Initial Explanation of
Complex Subject With
Awesome National Consequences
Former federal agent Rodney Stich and his coalition of former intelligence, law enforcement, and aviation safety personnel had attempted to expose patterns of hardcore corruption involving people in covert and overt government operations that were inflicting great harm upon the nation, national security, and many people. In an effort to halt Stich and his efforts, a series of parallel legal and judicial actions were taken. Among the first involving a hoard of lawyers and law firms was the filing of a sham lawsuit against Stich in the California courts at Fairfield, California, by the CIA-front San Francisco law firms of Friedman, Sloan and Ross. That sham and legally barred lawsuit enabled cooperating corrupt California judges to immediately seize the $10 million in assets that Stich used to fund his exposure activities, while also diverting his attention from trying to halt the corruption. These diverting actions would have grave consequences for the nation and its people.
The following violations were related to one of the multiple tactics used to silence the former government agent and was related to a sham and bizarre legal action filed by the San Francisco based CIA-related law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross and their lawyers. The intent and the result was to seize the $10 million in assets that funded his exposure activities and divert attention from exposing high-level corruption. Many other actions were taken after that scheme.
Details of Repeated
Massive Violations of Law in Effort To
Halt Whistleblower's Exposure of High-Level Corruption
Dozens of state and federal statutes, controlling case law, and constitutional protections barred the lawsuit. California judges repeatedly violated each of them, which were gross violations of civil and constitutional rights. The repeated civil rights violations involved a conspiracy including over 50 lawyers and law firms, several dozen federal judges, and Department of Justice employees. The civil rights violations were combined with criminal violations for the purpose of halting former federal agent Rodney Stich and his coalition of other insiders from exposing corruption in key government positions.
For a quick understanding of the bizarre attempts to halt the continued exposure of high-level corruption by former federal agent Rodney Stich and his coalition, the following sequence occurred:
California Judges Involved in the Scheme
Federal Judges Reentry into the Scheme
State and Federal Laws Repeatedly Violated
by California Judges to Aid and Protect The
CIA-Related Law Firm
In a bizarre scheme to immediately separate former federal agent Rodney Stich from the assets that funded his exposure of judicial and other government corruption, a sham "divorce" action was filed against Rodney Stich even though he had been divorced for the prior 20 years, multiple judgments established that fact, and his former wife had been declaring herself divorced for the prior two decades in real estate sales and purchases and declarations to the Social Security Administration.
The tactics knowingly−and obviously intended to separate Stich from the $10 million in assets that funded his exposure activities. The documented tactics continued the series of major national tragedies by halting the attempts to circumvent the blocks and to provide the information direct to the public.
This lawsuit was filed in the California courts at Fairfield, California, by the San Francisco law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross, identified by two reliable sources as a front for the CIA and FBI. Not one, but dozens, of state and federal laws and constitutional protections barred that lawsuit, and required recognition of the judgments showing the parties to have been divorced for the prior 20 years.
Stich's former wife, living in Duncanville, Texas, was reportedly promised money if she cooperated, which she did, declaring herself married to Stich in California while continuing to declare herself divorced in Texas.
For that lawsuit to succeed despite the violations of dozens of state and federal laws, it required the cooperation of California and federal judges for the next 20 years, including the cooperation of the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court who had to "approve" the violations of record-setting state and federal laws and constitutional safeguards, and the repeated judicial denial of due process. This was repeatedly done by Supreme Court justices.
Although the judicial misconduct targets one individual, in an attempt to silence his exposure of criminal and even subversive activities in key judicial and government positions, the judicial misconduct affects important national interests. This documented pattern of judicial misconduct provides a rare opportunity, providing the platform for those who are outraged by the widespread corruption in state and federal courts, and in the U.S. Supreme Court, and want to do something about it.
The violations initiated by the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross (San Francisco) acted to, and were intended to, halt the reporting and exposure of criminal activities associated with a series of airline disasters. In this way, they were a form of obstruction of justice, that protected those who perpetrated the crimes against the United States, and would knowingly continue the corruption and the deadly consequences, which did occur and are still occurring.
The violations occurred in a bizarre and sham lawsuit filed by the CIA-front law firm, and to continue, had to have the complicity of large numbers of California judges (and then later, the complicity by large numbers of federal judges).
California Laws Repeatedly Violated
California Judges for Six Years
1) Rule 1201(c)(defines jurisdiction under Family Law Act, and limits jurisdiction to termination of an existing marriage, legal separation from an existing marriage, nullity of prior marriage, excluding attacks upon any of the five prior judgments).
2) Rule 1211 (limits parties in Family Law Act proceedings to existing wife and husband).
3) Rule 1212 (limits cause of action in Family Law Act proceedings to those stated in the Rule 1281 petition form and 1282 response form, which do not include attacks on prior judgments).
4) Rule 1215 (limits causes of action in Family Law Act proceedings to those stated on the Rule 1281 petition for dissolution of marriage form).
5) Rule 1222 (limit jurisdiction under Family Law Act to altering a marital status not previously terminated, as provided on form 1281).
6) Rule 1229(a) (which prohibits inserting any matter in the 1281 petition for dissolution of marriage form or the 1282 response form that is not printed on the face of the form, and which contains no provisions for attacking prior judgments).7) Rule 1230(a)(2) (which deprives court of jurisdiction of personal and subject matter jurisdiction if there is a prior judgment).
8) Rule 1234 (motion to quash summons under Family Law Act).
9) Rule 1239(a)(2) (Motion to quash responsive relief on basis of prior judgment).
10) Rule 1281 (petition for dissolution of marriage form, limiting causes of action to those stated on the form--which does not include attacks upon prior judgments).
11) Rule 1282 (response form, limiting response to the statements on the form, which provides no provision to answer cause of action attacking prior judgments).
12) Civil Code § 4351 (limits jurisdiction to causes of action stated in Rule 1201(c) and 1281).
13) Civil Code § 4503 (limits cause of action to those stated on Rule of Court form 1281 and 1282 (which excludes attacks upon prior judgments).
California Statutes Barring the Lawsuit
14) Civil Code §§ 4554. Effect of final judgment constitute a final adjudication of the rights and obligations of the parties.
15) Civil Code § 5004. Full faith and credit must be given to each of the six divorce judgments entered as local judgments in the states of Nevada, Oklahoma, Texas, Colorado and the California counties of Contra Costa and Solano.
16) Civil Code § 5164. Filing of divorce judgment from another state must be accepted as judgment of the state of California.
17) Code of Civil Procedure § 1699(b). Foreign support order must be treated in the same manner as one rendered by a California court.
18) Code of Civil Procedure § 1713.1. Foreign state judgments must be recognized as local judgments.
19) Code of Civil Procedure § 1713.3. Defines "foreign judgment" as a judgment of another nation.
20) Code of Civil Procedure § 1908. Effect of foreign state or sister state judgment must be recognized as a local judgment.
21) Code of Civil Procedure § 1910. Parties to the prior divorce judgment are precluded from attacking the judgment (as is also stated in the 1966 judgment).
22) Code of Civil Procedure § 1913. Conclusiveness of sister state judgment the same as a local judgment. This conclusiveness is extended to foreign nation judgment by Civil Code §§ 1653(j), 1713.1, 1713.3, 1908, 1913, and 1915.
23) Code of Civil Procedure § 1915. Final judgment of a foreign country has the same effect as final judgment rendered in California.
Additional Statutes Barring
The Sham Lawsuit
24) Civil Code § 5004. Requires full faith and credit be given to the six judgments entered as local judgments in Nevada, Oklahoma, Texas, Colorado and the California counties of Contra Costa and Solano.
25) Civil Code § 4554. Entry of prior judgment constitutes final adjudication of the rights and obligations of the parties.
26) Civil Code § 5164. Filing of custody decree of another state shall be treated as custody decree of local judgment.
27) Code of Civil Procedure § 1713. Prior judgment is conclusive between the parties, and this is extended to foreign country judgments by Code of Civil Procedure §§ 1653(j), 1713.1, 1908, 1913, 1915; civil Code § 5165.
28) Code of Civil Procedure § 1908. Conclusiveness of prior California divorce judgment, and extended to sister state and foreign country judgments by other statutes, including Civil Code § 5172 and Code of Civil Procedure §§1653(j) and 1713.3.
29) Evidence Code § 622. Recitals in prior judgment are presumed to be true between the parties, including the recital of proper exercise of jurisdiction.
30) Evidence Code § 665. The parties to the prior divorce proceeding in 1965-1966 are presumed to intend the ordinary consequences of their voluntary act.
31) Evidence Code § 666. States that any court of California or of a foreign nation is presumed to have acted in the lawful exercise of its jurisdiction.
Absence of Jurisdiction Over Separate Property
32) Civil Code § 5102. (If, for argument, there had been a marriage, all of Stich’s properties were separate and outside the jurisdiction of a judge under a Family Law Act proceeding. Section 5102 provides that neither husband nor wife has any claim upon the separate property of the other.
Personal and Subject Matter
Jurisdiction As Matter of Law
1) Rule of court 1230(a)(2). Special appearance challenging the court’s personal jurisdiction by motion to quash based upon a prior divorce judgment terminating the marriage 20 years earlier.
2) Rule of Court 1234. Motion to quash specifically intended in Family Law Act proceedings when there is a prior divorce and no marital status.
3) Code of Civil Procedure § 418.10. Provides for motion to quash challenging the court’s absence of personal jurisdiction, during which time the court has no jurisdiction over the party.
Repeated Due Process Procedural Violations
33) Refused to recognize Stich’s special appearance status and absence of personal jurisdiction.
34) Refused to conduct a hearing on the Rule 1230 Motion to quash. California judges refused to conduct a hearing on the court's challenged jurisdiction in response to a motion to quash, and four years later, converted the limited hearing on the motion to quash to a full blown hearing relitigating the exercise of jurisdiction by the 1966 divorce court.
35) Refused to recognize the absence of personal and absence of subject matter jurisdiction under the Family Law Act.
36) Repeatedly refused to issue mandatory findings of facts and conclusions of law when timely requested. Code of Civil Procedure §§ 632 and 634. Rule 23.
37) Appeal briefs were repeatedly dismissed by California appellate judges without addressing the issues.
38) California court of appeal judges retaliated against Stich for exercising due process remedies, a criminal offense under Title 18 U.S.C. § 241.
39) Each subsequent judge, including federal district and appellate judges, repeatedly violated their duty to halt the violations of Stich’s civil rights, violating, inter alia, Title 42 U.S.C. § 1986.
Powerful Forces Involved
For that many laws to be repeatedly violated, with the complicity of multiple California appellate judges and California Supreme Court justices, powerful forces had to be involved.
Laws Violated by California Judges
While Protecting the Scheme
40) Full faith and credit statute, Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1738.
41) Article IV, § 1 (Full Faith and Credit Clause), requires recognition of the personal and property rights in the California divorce judgment, its entry for recognition as local judgments in the courts of Nevada, Oklahoma, and Texas.
42) Fourteenth Amendment due process, equal protection, property, liberty, and freedom rights, by denying to Stich due process, equal protection, and the protections of California and federal law.
43) Privileges and Immunity Clause rights under Article IV, § 2, and under the 14th Amendment (depriving right to obtain divorce on universally recognized residence basis, and right to change residence).
44) The right to unabridged interstate travel, under the Commerce Clause, without losing rights and privileges acquired in prior jurisdictions of residence.
Brief IntroductionFormer federal agent Rodney Stich and his coalition of other former government agents and insiders had sought to report the corrupt activities in the government's aviation safety offices related to a series of specific airline disasters, and also criminal activities in other areas of overt and covert government activities. The authority for doing this was the federal crime reporting statute and the statute that permits any citizen to seek a court order requiring a federal official to perform a mandatory duty and halt unlawful conduct.
In response to these efforts, large numbers of federal judges, Department of Justice personnel, and over 50 lawyers and law firms embarked on multiple schemes to block the reports of the high-level corruption and silence the former federal agent acting as a whistleblower to expose misconduct resulting in major harm, many deaths, and a series of catastrophic events. Click here for more introductory information.
Violations of Landmark
Supreme Court Decisions
45) Violated rights established in U.S. Supreme Court decisions requiring recognition of prior divorce judgments and adjudicated personal and property rights, and rights acquired as a divorced person in prior states of residence:
a) Williams v. North Carolina (1945) 325 US 226, 65 S Ct 1092, 89 L ed 1577 (prohibiting state judge from voiding prior divorce judgment or personal and property rights adjudicated therein).
b) Coe v. Coe (1948) 334 U.S. 378 (prohibited state judge from attacking prior divorce judgments and rights adjudicated in the judgment).
c) Sherrer v. Sherrer (1948) 334 U.S. 343 (prohibiting state judge from voiding prior divorce judgment).
d) Vanderbilt v. Vanderbilt (1957) 354 U.S. 416 (prohibiting state judge from voiding prior divorce judgment).
e) Estin v. Estin (1948) 334 U.S. 541 (prohibiting state judge from voiding prior divorce judgment).
f) Perrin v. Perrin, 408 F.2d 107 (3rd Cir. 1969) (prohibiting state judge from voiding personal and property rights adjudicated in foreign country judgment and refusal to recognize one day residence as basis for exercising jurisdiction or recognizing validity of judgment and adjudicated personal and property rights).
Civil and Constitutional
Violations By Federal Judges
Aiding and Abetting the CIA-Front Law Firm
46) Federal judges systematically aided and abetted the record-setting civil and constitutional violations perpetrated by the California judges. Starting in 1983 and continuing to this date, federal district and appellate judges aided and abetted these record-setting violations of state laws and federally protected rights even though they had a duty of trust to uphold and enforce the laws being violated. They immediately dismissed each and every attempt by Stich to obtain relief under the Declaratory Judgment Act (Title 18 U.S.C. § 2201, 2202 and FRCivP 47)
47) Violated their duty to provide a federal court forum. In 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 jurisdiction, ...."
48) 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.
49) Violated Title 28 U.S.C. § 1343, which requires district court judges to provide a federal court form for anyone whose civil rights had been violated.
50) Title 28 U.S.C. § 2201, Declaratory Judgment Act, to "declare the rights and other legal relations" adjudicated and stated in seven divorce judgments. These personal and property rights were being taken by California judges acting without personal jurisdiction, acting without subject matter jurisdiction, and violating dozens of California and federal statutes, rules of court, and fundamental constitutional rights. If any of the defendant federal judges had exercised their responsibilities under this statute, the onslaught of civil rights violations would have immediately halted.
51) 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.
52) Title 42 U.S.C. § 1986. Defendant federal judges are liable to Stich for damages under the clear all-encompassing wording of this statute.
53) Repeatedly violated case law that barred dismissal of the multiple lawsuits when facts are alleged that stated federal causes of actions.
54) 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. These injunctive orders violated every requirement for such orders. They:
a) Protected the parties perpetrating the unlawful acts instead of protecting the victim.
b) Insured the continuation of the civil and constitutional violations instead of halting them.
c) Instead of protecting public interests, these reversals harmed the public interests.
d) Refused to make findings of facts and conclusions of law showing that these requirements were met.
55) FRCivP65 injunctions. The purpose of the injunction was outrageously unlawful and unconstitutional, barring Stich for the remainder of his life from the legal rights and legal protections that are guaranteed by law and constitution and under our form of government to every citizen. The mere fact that Stich sought to report corrupt and criminal acts in government and judicial offices was no justification for converting him, as a matter of law, to a man without a country.
56) Fifth Amendment. Defendant 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.
57) Fourteenth Amendment. Defendant federal judges aided and abetted the violations of the Fourteenth Amendment by the CIA-front law firm and the defendant California judges.
58) Engaged in a continuous pattern of reversing the clear wording and intent of every statute, rules of court, Supreme Court decision, and constitutional right.
59) 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.
60) 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.
61) 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.
Civil Rights Violations Obstructed
Reports of Criminal Activities
Constituted Criminal Acts
62) Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Obstruction of Justice. Defendant federal judges by refusing to receive reports of criminal activities being offered under the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. This obstruction of justice commenced in the late 1970s when Stich filed federal lawsuits under Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 and Title 28 U.S.C. § 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 as described in Stich’s book, the third edition of Defrauding America.
63) 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.
64) Title 42 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1965, Civil Rico. Defendant federal judges conspired with other defendants 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.
65) Retaliated against Stich for exercising due process remedies specifically provided by the laws and Constitution of the United States.
66) 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.
67) Title 18 U.S.C. § 241. 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.
68) Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 1505, 1510, 1512, 1513. It is a felony for anyone to retaliate against a witness, informant, whistleblower for having sought to report federal crimes.
69) Title 18 U.S.C. § 242. All defendants, including defendant federal judges, willfully deprived Stich of rights, privileges, and immunities secured and protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
70) Title 18 U.S.C. § 245. 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.
71) Title 18 U.S.C. § 246. 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.
Massive Violations of
Substantive and Procedural
Due Process Forced Stich To
Seek Relief in Chapter 11
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:
72) Corruptly seizing Stich’s life’s assets. Stich’s Chapter 11 assets were ordered seized without:
a) Violated the legal and constitutional requirement for a noticed hearing.
b) Violated the legal and constitutional requirement of a hearing at which Stich could defend against the taking.
c) Taking Stich’s life assets without cause. These were the assets that funded the exposure of judicial and other government corruption.
d) 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.
e) 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.
73) Federal judges expanded on constitutional due process violations. After seizing Stich’s $10 million in assets—that funded his exposure of government and judicial corruption—federal judges rendered orders barring Stich from filing objections to the seizure and liquidation; district court judges rendered orders barring Stich the right to federal court access; and Ninth Circuit appellate judges rendered orders refusing to recognize any appeals filed by Stich.
74) 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.
75) 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.
Protected and Joined the Scheme That Had
Repeated Catastrophic Consequences for the U.S.
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:
76) Obstructed justice related to a series of fatal airline crashes. Stich sought to exercise his moral and legal responsibilities as he filed federal actions, as a recent FAA inspector, seeking to report specific criminal acts that he discovered as a federal inspector-investigator related to a series of fatal airline crashes, especially at United Airlines. These actions were filed under Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361 and Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Their refusal to receive Stich’s evidence caused the continuation of the pattern of air safety and criminal acts, which were then linked to other crashes made possible by the judicial cover-up. Stich described this scenario in his second and then his enlarged third edition of Unfriendly Skies.
77) Obstruct justice relating to drug smuggling into the United States by personnel within the CIA and other government agencies. Federal judges obstructed justice by blocking the reports of these criminal and subversive activities. Stich, and his group of other former and present government agents, including CIA personnel who hauled the drugs under orders, were blocked by federal judges and Justice Department attorneys from making such reports, and reports of other criminal activities as described in part in Stich’s books: Defrauding America, Drugging America, Disavow, and Unfriendly Skies. The government agents ready 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.
78) 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.
Powerful Forces in Government Orchestrated The
Multiple Corrupt Acts and Retaliatory Actions
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 American Public Has Much to Fear
The above indicates a literal secret government wither the government, and by their criminal activities constitute a Trojan Horse subversion of the United States.
Harm Inflicted Upon Stich
Through Judicial Corruption
79) The acts by the California and federal judges, including federal court of appeal judges not named in Stich’s lawsuit filed at Reno, Nevada (CV—N00-0152-ECR-PHA) caused Stich to suffer grave personal and financial harm. This harm included years of repeated acts that resulted in converting him from a successful real estate investor with over $10 million in assets to a state of poverty, and included:
a) Taking his home, and for a period of time, caused him to be homeless.
b) Taking his sole source of income, which, at he went past 70 years of age, he could no longer regain.
c) Taking his $10 million in real estate properties.
d) Destruction of his credit worthiness.
e) Incarcerated by California judges when Stich was ordered to pay funds that were tied up by the unlawful and unconstitutional orders, rendered without jurisdiction, by California judges.
f) Incarcerated for six months in federal prison, bussed from prison to prison in chains, in retaliation for attempting to report criminal activities and in retaliation for exercising constitutional due process against the unprecedented numbers of judicially inflicted civil and constitutional violations. Confined in isolation for over four weeks of this time, while Stich was recovering from open-heart surgery.
g) Continuously, charged with criminal contempt of court from 1986 through 1995, during which time he was in prison, and when he wasn’t, he was restricted to a small area around his home. He was in his seventies at this time.
h) Personal stress that came with almost daily crisis events associated with these corrupt judicial activities.
All of these arrogant judicial acts were associated with a sham lawsuit filed by the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross, claiming that Stich was married to a Texas resident and that she wanted a divorce. Seven judgments showed that the parties had been divorced for the prior 20 years, that all matters had been adjudicated and were final, and the lawsuit was barred by dozens of California and federal statutes, rules of court, Supreme Court decisions, and constitutional rights, combined with absence of personal and subject matter jurisdiction by the California judges. In addition, the Texas resident who allegedly wanted a termination of the reported marriage had been declaring herself divorced for the past 20 years in numerous real estate transactions, in her personal life, and in applications filed with the Social Security Administration, who recognized the 1966 divorce.
Important to remember why the sham lawsuit was filed; to halt former federal agent Rodney Stich to continue exposing the ongoing corruption related to a continuing series of airline disasters!
Consequences Enabled by the Attacks By
California and Federal Judges, Hoard of Lawyers,
And Other Enablers
As a result of the widespread corruption in overt and covert government operations, the systemic cover-ups that treat high-level corruption as the "third-rail," and the retaliation against whistleblowers, great American tragedies have repeatedly occurred, and will continue to occur.
Harm to the American public in non-violent areas.
Harm to the few people in the United States fighting the high-level corruption in a meaningful manner.
Sampling of Early Consequences
Progression of Consequences
These few examples of the horrors associated with airline disasters enabled to occur by documented corruption withheld from the American people. The standard culture of cover-ups in the United States enabled the corruption, cover-ups, to mutate into different areas. In the aviation area, although the continuing series of airline disasters eventually came to a halt for other reasons, the culture continued, and enabled to occur a number of easily preventable airline disasters. The inbred culture created the conditions that enabled four groups of terrorists to easily hijack four airliners within a few hours of each other and kill nearly 3,000 people.
One of Over 200 Victims Choosing This Way to
Made Possible by Many Enablers in United States
Victims of Less Catastrophic Events
There were many other forms of victims from the systemic high-level corruption. These included for instance victims of the:
Department of Justice prosecutorial misconduct, people being falsely charges with crimes in order to improve the prosecutors' career.
The explosion of violent crime related to drug smuggling into the United States, in which CIA assets were major players.
Series of financial frauds appearing every few years, with the latest housing and financial implosions surfacing in 2008.
Seizure of assets from innocent people.
These offenses are described in the books written by insiders.
Harm to People Overseas From
High-Level Corruption in the United States
In addition to the decades of harm resulting from the systemic corruption of key people and groups in the U.S. government, affecting aviation safety, financial, human rights, in the United States, there is the harm from outside sources brought about by the actions of U.S. politicians affecting people in other countries—such as the history of invading and killing foreigners—there are the successful "terrorist" attacks made possible by high-level corruption, and then there are the foreigners who are also victims from the same high-level corruption that adversely affects the American, but in a different form.
Remains of a girl—about the age of the 9-year-old Killed in Tucson in January 2011.
In criminal law, people are accomplices, and guilty, if they know of a criminal act and fail to report it to proper authorities and also to take efforts within their capability to halt their continuation. And there are endless numbers of accomplices that are complicit in these crimes and enablers of the consequences.
Suggestion to people outside the United States. Become familiar with the documented systemic corruption in the United States and show the outrage lacking of people in the United States, and:
Help expose the endemic corruption that seem to be acceptable to the American people, and maybe wake them up.
Help to protect yourselves against the decades of ham inflicted upon people of other countries by the actions of U.S. politicians—supported by much of the American public. Examples:
Serial lying by U.S. politicians to use as a pretense to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, killing tens of thousands of innocent people.
U.S. politicians shifting enabling blame from their own corrupt actions that encouraged and enabled four groups of terrorists to simultaneously hijack four airliners, and shift the blame to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan—with the help of a dumbed-down American public that is mostly too lazy to learn the truth.
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. 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.
Get Your Own Blog or Internet Site: Easy and Inexpensive
Get your own blog site, domain name, or hosting site at the popular godaddy.com hosting service.
A low-cost provider with excellent support se
rvice. Click on the following graphic for information
and quick start.
Return to www.defraudingamerica.com