Federal Judges Blocking
Reports of High-Level Corruption

This is a partial list of the federal judges directly involved in cover-ups, obstruction of justice, judicial fraud, or criminal retaliation against government agents, seeking to report corruption in key government corruption. These documented acts continued from 1976 to 2005. As a matter of law, these criminal acts by federal judges far exceed the gravity of the offenses charged against most federal prisoners.

First Federal Judges Blocking Reports
Of Corruption Related to Major Airline Disasters

Robert Schnacke (U.S. District Court, San Francisco) He was the first judge to receive a federal brief filed by Stich. (Stich v. United States, et al, 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977). The lawsuit sought to expose government corruption by key people in the Federal Aviation Administration, compounded by obstruction of justice from Justice Department employees.

Justice Department lawyers argued to have that action dismissed, thereby protecting the corruption that had played a major role in many prior airline crashes. 

Judge Schnacke, and then three judges in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, sympathized with Stich, but held that it was the responsibility of Congress, and not the court, to address these matters. That argument was contrary to statutory and case law.

Stich then filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Justices covered up for the serious government corruption by refusing to hear the case. By covering up for the FAA corruption, several subsequent air disasters were closely associated with the same type of misconduct, which continues to this day.

Judge James R. Browning, U.S. District Court

James R. Browning (U.S. District Court.) He was the district court judge who heard Stich's lawsuit against the National Transportation Safety Board (Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977) in which Stich sought a court order forcing the NTSB to open the accident investigation into the 1978 Pacific Southwest Airlines (PSA) disaster in San Diego and admit major evidence revealing the primary reason why the disaster occurred (as revealed in the third edition of Unfriendly Skies). 

Browning sympathized with Stich, and stated, as repeated by the three judges in the ninth circuit court of appeals that Stich had no standing to seek this remedy (despite the U.S. attorney at San Francisco initially agreeing to support Stich's actions. Aided by Justice Department and judicial misconduct, the pattern of NTSB cover-ups continued, as described in Unfriendly Skies, and in the tragic TWA Flight 800 disaster.

Stich v. United States, et al, 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977). This was an action against the Federal Aviation Administration that went to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982). This action attempted to force the NTSB to reopen the accident record of the PSA crash into San Diego (the world's worst crash at that time), to admit major evidence that constituted the primary cause of that great disaster. (This is described in the third edition of Defrauding America.) Initially, an assistant U.S. attorney in the San Francisco office supported Stich's actions, but was then blocked by the Department of Justice in Washington. It went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California. In this action, Stich filed a friend of the court brief in the Paris DC-10 crash litigation, offering evidence of a pattern of FAA corruption that would explain why the major safety defects on the DC-10 were part of the politics of air safety in the FAA Western Region. The lead trial attorneys had to, and did, approve of my filing.

Stich v. United Airlines. This action was filed in the U.S. District Court at Reno, Nevada, but the enormity of the Justice Department and judicial retaliation against Stich caused him to abandon the lawsuit. The intent of the lawsuit was to show the pattern of government-documented corruption at United Airlines that caused, and/or allowed to occur, a 20-year pattern of fatal airline crashes.

Judicial Obstruction of Justice
Restarted in 1986

In 1986, after former federal agent Rodney Stich and his coalition of other insiders attempted to report corruption and criminal activities in areas other than aviation, federal judges restarted their earlier attempts to prevent these federal crimes from being reported.

Milton Schwartz (U.S. District Court, Sacramento). He initially showed concern about the reports of high-level government corruption that Rodney Stich sought to report under federal crime-reporting statutes, including Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4, and then a month later and refused to receive the evidence. Compounding his refusal to receive the evidence offered under federal crime reporting statutes, Schwartz rendered an order barring Stich−for life−from federal court access (which was illegal and unconstitutional, and obviously intended to block Stich from reporting criminal activities that he and his government agents were seeking to report. 

This was a clear obstruction of justice, aiding and abetting the criminal activities being reported, and constituted federal crimes worse than the offenses for which many people languish in federal prison. Schwartz initiated corrupt judicial acts that enabled federal and California judges to seize and loot Stich's life's assets. Schwartz' crimes in these areas expanded through Schwartz' cover-ups, obstruction of justice, misprision of felonies, and his various civil rights violations against Stich. 

Not only did Schwartz commit criminal acts involving the obstruction of justice and retaliation against Stich, but he unlawfully and criminally blocked the exercise of what is the most important federal criminal statute available to the public when federal officials are guilty of criminal acts. That statute is Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4.

Expanding Felony Obstruction of Justice
With Felony Retaliation

Raul Ramirez (U.S. District Court, Sacramento-now in private practice in the Sacramento area.) Ramirez enlarged upon the corrupt acts by Judge Schwartz, charging Stich with criminal contempt of court after Stich sought to report to a federal court in Sacramento the criminal activities that Stich and other federal agents and deep-cover operatives had discovered. Ramirez, as with other judges, was corruptly charging Stich with criminal contempt of court for exercising the mandatory crime-reporting requirement of Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4. 

U.S. Magistrate John Moulds

John Moulds (Magistrate in U.S. District Court, Sacramento--also in private practice in Sacramento) Moulds was first contacted by Stich on the basis of his constitutional law expertise, seeking to halt the bizarre California lawsuit initiated by the CIA-related law firm, Friedman, Sloan and Ross. Possibly realizing the government's involvement, he refused to provide Stich any help. Later, he conducted a non-jury "trial" in which Stich was being charged by Justice Department prosecutors and Judge Milton Schwartz with criminal contempt of court in retaliation for Stich filing under Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4 (seeking to report additional criminal activities that Stich had discovered and seeking federal intervention under federal law against the actions taken to silence Stich via the sham California lawsuit). 

Moulds' misconduct resulted in Stich being sent to federal prison for six months for attempting to report to a federal court the criminal acts that he, or anyone else, must report. This sentence handed down by Moulds was then approved by U.S. District Judge Raul Ramirez (now in private practice in Sacramento). The entire Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals at San Francisco then upheld the right to imprison anyone seeking to report government crimes under Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4. 

Stich filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Justices also approved of this constitutional, statutory, and criminal outrage. The Justices of the Supreme Court were now involved even further in the criminal cover-ups as defined by federal criminal statutes. While Stich was in prison, federal judges ordered Stich's life's assets seized, and this was followed by judge-appointed trustees looting his $10 million estate. 

Ninth Circuit court of appeal judges, including Anthony Kennedy, became complicit in these obstruction of justice tactics, including the criminal retaliation against a former federal agent for attempting to report corrupt activities against the United States.

U.S. Attorney David F. Levi

David F. Levi (U.S. District Court, Sacramento). Levi was the U.S. attorney who joined Judge Schwartz in the scheme that charged Stich with criminal contempt of court and the judicial actions leading to the judicial seizure and looting of Stich's assets. Although it would have been a criminal offense if Stich had not sought to report the criminal activities to a federal judge, this Justice Department prosecutor (with the blessing of Judge Schwartz and the other judges and Supreme Court Justices) reversed the law and charged Stich with criminal contempt for seeking to report high-level federal crimes (that Stich was required to report to a federal judge under federal crime reporting statutes, including Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4). 

Oddly, or coincidentally, Justice Department employees and federal judges were earlier identified by Stich in aiding and abetting the criminal acts documented in Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America. After completing these attacks upon Stich, Levi was promoted to the position of federal judge, being another judicial position whose function could be to block any exposure of government corruption and to assist Justice Department retaliation against any government whistleblower. 

It is standard practice to put people in key positions throughout the courts and other government entities who are either criminally involved or sympathetic to the activities of the literal "secret government."

U.S. District Judge Edward Garcia

Edward Garcia (U.S. District Court, Sacramento). Garcia played a role in the above activities. 

U.S. District Judge Lowell Jensen

Lowell Jensen (U.S. District Court, San Francisco) Jensen played a role in the above activities. He was directly and corruptly involved as a Department of Justice attorney in the Inslaw scandal (described in Defrauding America), and in the Iran-Contra affair, and was rewarded with a federal judge position, a common tactic to control the system and control the checks and balances available to the public.

Judicial Obstruction of Justice in
Washington Courts in the Early 1990s

Lawrence Silberman (U.S. Court of Appeals, Washington, DC). Silberman played key roles in blocking Stich from exposing the high-level government corruption by dismissing a lawsuit raising these matters, including the attempts by Stich and his coalition of government agents and deep-cover operatives from exposing CIA crimes (CIA drug trafficking, savings and loan fraud, among others).

U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Stanley Sporkin

Stanley Sporkin (U.S. Court of Appeals, Washington, DC). Sporkin also played key roles in blocking Stich's exposure activities. Sporkin was at one time the head legal counsel for the CIA, was legal counsel for the covert CIA operation, Southern Air Transport, and identified by Terry Reed in his book, Compromised, as involved in CIA Arkansas drug smuggling activities. Others who were closely involved in blocking the exposure of high-level government corruption will be added to this list as time permits.

Obstruction of Justice and Retaliation
Felonies by Federal Judges in San Francisco

Marilyn Petal (U.S. District Court, San Francisco). One of the most vicious of all the federal judges, Petal's enlarged on the prior judicial misconduct, aiding and abetting the continuation of the criminal activities described and documented in the third editions of Defrauding America and Unfriendly Skies. Information provided to Stich by CIA sources indicated that Petal was deeply involved with CIA activities.

U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker

Vaughn Walker (U.S. District Court, San Francisco). Walker closely assisted Judge Petal in blocking the exposure of the high-level criminal activities and in seeking to return Stich to prison in retaliation for having exercised the mandatory federal crime-reporting statute. (Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4.) 

Walker's orders kept Stich under almost complete house arrest from 1990 to 1995, until the charges were suddenly dropped in 1995 without notice to Stich. (Walker rendered orders that provided unusual relief to major drug traffickers, possibly because of a CIA drug connection.)

Samuel Conti (U.S. District Court, Sacramento) He aided and abetted the actions by the other federal judges, with the same felony violations and prostitution of his judicial duties.

Additional Pre-911 Judicial Obstruction of Justice

All of the foregoing misconduct played deciding roles in the conditions that enabled 19 terrorists to so easily hijack four airliners on 9/11. However, there were additional judges involved in cover-ups shortly before their conduct played critical roles in the 9/11 catastrophic events. Federal Judge in Reno, Nevada, Who Blocked Reporting of the Corruption Shortly Prior to 9/11

U. S. district judge   Edward C. Reed, Jr., Reno, Nevada

Federal court of appeal judges in the Ninth Circuit at San Francisco, who received the notice of appeal and briefs and continued the cover-ups. This list will be uploaded shortly.

In dismissing the federal judges who Stich included among the judges and lawyer defendants, Judge Reed stated in his order of dismissal:

It is hereby ordered that motion to dismiss filed July 6, 2000, by defendants Federal Judges Milton Schwartz, Raul Ramirez, John Moulds, Marilyn Patel, Vaughn Walker, Robert Jones, and Edward Jellen, is granted.

The Federal Judges have absolute immunity. Judges are immune from damage actions for judicial acts taken within the jurisdiction of their courts. Moreover, judges are absolutely immune from a § 1983 or Bivens liability even when such acts are in excess of their jurisdiction and are alleged to have been done maliciously or corruptly. The acts complained of by plaintiffs were not in the clear absence of all jurisdiction or non judicial in nature. An act is judicial if it is a function normally performed by a judge and the parties dealt with the judge in his or her judicial capacity.

Stich filed a notice of appeal, paid the filing fees, and submitted the required filing papers., Ninth Circuit court of appeal judges refused to allow the appeal to proceed, claiming that prior orders of district and appellate judges permanently denying Stich the right to court access as available to everyone else--including murderers and terrorists--did not apply to Stich. That appellate court order was dated February 5, 2002--after those judges had seen the catastrophic consequences of the corruption and coverups.

Post-911 Obstruction of Justice


After 9/11, it became even more important for federal judges to continue the prior obstruction of justice tactics to avoid exposing themselves and the entire federal judiciary as enablers to the worst terrorist attacks ever perpetrated upon the United States.

After the 9/11 events, the list of federal judges blocking the exposure of corrupt and criminal activities expanded to include the following:

U.S. district court, Southern District of New York, where most of the 9/11 lawsuits have been filed:

    Chief judge Michael  B. Mukasey (thereafter appointed U.S. Attorney General)

    Alvin K. Hellerstein

           U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia

    Douglas H. Ginsburg

    David B. Sentelle

    A. Raymond Randolph

    Henry K. Hellerstein

Decades of Documented Complicity
By Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court

The judicial scandal becomes more serious, and reveals at least one of the powerful forces in government protecting the perpetrators.  Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court have repeatedly aided and abetted the criminal and subversive activities that Stich and his coalition of government agents sought to expose and correct. Stich repeatedly notified Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court of the underlying corruption, and the obstruction of justice tactics of federal judges over whom they had supervisory responsibilities, and also the felony misuse of federal courts to retaliate against Stich for attempting to report the criminal activities and for exercising federal defenses against the massive civil and constitutional violations that were parallel efforts to obstruct justice.

Repeatedly, Stich filed federal actions in U.S. District Courts seeking to report to federal courts the high-level criminal activities, such as CIA drug trafficking and the judicial corruption in bankruptcy courts, and was blocked from doing so. He even suffered judicial retaliation in the form of contempt-of-court charges and sentences and the seizure of his life's assets. In each of these cases he brought the matters to the U.S. Supreme Court in petitions for writ of certiorari. In each case, the Justices of the Supreme Court refused to correct the serious violations of federal criminal statutes and due process rights, and refused to act when they themselves were made aware of the criminal activities brought to them under federal crime-reporting statutes, including Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4.

Under federal criminal statutes, the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court are criminally implicated in many of the criminal activities described in author Rodney Stich's books. Under federal crime reporting statutes, and especially the very important Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4, anyone knowing of a federal crime is himself or herself guilty of a crime if that person does not promptly report the crime/s to a federal judge or other federal official.

Partial List of California Judges and Lawyers
Implicated in Series of Corrupt Schemes

The following California judges were among those who repeatedly violated massive numbers of California and federal laws and constitutional protections as they aided and abetted the sham lawsuit filed by the CIA-front law firm. Arguably, they knew they were blocking the reporting of criminal activities that had already, and would continue, to inflict great harm in the areas affected by the corrupt activities being exposed by former government agent Rodney Stich.

Dennis Bunting (Solano County, Fairfield, CA, who later became county counsel for Solano County in Fairfield, California.)

Dwight Ely, Fairfield, California.

Michael McInnis, Fairfield, California.

Harold F. Wolters, Fairfield, California.

William Jensen (Solano County, Fairfield, CA, promoted to California Court of Appeals)

Clinton Peterson (Solano County, Fairfield, CA, promoted thereafter to California Court of Appeals. He then retired and became a private judicial arbitrator.)

J. Clinton Peterson, Fairfield, California.

Richard Harris (Solano County, Fairfield, CA)

Donald King, California Court of Appeals, San Francisco.

Harry Low, California Court of Appeals, San Francisco.

Zerne Haning, California Court of Appeals, San Francisco.

All justices of California Court of Appeals (except Stanley Mosk who initially sought to support Stich's defenses).

California judges aided and abetted the federal actions to block Stich's reporting of the high-level government corruption, as detailed and documented in Unfriendly Skies:20th & 21st Centuries and Defrauding America). California judges openly and repeatedly violated large numbers of California and federal statutes, related decisional law, rules of court, as they played their part in stripping Stich of over $10 million in assets (1987 value). These assets funded his exposure activities. Under federal criminal statutes, they became criminally implicated in the scheme to block the reporting of federal crimes.

Some of the short-time California judges are now in legal practice in the Fairfield, California area, and others have been promoted to higher judicial positions in California.

Some high-level power in the federal government protected the six years of repeated violations of blocks of state and federal laws and constitutional protections, along with every procedural due process protection. That would be within the U.S. Department of Justice.

Parallel Complicity by Hoard of Lawyers
Blocking Exposure of Deadly Corruption

Powerful forces were able to commandeer help at every level, including at state and non-government levels. Playing major roles in seeking to halt the exposure of the corruption were a hoard of lawyers and law firms from 1982 through 2005.

The first scheme using lawyers involved the San Francisco-base CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross and  their lawyers. During the period from 1982 to 1986, the lawyers involved included, for instance:

The reach of the powerful force orchestrating the multiple schemes caused every lawyer obtained by Stich to defend to promptly sabotage him. These included, for instance:

Lawyers and Law Firms Named in Lawsuits
Were Protected by Federal Judges

In a pre-9/11 lawsuit filed by former federal agent Rodney Stich in the federal courts at Reno, Nevada, charging them as accomplices in conduct covering up for prior deadly crimes against the United States and becoming accomplices in actions to prevent the reporting and exposure of these crimes, the following were among the defendants named in the lawsuit (omitting the names of others that could have been included):

Jeffrey S. Ross, San Francisco area.

Lawrence A. Gibbs, San Francisco area.

Stanley J. Friedman. San Francisco.

Paul G. Sloan, San Francisco.

Friedman, Sloan and Ross law firm, San Francisco (CIA-front ACLU member)

Joshua Landis, Las Vegas.

Lawrence Goldberg, San Francisco area.

Terrance C. Stinnet, San Francisco area.

Goldberg, Stinnet and McDonald, San Francisco area.

Christopher A. Goelz, San Francisco area.

Merle C. Meyers, San Francisco area.

Susan E. Weber, San Francisco area.

Rene Feinstein, Las Vegas.

Estelle Mannis, Oakland area.

Kent L. Mannis, Oakland area.

Vernon Bradley, San Francisco area.

Jerome Murray, San Francisco area.

Charles Duck, Trustee and embezzler.

Obstruction of Justice Crimes Arises
From Any Conduct that Blocks Reports
Of Federal Crimes

The crime of obstruction of justice does not rest upon whether the charges of criminal activities being blocked  are actually true. The act of blocking the reports constitute the criminal act. The repeated blocks by federal judges to the reporting of criminal activities discovered by federal agents are federal crimes per se. The proof of this repeated block is found in numerous judicial records, some of which are listed in this and related Internet sites and in the books written by former federal agent Rodney Stich.

This does not imply that the charges were not true, but merely to illustrate the prima facie evidence of criminal acts being perpetrated by the federal judges.

Ironically, the consequences of the criminal activities that were and are being covered up by federal judges, and the consequences of the coverups, have been more catastrophic than the consequence of almost any crime perpetrated by anyone who had been, or in, in federal prison.

Obstructing Justice by Seizing Assets
That Funded Exposure Activities

Actions seizing the assets of the person funding the exposure of crimes against the United States expanded the parallel schemes by federal judges, Justice Department employees, California judges, and lawyers, all of whom knew they were hindering or blocking the former federal agent from exposing the major crimes against the United States. Among those involved in this scheme were:

Enablers to 9/11, 3,000 Deaths,
And the Consequences Following 9/11

Without addressing the other areas affected by the criminal activities that Stich and his group of former government agents sought to report, and addressing only the corruption that affected the aviation environment:

Gross Corruption not Simply
A Matter of Academic Interest

A history of prior and continuing airline disasters, due to the documented corruption, was repeatedly covered up by federal judges, resulting in continuing catastrophic events and massive deaths. Cover-ups, as expected, continued the problems, and encouraged an expensive of the corruption.

The expansion of the corruption into the culture of employees in the U.S. Department off Justice then played a major role in a series of aviation and other disasters related to terrorist acts—they also being a result of the culture of politicians in the United States. These terrorist acts included, for instance:

Sampling of Documentary Books
On Endemic Corruption in the United States

   

All of the books are available at amazon.com, in print and on the Kindle, and at many other Internet sites.

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.

 

Return to:

www.defraudingamerica.com

www.unfriendlyskies.com

www.druggingamerica.com

www.defraudingamericablog.com

www.transoceanairlines.com