998.
Birth Place :Brooklyn, New York Date Of Birth, 1943
A. Howard Matz Photo Collection
Matz, A Howard reference * Short Description * United States federal judge
Comment * A. Howard Matz (born 1943) is an American lawyer and judge. He has sat on the United States District Court for the Central District of California since 1998.
Label * Howard Matz
Howard Matz
Category: Judges of the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
Category: United States district court judges appointed by Bill Clinton
Category: 1943 births * Category: Living people
Given name Alvin Howard
Name * A. Howard Matz, A Howard Matz
Matz, A. Howard
Born 1943 in Brooklyn, NY
Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U. S. District Court, Central District of California
Nominated by William J. Clinton on October 20, 1997, to a seat vacated by Harry L. Hupp; Confirmed by the Senate on June 26, 1998, and received commission on June 29, 1998.
Professional Career:
Law clerk, Hon. Morris E. Lasker, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, 1969-1970
Private practice, New York City, 1970-1972
Private practice, Los Angeles, CA, 1972-1974
Assistant U.S. attorney, Central District of California, 1974-1978 Chief, Special Prosecutions Unit, 1977-1978
Private practice, Los Angeles, CA, 1979-1998
Henry Louis Gates' Contempt Of Cop Emptywheel - At tonight's nationally televised press conference, a reporter asked President Obama a question about the July 16 arrest of famed Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates. Obama set off...
Contempt of Cop' by William Norman Grigg - The police are to the government as the edge is to the knife, insists sociologist David Bayley, who apparently couldn't explain why the typical...
Welcome to America Now step inside the jail cell - The audio exchange in this video was apparently recorded at the U.S. Canada border after a Canadian displayed contempt-of-cop towards the American law enforcement officer asking questions.
Contemptible police tactics - Cops raid the home of a licensed medical marijuana provider in Washington, handcuff the fourteen year old son and put a gun to his head, and search the nineteen year old daughter and take the contents of her mickey-mouse wallet.
How To Survive Traffic Stops in America, Submit, Instantly! - What the cops want is immediate obedience and submission. Many cops are ex-military and view the civilian motorists of America about like they viewed the hapless peasants of Iraq and Afghanistan, that is, with contempt, not as fellow citizens deserving of civility and respect. It is a possibly lethal mistake to do anything other than submit, instantly and obey! Or be ready to shoot first. But aim high.
