Bizarre Scheme to Halt Corruption Fighter
Threatening to Expose Powerful People in U.S. Government
As part of a scheme to silence corruption fighter, Captain Rodney Stich, whose actions were threatening to expose powerful personnel in the federal government, a sham lawsuit was filed against him in the California Superior Courts at Fairfield, filed by the CIA-front San Francisco law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross. That firm filed a sham lawsuit against Stich, used the former wife living in Texas as a straw plaintiff. The sham lawsuit was filed under the California Family Law Act, permitting a California judge to immediately gain control of the assets, and resulting in their loss.
To carry out this scheme required violating a record number of California and federal statutes and controlling decisional law. To accomplish that required the cooperation of judges at every level of the California judicial system, and sabotage by Captain Rodney Stich's attorneys.
Details of the start of the scheme in the California courts can be found at www.defraudingamerica.com/california_judges_as_rico_enterprise.
The gross violations occurring in the California courts constituted repeated federal causes of action for which relief and defenses existed under federal law. Federal judges had mandatory responsibilities to provide the court forum and to provide relief. That relief would block that scheme and expose the role of the California judges and the CIA-front San Francisco law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross.
Captain Stich then started filing federal actions as every judicial act inflicted additional great and irreparable harm. This site addresses those efforts.
Federal Judges Enlarged Upon The Massive
Civil Rights Violations of California Judges
Federal judges immediately dismissed each and every attempt by Captain Rodney Stich to obtain relief guaranteed by the laws and Constitution of the United States from the record-setting violations of California and federal laws and constitutional, protections, even though they had a mandatory duty to provide a federal court forum, and a duty to halt the violations being repeatedly committed.
Mandatory Duty to Provide Federal Court Forum and Relief
For Record Setting Civil Rights Violations Causing
Great and Irreparable Personal and Financial Harm
Violated Title 28
U.S.C. § 1331. which requires federal judges to provide a federal court forum to a person for
civil actions arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States,
which included the Civil Rights Act and the Declaratory Judgment Act.
Title 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Federal question. "The federal courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."
Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene Tribe of Idaho, 117 S.Ct. 2238, 138 L.Ed.2d
438 (1997), the Court held what was plainly stated in the statutes: “Congress
has implemented the Constitution’s grant of federal question jurisdiction by
authorizing federal courts to enforce rights arising under the Constitution
and federal law. The federal courts have an obligation to exercise that
Violated due process right to federal defenses and the right to a federal court forum, which requires district court judges to provide a federal court form for anyone whose civil rights had been violated.
Title 28 United States Code Section 1343: (a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action authorized by law to be commenced by any person:
(1) To recover damages for injury to his person or property, or because of the deprivation of any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, by any act done in furtherance of any conspiracy mentioned in section 1985 of Title 42: To recover damages from any person who fails to prevent or to aid in preventing any wrongs mentioned in section 1985 of Title 42 which he had knowledge were about to occur and power to prevent;
(3) To redress the deprivation, under color of any State law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution of the United States or by any Act of Congress providing for equal rights of citizens or of all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States.
(4) To recover damages or to secure equitable or other relief under any Act of Congress providing for the protection of civil rights, ...
Title 42 U.S.C. §§
1983-1988, Civil Rights Act, for the unprecedented
numbers of violations occurring in the California courts, and the violations
of federally protected rights by every preceding defendant federal judge.
Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 provides: Every person who, under
color or any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage, of any State
of Territory, subjects ... any citizen of the United States ... to the
deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the
Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at
law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.
[Applies to anyone acting under color of state law who violates these rights, with no exception for judicial violations; the clear wording of the statute supersedes the self-serving judicial immunity in judge-made case law..]
Federal Offense For Anyone Refusing to Halt Civil Rights Violations
Title 42 U.S.C. § 1986. Action for neglect to prevent conspiracy
“Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in the preceding section [42 USCS § 1985], are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses to do so, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by such wrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on the case; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action, and if the death of any party be caused by any such wrongful act and neglect, the legal representatives of the deceased shall have such action therefore, and may recover not exceeding five thousand dollars damages therein, for the benefit of the widow of the deceased, if there be one, and if there be no widow, then for the benefit of the next of kin of the deceased. But no action under the provisions of this section shall be sustained which is not commenced within one year after the cause of action has accrued.”
Allegations Stated in the Complaint Must Be Accepted As True
For Opposing Dismissal
"With regard to a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, a § 1983 complaint should not be dismissed unless it appears that the plaintiff can provide no set of facts which would entitle him to relief. Doe v. Public Health Trust of Dade County, 696 F.2d 901, 907 (11th Cir. 1983) (Hatchett, J. specially concurring); Richardson v. Fleming, 651 F.2d 366, 368 (5th Cir. 1981). For purposes of testing sufficiency of the complaint, the allegations of the complaint must be taken as true. Richardson, 651 F.2d at 368.
Despite the statements of record-setting violations of federally protected rights, for which federal defenses exist, invoking mandatory responsibilities of federal judges to provide relief, Repeatedly violated case law that barred dismissal of the multiple lawsuits when facts are alleged that stated federal causes of actions.
Declare the Legal Status of Persons
Declaratory Judgment Act (Title 18 U.S.C. § 2201, 2202 and FRCivP 47)
provides for federal judges to
provides for federal judges to“declare the rights and other legal relations” adjudicated and stated in seven divorce judgments
Title 28 U.S.C. § 2201. Creation of remedy. "In a case of actual controversy within its jurisdiction, any court of the United States, upon the filing of an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and other legal relations of any interested party seeking such declaration, whether or not further relief is or could be sought. Any such declaration shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree and shall be reviewable as such.
Ten Years of Judicial Violations Prima Facie Evidence of Conspiracy
Ten years of repeated violations of their federal responsibilities as federal judges, aiding and abetting repeated violations by California judges of record-setting violations of California and federal laws and Constitutional protections, involving a sham lawsuit, in a scheme. filed by the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross, meets the criteria for prima facie proof of a conspiracy. Federal judges repeated aided and abetted the record-setting civil and constitutional violations perpetrated by the California judges.
Example of the Secret or Second Government
Subverting the American People
The enormity of the misconduct by dozens of federal judges is part of the overwhelming evidence associated with the lawless actions taken to halt the exposure of deadly high-level corruption that Captain Rodney Stich and his many confidants personally discovered and sought to expose and halt. Under conditions in the United States, this non-elected bureaucracy has inflicted great harm upon individual Americans, using the American public as a feeding trough. Over many years, the corrupt conduct in segments of the non-elected bureaucracy has enabled a series of corruption-enabled aviation disasters, enabled a series of terrorist successes, and other harm.
Protectors of Civil Rights Terminated the Civil Rights
Of Corruption Fighter—While Simultaneously Inflicting
Massive Civil Rights Violations and Harm
Federal district and appellate judges repeatedly issued unlawful and unconstitutional Orders Barring Stich for the Remainder of His Life From Filing Any Papers in the Federal District or Appellate Courts
The effect―and surely the intent of denying Stich access to the federal courts―was to:
Prevent him and his group of other former government agents
from reporting the criminal activities and related tragedies that they had
discovered. (Stich had encountered repeated blocks from members of
Congress and Justice Department personnel that prevented him from
providing them with the evidence. Stich then circumvented these blocks by
exercising the alternate remedy under the federal
crime reporting statute.)
Prevent Stich from exercising the many federal defenses against the massive numbers of violations of state and federal laws and constitutional protections, that constituted violations of federally protected rights, for which federal remedies and defenses were guaranteed to everyone (except to that former federal agent).
FRCivP65 injunctions. Rendered unlawful and unconstitutional injunctive orders barring Stich for the remainder of his life from federal court access and voiding all rights and protections guaranteed by the laws and Constitution of the United States. The injunctive orders reversed the clear legal requirements: the injunctive orders were rendered against the party suffering great and irreparable harm (Stich); were rendered in favor of the parties perpetrating the harm and responsible for the record setting violations of state and federal laws and federally protected rights; were rendered against the public interest rather than in the public’s interest; failed to stated these requirements in the decisions; and in the process misused their judicial positions to aid and abet the violations of federally protected rights that they were paid and entrusted to uphold and enforce.
Violated Fifth Amendment protection. The federal judges misused their judicial positions and the courts to destroy for plaintiff, and setting precedence, the rights and protections guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Fifth Amendment, Section 1. No person [shall be] deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
The federal judges aided and abetted the violations of the Fourteenth Amendment by the CIA-front law firm and the defendant California judges.
Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.
Federal judges engaged in a continuous pattern of reversing the clear wording and intent of every statute, rules of court, Supreme Court decision, and constitutional right. They, exactly like the California judges, sought to support their unlawful and unconstitutional acts by reversing the legal and common sense definition of frivolous, and placing a frivolous label on Stich’s filings, each of which stated serious and multiple federal causes of action that were backed up with judicial records of such violations.
The United States Supreme Court defined the legal definition of frivolous in Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738: An appeal [or complaint] is not frivolous if "any of the legal points [are] arguable on their merits ..."
Federal judges, like the California judges, sought to support their unlawful and unconstitutional acts by reversing the legal definition of vexation and called Stich a vexatious litigant.
Applying this definition to the American people, the exercise of constitutional due process for only one of the dozens of legal and constitutional violations inflicted upon Stich would, instead of creating a cause of action, would be frivolous and vexatious, In this manner, the mindset in the federal courts could void and eliminate every legal right and protection guaranteed under the form of government in the United States, and show how dangerous the judicial system is to the people of the United States. Ironically, it was the repeated violations of civil and constitutional rights judicially inflicted upon Stich, and the repeated denial and violation of constitutional due process specifically provided by such laws and the Declaratory Judgment Act and Rule 47, and the Civil rights Act, and related case law and rules of court, that caused Stich to have to repeatedly seek relief, to no avail.
Black's Law dictionary defines "vexatious proceedings" as follows:
Proceeding instituted maliciously and without probable cause. Paramount Pictures v. Blumenthal, 256 App.Div. 756, 11 N.Y.S.2d 768, 772. When the party bringing proceeding merely wishes to annoy or embarrass his opponent, or when it is not calculated to lead to any practical result. Such a proceeding is often described as "frivolous and vexatious," and the court may dismiss it on that ground. "An appeal [or complaint] is not frivolous if "any of the legal points [are] arguable on their merits ..." Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738; "The objective standard looks at the merits of the appeal from a reasonable person's perspective. ... whether any reasonable person would agree that the point is totally and completely devoid of merit, and therefore, frivolous. ... an appeal is not frivolous if "any of the legal points [are] arguable on their merits." In re Marriage of Flaherty (1982) 31 Cal.3d 637, 649.
Interpretation of a frivolous filing in California, under Code of Civil Procedure 907 and Rule of Court 26(a).
"For the purpose of determining whether a complaint is "frivolous," the court presumes that the plaintiff's allegations are true." Hernandez v. Denton, 88 C.D.O.S. 8132 (9th Cir. Nov. 23, 1988); quoting Franklin, 745 F.2d at 1228.
of Justice by Federal Judges—
And Resulting Catastrophic Events
Federal judges, by refusing to receive reports of criminal activities being offered under the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4, obstructed justice:
Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 (misprision of felony). “Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”
To address the corruption in government offices, Stich also sought a court order under 1361, ordering a federal official to perform his duty and halt his unlawful acts, directed to the FAA and NTSB). The earlier obstruction of justice focusing primarily on a pattern of covert corrupt and criminal acts documented by Stich while he was an FAA air safety inspector-investigator made possible the continuation of the federal violations that played key roles in subsequent fatal airline crashes. The obstruction of justice by the present defendant federal judges related to such crimes as the CIA drug smuggling, corruption in bankruptcy courts, and others are described in Stich’s various books, especially: Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centuries; Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups; and Lawyers and Judges: American Trojan Horses.
Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.
This obstruction of justice by federal judges commenced in 1976 when Stich filed federal lawsuits under Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 and Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361.
Stich v. United States, et al., 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977)(addressed hard-core air safety misconduct, violations of federal air safety laws, threats against government inspectors not to report safety violations and misconduct); Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982))(addressed repeated criminal falsification of official airline accident reports, omitting highly sensitive air safety misconduct, making possible repeated crashes from the same sequestered problems); Amicus curiae brief filed on July 17, 1975, in the Paris DC-10 multi-district litigation, Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California.) (addressing the long standing FAA misconduct, of which the cover-up of the DC-10 cargo door problem was one of repeated instances of tragedy related misconduct); U.S. v. Department of Justice, District of Columbia, Nos. 86-2523, 87-2214, and other actions filed by claimant seeking to expose and correct the powerful and covert air disaster misconduct.
Criminal Offenses Perpetrated by Federal Judges:
Subverting U.S. Government
By blocking Stich and a group of other former federal agents from reporting criminal and even subversive activities, federal judges repeatedly were guilty of criminal acts that had catastrophic consequences for the nation. The involved criminal statutes included:
Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 3, and 4, violated by the defendant’s obstruction of justice and harm inflicted upon Stich to prevent his reporting of the criminal activities.
Title 18 U.S.C. § 2. Principals. (a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal. (b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.
Note: The legislative intent to punish as a principal not only anyone who directly commits an offense and anyone who "aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures" another to commit an offense, but also anyone who causes the doing of an act which if done by him directly would render him guilty of an offense against the United States. Case law decisions: Rothenburg v. United States, 1918, 38 S.Ct. 18, 245 U.S. 480, 62 L.Ed. 414, and United States v. Giles, 1937, 57 S.Ct. 340, 300 U.S. 41, 81 L.Ed. 493.
Title 18 U.S.C. § 3. Accessory after the fact. Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States had been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.
Federal judges conspired with other judges and lawyers, among other people, as they perpetrated predicate acts in a racketeering enterprise, to strip Stich of the assets that funded his exposure of criminal acts that continue to undermine the internal security of the United States. Their predicate acts enlarged upon the harm being inflicted upon the American people and the government.
Title 42 U.S.C. § 1961. Definition. As used in this chapter-(1) "racketeering activity" means (A) any act or threat involving ... relating to 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice), section 1510 (relating to obstruction of criminal investigations), section 1511 (relating to obstruction of State or local law enforcement), section 1951 (relating to interference with commerce, robbery or extortion), section 1952 (relating to racketeering, ...
Title 42 U.S.C. § 1962. Prohibited Activities. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly 9 or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. ...
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern or racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.
(c) It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsections (a), (b), or (c) of this section. ...
Title 42 USC § 1964. Civil Remedies.
(a) The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of section 1962 of this chapter by issuing appropriate orders, including, but not limited to: ordering any person to divert himself of any interest, direct or indirect, in any enterprise; imposing reasonable restrictions of the future activities or investments of any person, including, but not limited to, prohibiting any person from engaging in the same type of endeavor as the enterprise engaged in, the activities of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or ordering dissolution or reorganization of any enterprise, making due provision for the rights of innocent persons.
(b) The Attorney General may institute proceedings under this section. Pending final determination thereof, the court may at any time enter such restraining orders or prohibitions, or take such other actions, including the acceptance of satisfactory performance bonds, as it shall deem proper.
(c) Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 of this chapter may sue therefore in any appropriate United States district court and shall recover threefold the damages he sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee.
(d) A final judgment or decree rendered in favor of the United States in any criminal proceeding brought by the United States under this chapter shall estop the defendant from denying the essential allegations of the criminal offense in any subsequent civil proceeding brought by the United States.
Title 42 USC § 1965. Venue and Process. (Any civil action or proceeding under this chapter against any person may be instituted in the district court of the United States for any district in which such person resides, is found, has an agent, or transacts his affairs.
(b) In any action under section 1964 of this chapter in any district court of the United States in which it is shown that the ends of justice require that other parties residing in any other district be brought before the court, the court may cause such parties to be summoned, and process for that purpose may be served in any judicial district of the United States by the marshal thereof.
(c) In any civil or criminal action or proceeding instituted by the United States under this chapter in the district court of the United States for any judicial district, subpoenas issued by such court to compel the attendance of witnesses may be served in any other judicial district, except that in any civil action or proceeding no such subpoena shall be issued for service upon any individual who resides in another district at a place more than one hundred miles from the place at which such court is held without approval given by a judge of such court upon a showing of good cause.
(d) All other process in any action or proceeding under this chapter may be served on any person in any judicial district in which such person resides, is found, has an agent, or transacts his affairs.
Criminal Acts of DOJ Personnel and Federal Judges
By Retaliating Against Former Federal Agent
For Reporting Tragedy-Related Federal Crimes
Federal judges retaliated against Stich for exercising due process remedies specifically provided by the laws and Constitution of the United States. They retaliated against Stich for attempting to report criminal acts under the federal crime reporting statutes that he and his group of government whistleblowers had discovered.
It is a felony for anyone to retaliate against anyone for having exercised due process remedies guaranteed by the laws and Constitution of the United States.
Title 18 U.S.C. § 241. Conspiracy against rights of citizens. If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any citizen in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; ... They shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... or both;
Title 18 U.S.C. § 1505. Whoever corruptly ... influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due the proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States ... shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
Title 18 USC § 1510. Obstruction of criminal investigation. (a) Whoever willfully endeavors by means of bribery to obstruct, delay, or prevent the communication of information relating to a violation of any criminal statute of the United States by any person to a criminal investigator shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (b) As used in this section, the term "criminal investigator" means any individual duly authorized by a department, agency, or armed force of the United States to conduct or engage in investigations of or prosecutions for violations of the criminal laws of the United States. [Stich was a federal inspector-investigator responsible for air safety at the most senior program at United Airlines, when he discovered an ongoing pattern of criminal activities related to a series of fatal airline crashes.]
Title 18 U.S.C. § 1513. Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant. (a) Whoever knowingly engages in any conduct and thereby causes bodily injury to another person or damages the tangible property of another person, or threatens to do so, with intent to retaliate against any person for──(1) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given or any record, document, or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding; or (2) any information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ...
Title 18 U.S.C. § 1515. Definitions of terms in criminal statutes (as used in sections 1512 and 1513).
(a)(2) the term "physical force" means physical action against another and includes confinement; (a)(3) the term "misleading conduct" means──
(A) knowingly making a false statement;
(B) intentionally omitting information from a statement and thereby causing a portion of such statement to be misleading, or intentionally concealing a material fact, and thereby creating a false impression by such statement;
(C) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a writing or recording that is false ... or otherwise lacking in authenticity;
(D) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a ... object that is misleading in a material respect;
(E) knowingly using a trick, scheme, or device with intent to mislead;
(4) the term "law enforcement officer" means an officer or employee of the Federal Government, or a person authorized to act for or on behalf of the Federal Government or serving the Federal Government as an adviser or consultant──
(A) authorized under law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of an offense; (5) the term "bodily injury" means──
(E) any other injury to the body, no matter how temporary.
(a)(1) the term "official proceeding" means ...
(C) a proceeding before a Federal Government agency which is authorized by law. 18 U.S.C. § 1515 (a)(3)(A). Misleading conduct means knowingly making false statements.
Federal judges repeatedly and willfully deprived Stich of rights, privileges, and immunities secured and protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
Title 18 U.S.C. § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law. Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both;
It is a felony for anyone to inflict harm upon a former federal investigator for seeking to report corrupt and criminal acts that he discovered as a federal air safety investigator.
Title 18 U.S.C. § 245. Federally protected activities. ((b) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force willfully injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with–(1) Any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons [whistleblower, witness, informant] from–(B) participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States.
It is a felony to deprive any member of a class, the class being whistleblowers, of benefits provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress.
Title 18 U.S.C. § 246. Deprivation of relief benefits. Whoever directly or indirectly deprives, attempts to deprive, or threatens to deprive any person of any employment, position, work, compensation, or other benefit provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress appropriating funds for work relief or relief purposes, on account of political affiliation, ... shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Desperately Seeking Relief from Massive Civil Rights
Violations and Encountering Additional Corruption
In U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Courts
Suffering enormous personal and financial harm from the unprecedented numbers of judicially perpetrated civil and constitutional violations, corruptly blocked by U.S. district and appellate judges from relief, Stich was forced to seek relief in Chapter 11 courts, seeking to force a federal judge to exercise his duties under the Declaratory Judgment Act and the Civil Rights Act and the case law and rules of court entitling Stich to a federal court forum and relief. The systematic judicial violations spanning the California and federal courts then escalated. Instead of providing relief, which a mere addressing of Stich’s personal and property rights under the declaratory judgment act would have accomplished, federal judges expanded on the civil and constitutional violations:
Federal judges corruptly seized Stich’s life’s assets, combining corrupt judicial acts with major violations of constitutional and legal due process:
Violated the legal and constitutional requirement for a noticed hearing.
Violated the legal and constitutional requirement of a hearing at which Stich could defend against the taking.
Took Stich’s life assets without cause.
Signed the orders in chambers taking Stich’s properties, without jurisdiction, the absence of jurisdiction arose from earlier orders that were signed ten days earlier refusing to accept jurisdiction over the cases.
Under controlling U.S. Supreme Court decisions, orders rendered without jurisdiction, or that violated constitutional due process, are void orders, and remain void, and continue to be void even when affirmed by appellate court decisions.
Jordon v. Gilligan, 500 F.2d 701, 710 (6th Cir. 1974)("a void judgment is no judgment at all and is without legal effect.") Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Bd. No. 27, 453 F.2d 645 (1st Cir. 1972). "a court must vacate any judgment entered in excess of its jurisdiction."); U.S. v. Holtzman, 762 F.2d 720 (9th Cir. 1985)
A void judgment is not entitled to the respect accorded a valid adjudication. All proceedings founded on the void judgment are themselves regarded as invalid. A void judgment is regarded as a nullity, and the situation is the same as it would be if there were no judgment. 30A Am Jur Judgments §§ 43, 44, 45. It is attended by none of the consequences of a valid adjudication. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at any place. ... It is not entitled to enforcement ... All proceedings founded on the void judgment are themselves regarded as invalid. 30A Am Jur Judgments § 44, 45.
An illegal order is forever void. An order that exceeds the jurisdiction of the court, is void, or voidable, and can be attacked in any proceeding in any court where the validity of the judgment comes into issue. (See Rose v. Himely (1808) 4 Cranch 241, 2 L ed 608; Pennoyer v. Neff (1877) 95 US 714, 24 L ed 565; Thompson v. Whitman (1873) 18 Wall 457, 21 l ED 897; Windsor v. McVeigh (1876) 93 US 274, 23 L ed 914; McDonald v. Mabee (1917) 243 US 90, 37 Sct 343, 61 L ed 608.
Opportunity for Patriotic Law Firm to Collect
Sizable Legal Fees While Exposing And
Fighting High-Level Tragedy-Related Corruption
Since there is not statute of limitations on void orders, an aggressive law firm could combine a federal action, in any federal jurisdiction, with a legal action to reclaim all of the assets. Their value, when seized, exceeded $10 million. In 2007, these same properties are valued at approximately $20 million.
In addition, there would be numerous lawsuits that could be filed against the lawyers, law firms, and state and federal judges implicated in these schemes that also played a role in major national tragedies.
Repeating the Unlawful Orders Voiding For Stich all Due Process
Federal judges expanded on their constitutional due process violations. After seizing Stich’s $10 million in assets—that funded his exposure of government and judicial corruption—federal judge Edward Jellen (Oakland) rendered an order barring Stich from filing objections to the seizure and liquidation. Numerous federal district court judges had already rendered orders barring Stich the right to federal court access, for the remainder of Stich's life. And Ninth Circuit appellate judges rendered orders refusing to recognize any appeals filed by Stich. All of these corrupt judicial acts were known to thee Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court through submission of papers and letters to the court and to individual justices.
Oakland Federal Judge Edward Jellen Feloniously
Expanded on Legal and Judicial Attacks
These repeated constitutional due process violations were followed by felony misconduct. Federal judges, with the assistance of Justice Department prosecutors in several cases, charged Stich with criminal contempt of court for exercising constitutional due process. He was charged with criminal contempt of court by Oakland federal judge Edward Jellen with criminal contempt of court for filing objections to the taking and liquidation of assets. These included filings showing that trustee Charles Duck was looting his assets. Justice Department prosecutors were forced to later enter a wrist-slap plea bargain with Duck after the media in the San Francisco area charge trustee Duck with the nation’s worse trustee embezzlement—which included looting of Stich’s assets. For objecting to Duck’s looting, federal judges and Justice Department attorneys charged Stich with criminal contempt of court.
Federal judges financially rewarded every attorney involved in the civil and constitutional violations in the sham California action, which carried over into the federal courts, by fire sale liquidation of Stich’s assets and giving them the results. These assets were distributed to the attorneys perpetrating the violations of federally protected rights while denying any assets to Stich for hiring legal counsel.
Judges Became High-Ranking Enablers
In Series of Corruption-Enabled National Events
By their concerted pattern misusing the courts and their judicial positions, federal judges defrauded and continue to inflict great damage to the internal security of the United States. They:
First blocked the reporting of criminal activities in the government's aviation safety offices, thereby enabling the culture to continue, along with the fatal airline disasters caused or made possible by the corruption. These were criminal acts.
Federal judges then conspired with the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross (and then others) to insure the success of the scheme to strip Stich of the assets that funded his exposure activities. This required violating Stich's civil and constitutional rights, which are crimes under the Civil Rights and RICO statutes.
Federal judges then charged Stich with criminal contempt of court for reporting the criminal activities that he had initially discovered as a federal agent, and which were continuing to result in otherwise preventable airline disasters. These were criminal acts.
Federal judges charged Stich with criminal contempt of court for exercising federal defenses against the massive numbers of civil and constitutional violations perpetrated by CIA-front law firms, California judges, and prior federal judges. These were criminal acts.
Federal judges, by corruptly misusing their judicial positions in this manner, converted the
federal courts into a criminal enterprise, meeting the definition of a RICO criminal enterprise.
All of these forces are still in effect.
Federal judges obstructed justice relating to the attempts by Stich and his group of other government agents to report and produce evidence of drug smuggling (and other crimes) into the United States by people in key government positions, and the cover-up of such criminal and subversive actions by other government personnel. The government agents read to provide this evidence included agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Customs, Drug Enforcement Administration, Secret Service, the Central Intelligence Agency, including the former heads of secret CIA airlines and secret CIA financial operations. These obstruction of justice tactics, which continue to this day, are felonies under such statutes as Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 3, and 4.
Federal judges compounded these record-setting violations of federal civil, constitutional, and criminal statutes by charging Stich with criminal contempt of court for attempting to report these criminal and subversive activities. The initial scheme involving the sham California lawsuit was part of the efforts to block Stich’s reports of these crimes against the United States in which the defendant California and federal judges were implicated.
Judicially Inflicted Upon Former
in Scheme to Cover Up For
High-Level Tragedy-Enabling Corruption
in Scheme to Cover Up For
For attempting to protect major national interests that were already suffering great harm, federal judges and their shills in the legal fraternity and in the California courts inflicted great personal and financial harm upon Stich, corruptly misusing the nation's courts while concurrently violating massive numbers of civil and constitutional protections.
Seizure of his life assets, converting him from a multi-millionaire to a state of poverty, taking his home, making him homeless for a period of time.
Incarcerated by federal judges on a contempt of court charge for attempting to report criminal activities, including those that played a role in such major airline disasters as the hijackings of four airliners on September 11, 2001. This incarceration was under harsh conditions for six months, including two months in solitary confinement. This occurred within months of undergoing coronary multiple bypass surgery.
The American public suffered even worse from this misconduct:
For several decades before the 1982 start of the scheme, the harm from the corruption was recognized by knowledgeable insiders:
- Harm to individual Americans directly inflicted by arrogant and corrupt government personnel.
Series of corruption-enabled aviation disasters, including several aviation disasters while FAA airline safety inspector was under attack during his life-and-death-assignment.
Series of terrorist successes enabled by the corruption Captain Stich discovered and sought to halt.
- Harm to be expected.
- Tragedies after tragedies.
- American public as a feeding trough.
- Harm to people of other nations.
Continuing cover-ups and attacks on the corruption-fighter enabled continuation of the corrupt conduct of government personnel, including those in the California courts. The catastrophic type of horrors inflicted upon innocent people (in addition to the non-catastrophic type) included:
- Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie.
- World Trade Center bombing.
- U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
- Hijackings of four U.S. airliners on September 11, 2001.
The multiple areas of corruption that had a direct enabling effect for the horrific 9/11 events was then followed by the systemic corruption preceding the deadly invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, both totally blameless for the al Qaeda attacks. That destabilized the entire Middle East and Africa, and generating world-record number of people and groups wanting to kill Americans. The domestic results of this has yet to be felt.
Expected response from the American public after this is posted: ZERO!
Massive Evidence of Conspiracy Orchestrated By
Powerful Force in the Federal Government
The pattern of documented acts by the federal judges far exceeded the legal definition of a conspiracy, constituting a conspiracy to subvert the laws and constitution of the United States, a conspiracy to violate Stich’s civil and constitutional rights, a conspiracy to obstruct justice by block the reporting of criminal acts that Stich, a former federal agent and his group of other government agents sought to report under the federal crime reporting statute.
To understand the following subject, take a look at the introduction to systemic corruption in the United States, the efforts of several courageous former government agents, and the enormous number of people and groups protecting the guilty. That will help understand the existence of a powerful group in government that was orchestrating the retaliatory actions to prevent the information becoming known to the American people.
The evidence indicates that a powerful force in government was orchestrating the multiple parallel actions that blocked the reporting of high-level corruption, and that force was properly key people in the U.S. Department of Justice. Examples of these indicators included the following:
Years of cover-ups by Department of Justice employees when informed of the corruption.
Years of cover-ups by members of Congress when informed of the corruption.
Repeated cover-up by federal judges when former federal agent Rodney Stich filed federal actions under the federal crime reporting statute seeking to report to a federal judge the major corrupt and criminal activities in key government positions associated with a series of major aviation disasters and later involving national security harm.
Series of sham lawsuits filed by a hoard of lawyers that involved massive and unprecedented violations of state and federal laws, followed by repeated additional violations by a large number of California judges.
Unprecedented judicial retaliation for exercising legally-prescribed defenses.
Repeated protection of the massive violations of state and federal laws by federal judges.
Series of illegal and unconstitutional orders by federal district and appellate judges permanently barring Stich from filing any papers in any federal district or appellate court. These orders knowingly blocked Stich and his coalition of former intelligence and law enforcement personnel from reporting as required by law the federal offenses that they discovered during their official duties, and blocked Stich from defending against the massive violation being inflicted by a hoard of lawyers and California judges.
Corruptly, and in gross violation of federal laws and constitutional protections, federal judges corruptly seized, without a hearing and without cause, the $10 million in assets that funded the attempts to halt the tragedy-enabling high-level corruption.
Charging Stich with criminal contempt of court for attempting to report criminal activities that were enabling to occur a series of major aviation disasters—and other harm—and would make possible several major terrorist attacks, including the 9/11 hijackings. That retaliation against Stich enabled the corruption that had already enabled many deaths to occur, enabled the corruption in such areas as the government's aviation safety offices, the FAA, responsible for preventing aviation disasters, including terrorist attack, and within the Department of Justice to continue. Evidence that is little-known to the American people shows gross misconduct in these two groups as having been the primary enablers of a series of horrific terrorist attacks, including the hijacking of four airliners on September 11, 2001.
30-years of federal judges blocking the reports of high-level criminal activities in which they themselves become complicit through cover-ups.
Repeated complicity, from 1980 to 2005, by the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, as they aided and abetted each of these and many other instances that were brought to their attention through legal filings and letters.
For these monumental repeated violations of criminal statutes, of major civil and constitutional rights, to continue, knowingly sacrificing lives and national security, required a powerful force in government. And that is believed to be primarily within the U.S. Department of Justice, easily accommodated by a culture of systemic corruption and systemic cover-ups in the United States.
The lawyers, whose actions hindering the exposure of the high-level corruption by activist Rodney Stich, paralleled the block by federal judges and Department of Justice personnel, appeared to be acting for a powerful force somewhere in the federal government. Their actions were similar to the thugs in Egypt hired by the government officials in power, called "Baltagiya," or the hired thugs in Iran called "Basij"
Documentaries on 50 Years of
Government Positions, and the Resulting Tragedies,
Provided by Insiders
any Modern Industrial Nation
All of the books are available at amazon.com, in print and on digital formats, and at many other Internet sites. They bring together the various pieces of the puzzle to better understand the overall picture, and why the same conditions continue year after year. Information on the books by former government agent Rodney Stich
Sampling of early books reviews
Sampling of complimentary letters/faxes to author/activist Rodney Stich.
More information about these books by clicking here.
Print books from Amazon.com in Europe: http://www.amazon.co.uk./s/ref=nb_sb_noss/277-4275297-4922359?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=%22Rodney%20Stich%22