 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
||
 |
|
|||||||
|
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his Defence."~Amendment VI "It was your right, [KILLERCOP], as an indigent defendant, to have the [U.S.] marshal do it, but I didn't limit service to just the marshal." ~Judge Howard Matz
AS A MATTER OF FACT JUDGE MATZ DID JUST THAT, HE DENIED THE RIGHT. I SAID HE DENIED THE RIGHT, TOTALLY!! HE LIMITED MY RIGHT TO HIS FOISTED ATTORNEY FRIEND, DAVID REED. AGAIN ANOTHER RIGHT LOST AND DENIED, ANOTHER OF TOO MANY TO EVEN HAVE TO BE FORCED TO COUNT!! AND HIS BUDDY IN THE NINTH CIRCUIT, ALEX KOZINSKI, DID THE SAME THING ON APPEAL. YET, THEY FREELY WALK AMONG US. I'M NOT GOING TO PERMIT THAT. THE INTRESTS OF JUSTICE REQUIRE I TAKE THEM OUT! August 27, 2003 JUDGE HOWARD MATZ:"Killercop, would you like to proceed [TO TRIAL] on September 30th?"
JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: -- and I'm not going to permit that. And I'm telling you if you want to get subpoenas served, there is one and only one way and I'm not going to repeat it. If you don't choose to give them to Mr. Reed, they won't be served. KILLERCOP : Okay. JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: All right. We're adjourned.
“So a prudent thing to do for somebody in your situation would be is I’ll take my best shot at it. You can take your best shot at being your own lawyer, if you want, or you can be a lawyer.” --Judge A. Howard Matz
This is amazing considering Matz has repeatedly advised Killercop, for over a year and a half now, not to represent himself, even claiming he would come off the bench and assault the defendant, figuratively speaking, he claimed, if the defendant wanted to represent himself. This was done because then the judge knew if Killercop went forward, under the admitted unlawful and illegal waiver, then no violations of the Speedy Trial Act would occur.
November 30, 2007 SPEAKING OF SUBPOENA POWER!! LOOK WHO WANTS IT! City Atty. Trutanich's ill-advised power play A bill moving through the Legislature would give L.A.'s city attorney the power to empanel a grand jury. This is an overreach that should not be allowed. June 11, 2010|Raphael J. Sonenshein Last week, the California Senate passed a bill sponsored by Sen. Gil Cedillo (D- Los Angeles) that would vastly inflate the authority of the Los Angeles city attorney. If the Assembly passes the bill and it is signed into law by the governor, the city attorney will be empowered to ask a state judge to empanel a grand jury and issue subpoenas to investigate potential criminal activity, a power now held in California only by the state attorney general and county district attorneys. The proposed law, introduced at the urging of Los Angeles City Atty. Carmen Trutanich, is an ill-advised end run around the right of the people of Los Angeles, through their city charter, to decide the powers and authorities of elected officials. The bill's language is convoluted. Rather than stating outright that this is a state law aimed at a single city, it instead grants new powers to the "prosecuting city attorney of any city within the County of Los Angeles having a population in excess of 3,000,000 people." Of course there is only one city that meets those criteria — Los Angeles — and the law would profoundly change the structure of power in its city government. There is a reason city attorneys can't empanel grand juries and district attorneys can. The city attorney provides legal advice to all sectors of city government, defends the city in court on a wide range of civil matters and is on the alert to protect the city from legal liability. At the same time, some city attorneys, as in Los Angeles, prosecute criminal misdemeanors. This allows city attorneys to have a broad impact on such diverse issues as billboards, gang violence and code enforcement. But felonies are handled by the county district attorney, who is not the county government's legal advisor; that role is filled by the county counsel. District attorneys would be lost without grand juries. They are used in complex criminal cases to determine whether there is sufficient cause to bring charges, and they allow prosecutors to call people to testify and subpoena documents to inform filing decisions. Because by law city attorneys can only file misdemeanors in California, they rarely handle the kind of complex cases that require these tools before charges are filed.
"Only one tribunal ever adopted a practice of forcing counsel upon an unwilling defendant in a criminal proceeding. The tribunal was the Star Chamber." -U.S. v Faretta , 422 U.S. 806 (1975) OUTSIDE IT'S AMERICA. When speech is compelled, additional damage is done. Individuals are coerced into betraying their convictions. Forcing free and independent individuals to endorse ideas they find objectionable is always demeaning. -Thomas Jefferson
REPORT A GANG MEMBER.
Look, you know you have to look, there! ABOVE!! It's "a person, on the left," and "the person of another," on the right. Do you understand? No? Still Baffled? Click image below for the answer to the question, "What is a person and what is the difference between a person and the person of another?"
(c)1997-2023 TO PURCHASE THIS PREMIUM DOMAIN NAME CLICK HERE. |
"We will not serve your subpoenas!" -JUDGE A. HOWARD MATZ
NOT IN THIS COURTROOM! BUT ANYTHING ELSE GOES!! A.K.A. THE CASE OF THE SELLING OF THE RIGHTS OF A SLAVE, TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER. A.K.A. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. "Killercop "had" the right to subpoena witnesses; he
"had" the right to cross-examine. Those are the general contours
of what this kind of hearing "use to" entail." ~Judge Matz
JUDGE HOWARD MATZ WOULD NOT KNOW A FACT IF IT HIT HIM IN THE FACE. GOOD THING FOR HIM HE IS TWO FACED. MEANING HE TURNS THE CHEEK, AND LOOKS THE OTHER WAY WHEN HE BREAKS THE LAW. A.K.A. The case of "It would not be appropriate for you to tell me what you are trying to establish."
JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: "I'll consider it after you tell me what it is that you are
so upset about.
So go ahead and tell me." Killercop: Well, you're putting me in kind of an untenable position here, Your Honor. You want me to expose how I'm going to impeach his lies in front of him? Is that what you are asking me to do? JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: No, I'm not. Killercop:: Well, that's what it sounds like. SIDE BAR: “Trial Court’s failure to conduct adequate inquiry into defendant’s timely raised claim that his attorney had conflict of interest constituted violation of Sixth Amendment right to counsel and defendant did not have burden of showing actual prejudice.” CONTINUED: JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: Look, Killercop, this is a lot -- Killercop:: As long as he made a material JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: Tell me what it was. Killercop: -- you totally relied upon that JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: What was the misstatement of fact? Killercop: He said that I refused to assist The second lie was: I refused to give him the name of any files, exactly any files to help him with any discovery. That's the second miss -- second fact that he lied about. Those two statements I can refute and prove they were lies. JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: You don't want Mr. Reed to be your lawyer. Right? KILLERCOP: He's not my lawyer, He's your counsel. I stressed that very closely in the letter to you and I cited U.S. v Mills. He's not my agent. He's your agent. JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: Okay. Well, I think that's sufficient basis to stop right here. I don't think there is any need for Mr. Reed to respond. And the extent to which you and he had a difference of opinion as to whether and, if so, to what extent you've cooperated before, I relieved him in large measure as a result "of your refusal to communicate" with him. KILLERCOP: That's exactly what I'm talking about. Exactly. You removed him because he said that I refused to assist him at all, on October 26. That's a lie I'd like a chance to refute that. JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: Okay. Mr. -- we're not going to go through that hearing again, Killercop.
I made findings that based upon your own characterization of what any lawyer who was your lawyer could do and and would not be permitted to do and would not meet with your approval and whose efforts on your behalf you would reject, I relieved him of his duties. That ends it. That's my ruling. We are not going into it any further. You have the basis on the record to appeal me if you like, depending on what happens at the trial. Okay. There is no issue as to -- and no relevance
anymore and I don't think there is any basis for an issue as
to the accuracy of Mr. Reed's statements. Mr. Reed enjoys a
well-deserved reputation as an honorable, diligent and KILLERCOP: Your Honor, I -- JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: -- I will issue -- KILLERCOP: -- can I leave my subpoenas here? JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: You can give your subpoenas to -- - - Mr. Reed. I will issue -- KILLERCOP: I don't trust him with -- I don't even trust him with a piece of paper of mine. You understand me? JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: We will not serve your subpoenas. KILLERCOP: I'm not asking you to serve my subpoenas. I'm just telling you I'm not giving this man a shred of paper. He's already stolen my paper from that day on the hearing. JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: Killercop, I want you to understand something real simple. If they are third parties who you want to be subpoenaed, the one and only way that that will happen is not through me and not through my clerk. We are not process servers for anybody. You will give those subpoenas to Mr. Reed -- KILLERCOP: I will not give those subpoenas to Mr. Reed. He stole my copy and -- JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: -- and he will give them to them to the investigator. KILLERCOP: You refused to give me any kind of evidentiary hearing to investigate his material -- material misstatements to this court upon which you relied to make a ruling against me JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: Okay. Killercop, by your choice... KILLERCOP: No, he's not my choice. He's your choice of agent. You said our relationship has become untenable.
JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: -- and I'm not going to permit that. And I'm telling you if you want to get subpoenas served, there is one and only one way and I'm not going to repeat it. If you don't choose to give them to Mr. Reed, they won't be served. KILLERCOP : Okay. JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: All right. We're adjourned.
TRIAL DAY 1 KILLERCOP:" I have never seen this letter." MR. REED: "He acknowledged that he saw the letter when we met him, Your Honor."
JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: "Don't volunteer information until I call
upon you, please, Mr. Reed. The objection is overruled.
The letter is lodged because I think we need to have
a complete record as to this last-minute issue about subpoenas. So please hand the letter to the courtroom
deputy, Killercop." JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: "I have sorted these [subpoena's] into various categories. There
are a few that are directed to federal agencies: One to the
FBI field office, one to Special Agent James Laverick, one to
someone named Sue Hermitage at the Social Security Administration, one to Debra Yang, [my good friend] the U.S. Attorney." JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: "But before the jury is brought out, there is one other things that I'll be dealing with. Killercop, whether you understand it or not, there are a lot of elements that you have to satisfy, and I'm going to give you an opportunity, quickly, to try to do so, orally, to require that these subpoenas be served. I think I should start by saying that if it was your understanding that the only appropriate person and only authorized person and the only acceptable person to serve them was the U.S. Marshal, that was a fundamentally erroneous conclusion. I never said that you were unauthorized to require that the investigator, Mr. Cruz, that Mr. Reed offered to make available to you, would not be appropriate or could not effectively serve these subpoenas. You choose not to allow him to do so. I authorized you, because it was your right as an indigent defendant, to have the marshal do it, but I didn't limit service to just the marshal. " LIE 1 HE "LIMITED IT" TO DAVID REED AND TO DAVID REED, ONLY.
"And you were aware that, under the "Criminal" Justice Act, your rights to have process served could be
effectuated through appointed investigators and counsel. What I have done is grouped these subpoenas, all of which -- those that have a date that you wrote in, you wrote the date in as October 20th. You have been in the presence of the marshal since then more than once. And according to the information -- and I want it to be filed under seal -- that was handed to me yesterday -- let me give the document to the clerk for filing . Those should be filed, but filed under seal. And I'm handing them to the clerk so that later today she can arrange for that. Now, there seems to be something like five or six subpoenas directed to law enforcement agencies. One is directed to someone named Victor J. Pietrantoni of the L.A.P.D. It appears to seek documents relating to killercop.com, all documents related to you that this individual worked on, and the names of persons that he had spoken with about those two categories. "
He didn't limit service...? REALLY? LET'S GO BACK IN TIME AND SEE, AS IN A LONG TIME AGO... KILLERCOP: I'd like this to be entered now. It
is -- excuse me. It consists of one letter dated November 3,
2003, regarding David R. Reed, included within it is an
attachment, an October 22nd letter, two pages long, and a
letter titled "David Reed dated 09, colon, 29, colon, 2003. JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: Okay. Those will be filed. KILLERCOP: I would also like the record to reflect that after the Court went into his chambers, I attempted to follow the Court's instruction regarding subpoenas, and I turned to the marshal to my left and I attempted to hand him a subpoena for Jeffrey Raymond Cugno, who was in the courtroom at the time. I instructed the marshal to assist me in serving that subpoena on Mr. Cugno, and the marshal refused. The head marshal then -- I think his name is Mr. Martin -- spoke with your clerk at the time. Mr. Martin came back to me and told me that the clerk had informed him that I was to go through counsel. I informed him that I am my own counsel. And I requested he again assist me. He refused. I turned around to see Ms. Duarte and Agent Cugno laughing. I was then removed from the courtroom after that. I would move -- excuse me, Your Honor. I would move at this time for an ex parte hearing regarding subpoenas I need assistance with which need to be issued out of state. That will be all, Your Honor. Thank you. JUDGE HOWARD MATZ: Okay. The request for a [due process] hearing is denied. Your rights and "opportunities" to effectuate service were set forth a long time ago. SEE ALSO: PREVIOUS COUNSEL WAS MICHAEL BRENNEN, ESQ
(CENSORED 03.26.2023)
They all ignored their oaths, the facts, the rules, the laws, the 5th and 6th amendment and proceeded forward with a selective persecution in a secret hearing. "Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." -Elie Wiesel With the above in mind, could you please help and make a small donation. TO DONATE JUST SCAN THE VENMO OR ZELLE QR CODE BELOW.
MEDIA INQUIRES CLICK HERE. LEGAL INQUIRIES CLICK HERE. TO PURCHASE THIS PREMIUM DOMAIN NAME CLICK HERE. | |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
