Years of Legal and Judicial Actions Related
To Corruption and Great American Tragedies

Former federal agent Rodney Stich, after first discovering corruption in certain of the government's aviation safety offices responsible for a series of airline disasters, and after learning of corruption in other areas from the many other former and present government agents who contacted him, sought to circumvent the standard cover-up in government by filing federal lawsuits to make a record and hopefully force attention to the corruption activities.

The first in a series of federal lawsuits, filed between 1974 and 1977, sought to  report deep-seat corruption in the government's aviation safety offices that was closely linked to a series of aviation disasters. Various filings in those lawsuits for those with a more serious interest in the facts that continue to inflict such tragic consequences.

These were filed under the authority of the federal crime reporting statute and the statute permitting any citizen to seek a court order requiring a federal official to perform a legal duty and halt unlawful conduct. Although federal district and appellate judges admitted the gravity of the charges, they refused to allow the information to be provided and dismissed the lawsuits.

Last Attempt to Report Corruption
That Enabled the 9/11 Events

• The last attempt to report these criminal activities to a federal court—prior to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, was a  federal lawsuit filed in the U.S. district court, Reno, Nevada. That lawsuit sought to report criminal activities that were inflicting great harm in numerous areas of national security and national interest, including the misconduct that caused the conditions to exist that encouraged and enabled four groups of hijackers to seize four airliners on 9/11.
   
• That lawsuit also exercised federal remedies to defend against the massive violations of state and federal laws associated with the sham lawsuit filed by the CIA-front law firm. Named as defendants were lawyers, law firms, and California and federal judges, all acting in unison knowing that their misconduct was blocking the reporting and correction of corrupt activities that had left a trail of death and destruction in its wake.
   
• Continuing years of judicial gridlock, the federal judge blocked the reports by dismissing the lawsuit. The dismissal violated federal criminal statutes and civil due process, and also constituted obstruction of justice by blocking the reports of deadly criminal activities.

Post 9/11 Federal Lawsuits Seeking Again
To Report Corruption Related to 9/11

Most of the 9/11 lawsuits seeking to determine the legal blame for the events of 9/11 have been filed in the U.S. district court for the Southern District of New York. This is the court where two of the top judges have blocked reports of the corrupt activities that enabled four groups of hijackers to seize four airliners. By blocking these reports these same federal judges:

• Enabled the years of corruption related to years of resulting national tragedies to continue.
   
• Protected the people and groups engaging in crimes against the United States, resulting in national disasters, to escape punishment.
   
• Deprived the victims' families of the truth behind the deaths of their family members.
   
• Deprived defendants in 9/11 lawsuits of evidence showing the reckless misconduct by others, as highlighted here, created the conditions that encouraged and enabled the hijackers to seize four airliners. Without these offenses, there would be no 9/11 litigation.

An earlier post-9/11 federal lawsuit  was filed in the U.S. district court at Washington, D.C., seeking to report federal crimes under the federal crime reporting statute, some of which played key roles in the events of 9/11. The lawsuit also exercised federal remedies seeking relief from the massive violations of law that were part of the scheme to halt Stich's reporting of criminal activities. 

In violation of law, including the crime reporting statute, Judge Henry Kennedy dismissed the lawsuit immediately after filing, preventing the reporting of the criminal activities and continuing the dual judicial practices of blocking the reports and blocking federal remedies for the massive violations of federally protected rights.  

Mechanics of Why 9/11 Occurred

Examining documented facts in reverse, starting from the events of 9/11, reveals a level or arrogance, duplicity, and criminal acts that have been implicated in decades of continuing  harm upon national security issues and the lives of the people harmed by the misconduct−and the cover-ups:

• The terrorists seizure of four airliners on 9/11 was made possible by absence of known procedures that would prevent the hijackings of airliners. That is an obvious fact.
   

• Evidence in government records reveal that there was a culture and corruption in key segments of the primary government aviation safety offices, the FAA. And that this corruption repeatedly blocked the implementation of known safety procedures, and that years of preventable airline disasters resulted from this misconduct. (Detailed in History of Aviation Disasters: 1950 to 9/11.) These would be criminal acts related to many deaths.
   

• The reports of this corruption and continuing series of fatal airline disasters were made in letters covering many years sent by present and former government insiders to members of Congress, to Department of Justice officials, and to media people. None took any action, becoming complicit in the continuing corruption and tragedies.
   

• Evidence in numerous judicial records seeking to report the corruption and criminal activities related to corruption affecting airline safety, and criminal activities adversely affecting other national interests.
   

• Corruption in the government's aviation safety offices that created the conditions enabling hijackers to seize four airliners. This corruption blocked the simple and inexpensive preventative measures that federal inspectors had been reporting for years, that would have halted the decades of airliner hijackings, for which the  authority and responsibility to perform. Blaming "intelligence failures" for not discovering the plans by a close-knit group of hijackers appears to be a deliberate attempt to divert attention from the primary blame.
   

• Cover-ups by members of Congress. Members of Congress had been repeatedly notified of the corruption by government insiders, including former federal agent Rodney Stich. A lawsuit was filed against members of Congress in the federal courts at Washington, D.C., and another one in the federal courts at Reno, Nevada. These lawsuits sought to make a record of the charges of cover-ups, and the defendants' responses. They  admitted knowing of the charges of criminal misconduct and related consequences and of doing nothing in response, claiming they were immune from the consequences.

The Butterfly Effect on 9/11

From seemingly remote acts by people in the government's aviation safety offices, misconduct in the offices responsible for intelligence, cover-ups, and retaliation against whistleblowers, the "butterfly effect" made possible catastrophic consequences for years, including on September 11, 2001. An outsider could not be expected to understand how corrupt people in the government's aviation safety offices, blocking the known preventative measures to block hijackers, could result in 3,000 deaths and the peripheral consequences from those hijackings.

Nor could an outsider recognize the catastrophic consequences made possible by federal judges blocking the reporting of corrupt actions by key people in government offices. Or the outcome from misusing judicial power to harm the one former government agent who continued his efforts t report and halt the corrupt activities.

Another name for the "butterfly effect" is the well-known "blowback effect," a term that should be household words in the United States where the blowback effect of corrupt and covert activities by America's politicians and CIA operations has been repeatedly catastrophic−but not recognized.

Also playing key roles in the misconduct, the cover-ups, the retaliation, and the consequences, were Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. They had supervisory responsibilities over the  judges blocking reports of criminal activities, the judges inflicting harm upon Stich to halt his exposure activities, and the judges who converted Stich to a literal man without a country by terminating his civil and constitutional protections.

Further, Supreme Court Justices also refused to receive reports of the criminal activities that they had a responsibility to receive under the federal crime reporting statute.  They violated many federal statutes by their misconduct. If they had exercised their moral and legal responsibilities, it is probable that the events of 9/11 would never have happened. The evidence against the Justices includes:

• Petitions and letters were repeatedly sent to Supreme Court Justices notifying them of these corrupt activities, many of which were within their immediate areas of legal responsibilities. Documented records showed the involvement of Supreme Court Justices in these sordid activities. The roles of federal judges have grave implications for the United States and the system of law.
   
• Petition for writ of certiorari submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court on November 11, 2000 (one of many) that continued updating the Supreme Court justices of the corrupt and criminal activities in government and judicial offices, including those that later made possible the events of 9/11. The charges in that petition included:
   
  • Pattern of blocking the reports of criminal activities that government agents discovered in government offices and obstruction of justice by federal judges over whom the Justices had supervisory responsibilities.
     
  • Pattern of judicial and Justice Department retaliation against Stich for attempting to make these reports of criminal activities. These retaliatory acts were felonies under federal criminal statutes. The Justices were covering up for the criminal activities.
     
  • Evidence of massive civil and constitutional violations in schemes to halt Stich's exposure activities, with concurrent aiding and abetting by federal judges and repeated violations of federal defenses against such offenses.
     
  • The Supreme Court justices blocked the filing of that petition, which they had done on other occasions, despite the fact that the filing fee was submitted and the papers met the legal filing requirements.
     
  • Certified letter dated January 2, 2001, was sent to each of the Supreme Court justices that detailed the pattern of judicial misconduct in Ninth Circuit federal courts, including obstruction of justice, widespread due process violations, misusing the courts to inflict great harm upon former government agents and whistleblowers. The aiding and abetting of these acts by Supreme Court justices raises many serious questions. (HTML) (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
     
• May 1, 2002 Petition submitted for filing with Supreme court  Justice Clarence Thomas. The filing was refused, but Justice Thomas received a copy of the petition and knew its contents. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)

 Criminal Statutes Repeatedly
Violated by Federal Judges

The criminal activities that federal judges repeatedly blocked from being reported were being reported to a federal court under the federal crime reporting statute (Title 18 U.S.C. § 4). That statute requires a federal  judge to receive the information and any evidence as part of his administrative duties. Blocking the reports would be criminal acts combined with violations of other criminal statutes, including:

• 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.
   

• 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.

• 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 under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
   
• Title 18 U.S.C. § 35. A party who conveys false information, knowing it to be false, knowing an attempt or alleged attempt being made that would be a crime under Chapter 97 or 111, which pertain to aircraft and motor vehicles.
   
• Title 18 U.S.C. § 111. Impeding certain officers or employees. Whoever ... intimidates, or interferes with any person ... while engaged in ... the performance of his official duties shall be fined ... or imprisoned ...
   

• Title 18 U.S.C. § 153. Embezzlement by trustee or officer. Whoever knowingly and fraudulently appropriates to his own use, embezzles, spends, or transfers any property or secretes or destroys any document belonging to the estate of a debtor which came into his charge as trustee ... shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... or both.

• 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 so exercised the same, ... they shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... 

• 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 ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishment, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; (check if this has been applied against a group, such as whistleblowers). 

• 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, race, color, sex, religion, or national origin, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

• Title 18 U.S.C. § 371. Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States. If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof, in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... 

• Title 18 U.S.C. § 372. Conspiracy to impede or injure officer. If two or more persons in any State, Territory, Possession, or District conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof, or to induce by like means any officer of the United States top leave the place, where his duties as an officer are required to be performed, or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties, each of such persons shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than six years, or both.

• Title 18 U.S.C. § 1341. Frauds and swindles. Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, .....  places in any post office or authorized depository for mail matter, any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Postal Service, or deposits or causes to be deposited ...., shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

•  Title 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Fraud by wire, radio, or television. Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

• Title 18 U.S.C § 1503. Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally. (a) Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United States, ... on account of the performance of his official duties, or corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
   
• 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 U.S.C. § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant—(b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, or threatens another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to −(1) influence, delay or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding: shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... or both.

• 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 for certain provisions; general provision. (a) As used in sections 1512 and 1513 of this title and in this section-(1) the term "official proceeding" means-(A) A proceeding before a judge or court of the United States. (2) the term "physical force" means physical action against another, and includes confinement; (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, forged, altered, or otherwise lacking in authenticity;

  • (D) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a sample, specimen, map, photograph, boundary mark, or other object that is misleading in a material respect; or

  • (E) knowingly using a trick, scheme, or device with intent to mislead.

• Racketeering enterprise and RICO statutes violated.

• Other legal definitions pertain to the conduct of federal judges.

• Other links to federal laws violated by federal judges, and civil and constitutional, all perpetrated knowing that they were involved in schemes to block the reports of criminal and subversive activities.

Continuation Into 21st Century of
Obstruction of Justice Tactics

With more evidence then ever of the massive involvement of lawyers and judges in the felony obstruction of justice tactics, and with books available exposing their crimes, its became even more important that lawyers and judges continue their efforts to silence former federal agent Rodney Stich. Since they had already stripped him of all worldly possessions, they then went after the books that he wrote.

The latest attempt to halt information of the corruption reaching the public involved attempts to seize the books. The first series of lawyers, law firms, and judges started with a sham legal action in South Carolina  that used a possible wife-murderer as straw man, a combination that would fit in well with the history of lawyers, law firms, and judges and the related series of catastrophic events.

That scheme was then joined by a Los Angeles law firm and lawyers that then had the cooperation of California judges who were already deeply involved in conduct that enabled to occur great tragedies.

Despite the fact, which they surely knew, that prior efforts of lawyers and judges to interfere with the efforts to expose the deadly corruption, the Gratzer and Guerrini lawyers cavalierly proceeded to continue the practices that they knew would enable the corrupt and criminal activities to continue, along with the multiple forms of catastrophic consequences.

And if the facts are corrupt, they would be guilty of various criminal activities, including obstruction of justice and retaliating against a witness and former federal agent in an attempt to prevent reporting of crimes against the United States.

If these legal attacks upon Stich had to be funded by some unknown source, the cost would have been in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Just in the latest scheme started by the Smith and Collins lawyers, involving half a dozen law firms and dozens of lawyers, the cost would easily exceed $100,000. Whose paying for this vast legal obstruction of justice tactics?

Since 1982, against Stich, had involved over 100 lawyers, law firms, California and federal judges. Apparently the urgency of silencing Stich supported the Herculean efforts. The evidence, including the repeated violations of large numbers of state and federal laws and constitutional protections, thee total denial of all procedural defenses, and the involvement of state and federal personnel, strongly indicated that a powerful force somewhere in government had been orchestrating these events from the beginning, using the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross in San Francisco and their lawyers.

The most probable location of this power, strange as it may seem, and based upon the control over state and federal judges and lawyers nationwide, is the federal judiciary. Whatever the source, it would add still another area of corruption subverting the United States from within.

The hoard of perpetrators continue to get away with their corrupt conduct for several reasons: :

• The extent of the corruption, and the resulting harm upon the American people and the United States is of such grave implications that the results would be unknown if the American public ever discovered and understood what was done to them.
   
• State and federal judges protected the schemes that appeared to originate at a high level in the federal government, and probably within the U.S. Department of Justice.
   
• Media people have for years covered up for the more serious forms of corruption in government offices, some of whom have been on the secret payroll of the CIA an other government offices for years.
   
• Members of Congress engage in all forms of corruption, and cover-ups would fall right in line with that culture.
   
• The public. Those who are misinformed or kept uninformed by the media; those who are too lazy or indifferent to exercise their responsibilities as a citizen; the general decline in the morals of the people.