ONCE UPON A TIME ALONG CAME AN UNLAWFULLY FORCED ATTORNEY, NAMED GREGORY. HIS JOB WAS TO PLAY STUPID, ALLOW HIMSELF TO BE FORCED ON ME BY MATZ, THEREBY TAKING OVER THE SUBPOENA OF GARY WINNICK, FROM THE PREVIOUS INCOMPETENT ATTORNEY, WILLIAM "BILL" HARRIS.
GREG THEN LATER "RELEASES" GARY, TO THE PROSECUTOR; WHEN HE COULD NO LONGER PLAY THE FORCED GAME.
THE PROSECUTOR THEN "RELEASES" GARY TO LORD MATZ WHEN SHE COULD NO LONGER PLAY THE FORCED GAME, EITHER
WHO THEN RELEASES GARY WINNICK!!
'CAUSE THEY KNEW I SURE WAS NOT GOING TO RELEASE HIM!!
" There's one other thing, before you ask
your question, before I forget. There is a subpoena that
apparently has been served on Gary Winnick.
NOTE: AS IN LAWFULLY SERVED.
I notice that Gary
Winnick is not identified on the government's witness list. And
I assume, correct me if I'm wrong, that the government has the
ability to communicate with Mr. Winnick or with his lawyer; is
that correct?
MS. DUARTE:
I have that ability, Your Honor.
THE COURT:
I want you to communicate to the lawyer or
to Mr. Winnick or to both, that although he doesn't have to
respond to the subpoena on the date or under the terms that it
may have contained, he remains responsible to respond on
whatever date he is later notified.
In effect, what I'm saying is that the subpoena,
although it was issued and served through the auspices of Mr. Harris, 'it's like a court subpoena.'
I don't want anybody to
have to go through any protracted or new ground of efforts to
subpoena him anew.
Elena had no authority to release him, and I had a duty to produce him, especially after I allowed his testimoney against killercop. Therefore and heretothere I now find that he shall be taken into custody on sight and brought forth to trial under the authority of said unexpired lawful subpoena.
But then again, I'm officially nutzzzzzz, until certified un-nutzzzzzz in a competent court of the law. So I am waiting on the law, and the certificate required by the law.
But I'm no expert.(.pdf) Anyone see ours, yet? He has our certificate required by the law and I need it to be officially un-nutzzzzzz. And that's a fact!
"All right. I have arranged for your
presence today through my courtroom deputy because I told him,
the deputy, to arrange, "in the usual and ordinary course," to
have a lawyer selected from the indigent defense panel to serve
in the standby capacity that I've just explained to
KILLERCOP. You are that individual. And I will allow
KILLERCOP and you to determine to what extent, if any, Killercop
wishes to communicate with you at points where he seeks the
assistance of "standby" counsel in his own self-defense.
"But I'm telling you I have the authority, and now I've exercised the authority. "
KILLERCOP:
Thank you very much, Your Honor. I appreciate that, but that didn't answer my question.
And I'm just asking you [to do you job and inform me where in the law you have the authority --]
INTERUPTION BY A. HOWARD MATZ:
Okay. Now, Killercop, I'm telling you now that henceforth -- and I've had to tell you this in the past when I've responded to some -- something I've permitted you to say or you've chosen to say, and you don't like the answer -- I am not going to involve myself, and I'm not going to permit you to try to create a circumstance where there is some kind of protracted argument or discussion, no matter how civil the voices may be, no matter how hard each of us may try to be. That's not my function, and that's not your right. So if you don't like my answer, that's just too bad.
Now, is there anything else you want to add that is different?
KILLERCOP:
Well, yes. I appreciate that, Your Honor. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to respond. But you haven't answered my question.
Ummmmm, So at this point you are just making things up! That was not an "objection," it was a direct challenge requiring an answer under the law. There is and remains "both the issue and the question of the authority." Both unanswered. So actually, and to date factually, under the law and now on the record you didn't and don't have that authority, Nada. Gar nichts. Rien du tout. Bupkes, and you are breaking the law!
Let the record reflect he willfully refused to answer the question of the issue of the law and authority.
MS. DUARTE: 
