 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
||
 |
|
|||||||
|
Right is right, no matter if nobody is doing it. And wrong is wrong, no matter if everybody is doing it.
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS ACCUSED: "A finding of competency is one of a fact, not law. United States -v- Shepard, 538 F.2d 107 at 110; United States -v- Fratus -- F-r-a-t-u-s -- 530 F.2d 644 at page 647; U.S. -v- Winn, 577 F.2d 86 at note 14 on page 88; Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402, annotations at paragraph 8 on page 2083. Rule 43, which you used to explain my absence obviously does not apply. And since a finding of incompetence is one of clearly a fact, not law -- And under the right of due process afforded to an accused in a court, the court could not abridge that right by that rule. Pursuant to Title 18, section 2072 (b), 'no rule shall abridge, modify or enlarge a substantive right.' Further, this court never found me incompetent at the March 14th hearing, so the hearing on April 7th should have been conducted pursuant to the protections afforded to an accused under the Fifth Amendment, due process, and the Sixth Amendment..."
More than 230 participants attended the 18th Annual National Jewish Law Students Association Conference held February at USC. L to R: Alissa Malzman ’06, Melissa Balaban ’91, Julie Marder (Michigan), Judge Stephen Reinhardt, Judge Alex Kozinski, Judge A. Howard Matz, Sam Yebri ’06, Tanya Bayeva (Michigan), conference participant, Rachel Feldman ’06, Rachel Weinstein ’06 and Debbie Ghodsian ’06.
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
IS MEL THREATING A PERSON OF ANOTHER, OR A PERSON?
LOS ANGELES -- Nevada Senate candidate Sharron Angle backed away Tuesday from remarks in which she referred to the Second Amendment right to bear arms and the need to "take ... out" Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Angle, in her first extended Nevada interview since winning the June 8 primary, said she was speaking broadly about the Constitution and her words about the Democratic leader were "a little strong." The Republican nominee stopped short of an apology but said she no longer uses that phrase. "I meant take him out of office, and taking him out of office is a little different," Angle said. "I changed my rhetoric." I contained the language. "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 THIS SPACE FOR SALE |
A cruel and unusual treatment.
Readers, can someone figure out how all three, very seasoned attorneys in the story violated this rule, this law and then violated the First, Fifth and Sixth Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United States, all in one hearing? Can any of you answer that for me? 18 U.S.C. 4241A comes before 4241D. That's D as in DOG. Seems simple enough. Examination [A] EXAMINATION comes BEFORE any of [D] TREATMENT. But they all knew that law and fact. Instead they played stupid. Really, really stupid.
HOW JUDGE A. HOWARD MATZ AND COMPANY COVERED UP HIS WILLFUL INCOMPETENCE, AND BROKE MORE LAWS, AGAIN. Court: “Okay. I arranged this
('joint proposed amended order' means all agree to the coverup "he arranged," of the violation of the Due Process Clause and rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendment, as well as Rule 43.)
Court: "Killercop's presence is not necessary, given that he’s currently represented by Mr. Nicolaysen. This is primarily an issue, at the very least, a mixed issue of fact and law, probably a legal issue.” WRONG, AGAIN, JUDGE MATZ!!!
Rule 43(a), Fed. R. Crim. P., provides in part that a defendant must be present at every trial stage, including the jury impanelment and the return of the verdict and sentencing, unless otherwise provided by the rules. Rule 43(b)(3), Fed. R. Crim. P., provides in part that a defendant need not be present where the “proceeding involves ONLY a conference or hearing on a question of law.” But he knew this, see right below. SOURCE: A Manual on
Jury Trial
Procedures Members: The court’s determination of competency is a factual, rather than legal, determination. United States v. Makovich, 209 F.3d 1227, 1232 (10th Cir. 2000).
Judge Matz knew that...he went to Harvard, Law School, they all knew. The rule and the law is clear. They were all experts in the law, but not with computers. But Matz must have missed that Harvard law class on the Fifth and Sixth Amendment, cause he sure didn't follow it. And now someone will die, or, at the least, be tortured and subjected to the same illegal punishment, or Matz and his buddies in the government can apologize for the violations, and do some more restoration! I'm waiting...but until then,...I remain armed! See ya, wouldn't want to be ya!
All societies judge some people mad: any strict clinical justification aside, it is part of the business of marking out the different, deviant, and perhaps dangerous. Such ‘stigma’, according to the American sociologist Erving Goffman, is ‘the situation of the individual who is disqualified from full social acceptance’. Stigmatizing—the creation of spoiled identity—involves projecting onto an individual or group judgements as to what is inferior, repugnant, or disgraceful. It may thus translate disgust into the disgusting and fears into the fearful, first by singling out difference, next by calling it inferiority, and finally by blaming ‘victims’ for their otherness. This demonizing process may be regarded as psychologically
and anthropologically driven, arising out of
deep-seated and perhaps unconscious needs to order
the world by demarcating self from other, as in the The construction of such ‘them-and-us’ oppositions reinforces our fragile sense of self-identity and selfworth through the pathologization of pariahs.
Setting the sick apart sustains the fantasy that we are whole. Disease diagnosis thus constitutes a powerful classificatory tool, and medicine contributes its fair share to the stigmatizing enterprise. Amongst those scapegoated and anathematized by means of this cognitive apartheid, the ‘insane’ have, of course, been conspicuous. This polarizing of the sane and the crazy in turn spurred and legitimized the institutionalizing trend which gathered momentum from the seventeenth century.
TWITTER (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. SALES INQUIRIES CLICK HERE. THIS SPACE FOR SALE
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
