EVEN JARED LEE LOUGHNER WAS AFFORDED MORE DUE PROCESS THEN KILLERCOP WAS BY JUDGE A. HOWARD MATZ.
"When asked later whether he could behave in court, Loughner told Burns that he would prefer to watch the proceedings on a closed-circuit television screen in a courtroom anteroom, where he remained for the rest of the hearing."
Moreover the prosecutor knew that Judge Matz didn't make any specific legal or lawful finding...of incompetence, as well as the "defense" attorney forced on Killercop by Hizzzzonor, yet they all ignored the law and committed Killercop for "Treatment," of "Incompetence."
Now they are going to get their treatment back, in spades!
The secrecy of Killercop's "status conference" ... violated the due process clause .... Pp. 333 U. S. 266-273, 333 U. S. 278.
(a) The reasons advanced to support the secrecy ... investigative proceedings do not justify secrecy in the trial of a defendant accused of an offense for which he may be fined or sent to jail. Pp. 333 U. S. 264-266.
(b) An accused is entitled to a public trial, at least to the extent of having his friends, relatives and counsel present -- no matter with what offense he may be charged. Pp. 333 U. S. 271-272.
Tthe Federal Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") sent a letter to Judge Matz informing him that an internal investigation of Dr. Patenaude revealed "sufficient evidence to question the credibility and accuracy of a psychological evaluation"Dr. Patenaude had prepared in another case.
The letter continued:
This internal investigation could call into question the credibilityof other psychological evaluations conducted by this psychologist.
Accordingly, we bring this information to your attention for any action the court may deem appropriate.
The record indicates the neither the district court, nor "foisted" counsel, ever took action in response to this letter.
Whatever other benefits the guarantee to an accused that his trial be conducted in public may confer upon our society, [Footnote 24] the guarantee has always been recognized as a safeguard against any attempt to employ our courts as instruments of persecution. The knowledge that every criminal trial is subject to contemporaneous review in the forum of public opinion is an effective restraint on possible abuse of judicial power. [Footnote 25] One need not wholly agree with a statement made on the subject by
Jeremy Bentham over 120 years ago to appreciate the fear of secret trials felt by him, his predecessors and contemporaries. Bentham said:
". . . suppose the proceedings to be completely secret, and the court, on the occasion, to consist of no more than a single judge -- that judge will be at once indolent and arbitrary; how corrupt soever his inclination may be, it will find no check, at any rate no tolerably efficient check, to oppose it. Without publicity, all other checks are insufficient: in comparison of publicity, all other checks are of small account. Recordation, appeal, whatever other institutions might present themselves in the character of checks, would be found to operate rather as cloaks than checks; as cloaks in reality, as checks only in appearance. [Footnote 26]"
In giving content to the constitutional and statutory commands that an accused be given a public trial, the state and federal courts have differed over what groups of spectators, if any, could properly be excluded from a criminal trial. [Footnote 27] But, unless in Michigan and in one-man grand jury contempt cases, no court in this country has ever before held, so far as we can find, that an accused can be tried, convicted, and sent to jail when everybody else is denied entrance to the court except the judge and his attaches. [Footnote 28] And, without exception, all courts have held
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
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 fact] that you didn't make; however --"
I was to hear that word, "however," again, at my appeal, by the same woman in this room in this story, Elena Duarte, the assistant prosecutor, while she was lying to the Chief justice. I digress...allow me to continue.
Court: " [a]nd under the applicable provisions of the federal statute involved, 18 U.S.C. 4241(D), I was directing that he be"examined" in an FMC for the purposes of evaluating that determination. I did not make a finding [in fact] [and under the law]. ~LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, FRIDAY, APRIL 7, 2003, Page 4, Lines 4-7
18 USC 4247(d) Hearing. - At a hearing ordered pursuant to this chapter the person whose mental condition is the subject of the hearing ... shall be afforded an opportunity to testify, to present evidence, to subpoena witnesses on his behalf, and to confront and cross-examine witnesses who appear at the hearing.
18 USC 4141(d) Determination and Disposition.— If, after the hearing, the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is presently suffering from a mental disease or defect rendering him mentally incompetent to the extent that he is unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist properly in his defense, the court shall commit the defendant to the custody of the Attorney General. The Attorney General shall hospitalize the defendant for treatment in a suitable facility—
Lines 24-25, Id.
Prosecutor: “[a]nd even though we were aware that the court didn't make the specific finding [in fact] [and under the law] at the hearing,…that killercop was incompetent.”
DEAR GOD,
READ THAT AGAIN, FOLKS.
"The court didn't make any specific finding...of incompetence, in neither Fact Or Law." they all ignored the law, and then committed me for Mental "Treatment."
So Matz and his gang had this secret hearing, to try and cover up this "hybrid," which means unlawful order, that they had concocted out of the air, which I knew nothing about, after "being removed," after I objected to the proceedings as being of the kangaroo kind.
They got away with it by not notifying me or the warden, until months later. How ya'll like that due process entitlement. Sure ain't a right anymore, unless you can see more then I do.
I digress.So even though a "preponderance of the evidence" could not be judged, because of the previous illegal treatment I was subjected to, under no authority, they still moved forward and they shipped me off, claiming under authority of :18 U.S.C. § 4241(d), for treatments, not evaluations. Not that the Chief Perv of the Ninth Circuit gave a hoot.
While there I met a man named Dr. Thomas P. Patenaude, once. It was to be our only meeting of the minds.
Later I would meet the Warden, once, and inform him of the secret hearing, once Greggy finally sent me a copy of the secret hearing, but only months later and only after pressuring me to "take a deal, or they can hold you there forever!." To which I replied, "Byte Me!"
The Warden sent me back to California forthwith after knowledge of the secret unlawful hearing, the next day, after I showed him the transcript of the secret hearing. Patenaude claimed he then cured me!! It was like, magic. A regular miracle.
They certainly were not about to compound it by filing a false certification that I wasn't now "competent." when they both knew that to be false. (See Dr. Who, below) Oh the irony.
Oh the shame. I should say sham.
If they followed the law and produced the certificate, under the law, they would be lying.
There could never be a certified paper of my miraculous recovery from my "treatment," especially from a Dr. Who? And they all knew it.
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.
