Sequence of Judicial Conduct to Halt
Reporting Corruption in Government Offices
The
first in a series of federal lawsuits, filed between 1974 and 1977, seeking to report deep-seat
corruption in the government's aviation safety offices--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.
After repeatedly blocking Stich and his group of other former federal agents from reporting the corrupt activities in key government positions, federal judges then became heavily involved in 20 years of obstruction of justice legal tactics to destroy Stich's ability to continue his exposure activities. This sequence involved a long series of sham legal actions involving dozens of lawyers and law firms.
Urgent: Discover the
Tragic Ripple Effects
Of the Legal and Judicial Corruption
Although many of
the judicial activities described in this and the many other related sites
relate to
parallel legal and judicial acts against former federal agent
Rodney Stich, it is important to remember two things about these schemes:
One, their
primary goal was to block the reporting and exposure of corrupt and
criminal activities, keeping the people from learning about these
important matters that directly and indirectly adversely affects them.
Two, the ripple effects of their actions. Although ripple effects have had catastrophic consequences, their existence is virtually unknown.
One of countless examples in which the ripple effects occurred:
Blocking the reports of corruption in
the government's aviation safety offices enabled the
corruption to
continue, as well as the consequences. The books, Unfriendly Skies:
20th and 21st Centuries, and Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups,
describes the many years of airline disasters arising from the
corruption, and the four airline hijackings of 9/11 were simply
one-day's consequences made possible by the legal and judicial schemes
focusing on silencing the former federal aviation safety agent.
Last Attempt Before September 11, 2001
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. Post 9/11 Federal Lawsuits
Reporting
Corruption Related to 9/11
conditions that enabled hijackers to seize four
airliners on that fateful day. That lawsuit was submitted for filing to the U.S. district court at
New York City on August 18, 2002. Although federal law requires
filing of lawsuits upon receipt if the filing fee is paid, it was blocked from being filed for over 12 months. (Word)
(Adobe)
Before Stich was notified of its filing, Chief Judge Mukasey issued an order of
dismissal, which blocked the reporting of the criminal activities that enabled
hijackers to seize four airliners. Stich then filed a notice of appeal on October 20, 2003.
Explosive Ramifications in
Court of Appeal Brief
Appeal brief submitted to the U.S. district court in New York
on January 5, 2004, which has
explosive ramifications not only on the
misconduct in the three branches of government that enabled hijackers to
seize four airliners on September 11, 2001, but the other areas and other
aviation disasters caused or enabled by the same deep-seated misconduct. (Word
format) (Adobe
pdf format) That appeal brief was received by the court on January 7,
2004--but not filed as required.
During a telephone conversation with a clerk of the U.S. Court of Appeals on January 21, 2004, the clerk stated to Rodney Stich that the appeal brief had not been filed, which duplicated the blocking action previously taken place in the U.S. district court--which delayed the filing of the lawsuit for 13 months.
In response to this non-filing, Stich wrote a letter to Chief Judge John Walker, dated January 21, 2004, complaining about this latest tactic, with copies sent to each of the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. (Word format) (Adobe pdf format) That letter outlined the pattern of criminal activities by federal judges, the links to the events of September 11, 2001. That letter contained extremely explosive information, with explanation of how the judicial coverups played enabling roles in the deaths of 3,000 people on 9/11.
In response to that letter, the court then filed the brief on January 29, 2004, but placing a file-stamped date on it of January 7, 2004, which was the date placed on the envelope mailed to Stich. The reason for the delay can only be speculated, but with the involvement of the Supreme Court justices, they probably played a role in these highly suspicious actions.
Justice Department Lawyers
Continuing Obstruction of Justice
The scheduling order required the Justice Department lawyers--the same office seeking to put Martha Stewart in prison for selling stock allegedly after receiving a tip that someone else was selling (as most stock holders would have also done). There may be some contradiction in seeking to put a woman in prison for such a minor matter while the same prosecutors were continuing to obstruct justice as they had for many years related to the criminal and subversive activities that they knew existed that implicated key government personnel and politicians. Their Appellee brief would have to continue this coverup practice.
The brief by Justice Department lawyers that the court's briefing schedule stated had to be filed by February 12, 2004, was not filed. No filing extension was requested, and none was granted.
Stich then submitted for filing an Appellant Declaration of Filing Irregularities, dated February 23, 2004, with a copy to the U.S. attorney in New York. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) That submission for filing was also blocked by the court of appeal judges.
Consequences of
Judicial Block
In New York Courts
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:
- Deprive the victims' families of the truth behind the deaths of their family members.
- Deprive 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.
- Deprive plaintiffs the information to show that the people primarily responsible for the deaths and property damage arising from the catastrophic events of 9/11.
- Ensure the continuation of the deep-seated misconduct in certain government offices, and the decades of deja vu catastrophic consequences.
Similar Obstruction of
Justice
In Washington Courts
An earlier 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. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
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.
A notice of appeal was then filed, which three court of appeal judges refused to recognize, holding that in 1991 Judge Sporkin (former CIA legal counsel) issued an order permanently barring Stich from district and appellate courts.
It was this pattern of judicial misconduct that the corruption existed, that created the conditions enabling four groups of hijackers to seize four airliners on 9/11.
Another view of the pre/911 and post/911 tactics by federal judges blocking the reporting of corruption in government offices that enabled 19 hijackers to seize four airliners.
Examining in Reverse 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 coverups:
The terrorists seizure of four airliners on 9/11 was made possible by 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.
Coverups by members of Congress. Members of Congress had been repeatedly notified of the corruption by government insiders, including former federal agent Rodney Stich. During a lawsuit filed against certain members of Congress addressing their felony coverups, 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 and 9/11
From seemingly remote acts by people in the government's aviation safety offices, misconduct in the offices responsible for intelligence, coverups, 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 coverups,
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:
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. § 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. § 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. § 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;
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.
Prima Facie Evidence of
Criminal
Acts by Federal Judges
The existence of criminal acts arising from the documented blocking of the reports by former federal agent Rodney Stich, or retaliating against him when he tried to make the reports, does not require a determination of the truthfulness of the charges Stich sought to make. The judicial blocks to the reports were criminal acts per se.
The harms inflicted upon Stich when he tried to report the criminal activities were also judicially recorded, constituting criminal acts per se.
Starting with recognizing why hijackers were successful on 9/11, the serious
problems in the government's aviation safety offices and to a lesser extent the
problems in the intelligence offices, both areas which Stich sought to expose,
it becomes obvious that federal judges have a major blame for the deaths and
destruction occurring on that fateful day. Among the Various Reasons for the
Many reasons exist for the series of judicial crimes. But after federal
judges blocked the initial attempts to expose the corruption related to a
continuing series of fraud-related airline crashes they had to continue their
coverup actions to keep their prior misconduct from being exposed. Then, when Stich started publicizing the judicial
misconduct in his books and on radio and television shows, it is very probable
that the sham lawsuit filed by the CIA-front law firm was to financially destroy
Stich and thereby halt his expensive exposure activities. Once that sham lawsuit started, it became necessary for federal judges to
compound their obstruction of justice with repeated violations of state and
federal laws that Stich relied upon to defend against the multiple sham
lawsuits. Although the judicial cover-ups and obstruction of justice enabled the
continuation of great harm associated with the underlying corruption, the
catastrophic events of September 11, 2001, made possible by the corruption the
judges were protecting, created an even greater threat--and the importance of
further blocking Stich's exposure activities. Also, many other people besides federal judges were implicated in the
coverups, including members of Congress, Justice Department personnel, much of
the media, and those perpetrating by underlying criminal activities (such as
drug smuggling, bankruptcy court corruption, illegal funding of Iraq's arms
buildup, and much more). The continuing misconduct by federal judges, including
those in the district and appellate courts of New York and Washington, D.C.,
protected all of these implicated people.
List of federal judges and justices implicated
in federal crimes and their
catastrophic consequences, and their documented blocking of reports of
criminal activities and their documented infliction of great and irreparable
personal and financial harm to halt these reports.
Judicial
Obstruction of Justice
Complicity of Lawyers and Law Firms
The complicity of lawyers and law firms in these patters of misconduct are detailed in the various books, commencing with their cover-up misconduct within the government's aviation safety offices. They then are shown as being heavily implicated in the sham legal actions paralleling the judicial obstruction of justice to halt Stich's exposure activities. They are revealed as covering up the corruption in government related to the 9/11 lawsuits.
The patterns of complicity by lawyers who sham lawsuits and violations of state and federal laws knowingly impeded and sought to destroy the ability to report the criminal activities formed the basis for lawsuits. Lawsuit were filed against California and federal judges, and attorneys, on the basis of their repeated violations of state and federal laws, initially with the CIA-front law firm, all of which were intended, and did, block the reporting of the criminal activities while federal judges were blocking. The lawsuit also sought to report the criminal activities under the federal crime reporting statute that Stich and his group had discovered. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) That lawsuit was based upon:
These lawsuits, if allowed to continue, threatened to expose the schemes to block the reporting of major criminal activities. They were repeatedly blocked by federal judges, protecting their accomplices in the multiple schemes to halt Stich's exposure activities. In every instance, federal judges blocked the start of discovery that would have exposed the actions by the cooperating lawyers and law firms, including the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross (San Francisco) and its lawyers.
Lawsuit
Filed Against Supreme Court Justices
On
Basic of Corruption
The basis and purposes of the lawsuit were to:
Complicity of Smith and Collins Law Firm in South Carolina
Twenty years after the start of the sham legal attacks upon Stich, and after the 9/11 attacks, made possible by the corruption Stich was exposing, another sham lawsuit was filed against Stich and the publishing firm of Diablo Western Press by the Charleston, South Carolina, law firm of Smith and Collins, and their attorneys, David Athell Collins and Steven L. Smith. The lawsuit was filed in a small county court where judges are even more corrupt than in the larger city courts where there is more attention to what judges do.
The allegations in the lawsuit were immediately disproved by the facts to which they referred. The lawsuit used as the plaintiff a former resident of Elko, Nevada, whose wife was murdered a wife after she confided to her doctor that if she were found dead, her husband will have done it. A week later she was murdered. Her husband, Steve Gratzer, left the state, and at the time of the lawsuit against Stich, he was reportedly a prison guard in South Carolina
False Claim of Libel in a Remote South Carolina Jurisdiction
Among the many people who provided Stich with information about corruption in government was a former physician from Elko, Nevada, who was also a Lt. Col. in the Idaho National Guard: Dr. Geza Cserno, M.D.
While discussing retaliation by Justice Department prosecutors against him, as a result of his position as the medical director in the Idaho National Guard and the refusal of the Guard Unit to join in the attack upon the Ruby Ridge family, the doctor described a conversation he had with a patient, Doris Gratzer.
Dr. Cserna described to Stich the retaliatory actions taken against him by Justice Department prosecutors after the Idaho National Guard, in which he was a medical officer, refused to provide a helicopter to attack the Ruby Ridge family. In the book, Drugging America, Stich included this reference to Doris Gratzer to complete the contents of his discussions. Nowhere in the book was it stated, or implied, that Steve Gratzer murdered his wife since that was not the nature of the subject being discussed. (However, based upon what the doctor told Stich, Steve Gratzer should be a prime suspect in the murder of Doris Gratzer.) The following is what was stated in the book:
In 1997 I started receiving information from a physician who had been targeted in a similar gun-charge. Dr. Jed Cserna was an MD with a private practice in Ely, Nevada, and a Lt. Colonel in the Idaho National Guard, with 16 years of military service behind him. His problems started in Ely, Nevada, where he was a physician. Cserna told me how it appeared to start. While he was treating a patient, Doris Gratzer, she told him, "If I'm ever shot, Steve [her husband] did it." Dr. Cserna told this to the hospital staff and they said that she always had problems, and this occasion was no different than others. A week later, she was found dead, killed by a bullet wound to the head.
Cserna said her husband, Steve Gratzer, was influential in the town, especially with the sheriff, who was responsible for conducting an investigation into his wife's killing. Cserna was now a danger to Gratzer. According to Cserna, false statements were made by a government informant, seeking to justify his position and pay, that resulted in a raid by ATF agent Doreen on his doctor's office. His home was broken into and possessions disappeared. Participating in the ATF raid was the sheriff who he referred to as Burnie (Ronero), who would soon participate in sham charges filed against the doctor.
Cserna said her husband, Steve Gratzer, was influential in the town, especially with the sheriff, who was responsible for conducting an investigation into his wife's killing. Cserna was now a danger to Gratzer. According to Cserna, false statements were made by a government informant, seeking to justify his position and pay, that resulted in a raid by ATF agent Doreen on his doctor's office. His home was broken into and possessions disappeared. Participating in the ATF raid was the sheriff who he referred to as Burnie (Ronero), who would soon participate in sham charges filed against the doctor.
Government agents arrested Cserna a short time later and charged him with possession of a machine gun and a short-barreled rifle. The guns in question were an AR-15 that was not an automatic, and a Uzi 9mm that had been sold to him with a folding stock and various barrels. He had used both guns two and three times a week at the local police firing range and was never questioned about their legality.
DOJ Retaliation for Refusing Ruby Ridge Participation?
Cserna told me about an event that happened in Idaho while he was the physician assigned to the Idaho National Guard air wing. During the Ruby Ridge attack that killed Mrs. Weaver and her son, ATF agents had gone to the Idaho National Guard base and told the Commander of the helicopter division, "We are ordering you to activate your choppers to go north and strafe Ruby Ridge." The colonel refused, stating, "This is against the law, the constitution, and finally, Randy Weaver is an Idaho Citizen. Either you get out or I'll have you thrown out."
The quotation by Dr. Cserna that was in the book, Drugging America, was privileged under law. Also, in no way did the statements imply that Steve Gratzer murdered her (although the information Stich obtained raised a strong probability that Steve Gratzer did in fact murder his wife).
It is common for prosecutors to threaten people with punishment if they don't cooperate in giving testimony, fabricating testimony, or to join a lawsuit against a particular target, and the question arises whether Steve Gratzer, who may have been threatened with being charged with his wife's murder, did not cooperate. This is only speculation, but it is entirely possible.
Massive Legal Attacks, Knowing
No Possibility of
Money Damages
Before the South Carolina law firm of David Collins filed their lawsuit against Stich, the law firm knew that neither Diablo Western Press, nor Stich, had any assets that could be seized, nor insurance. The only assets were the books, and taken from the publisher, these would be virtually valueless. Despite this knowledge, several dozen attorneys and half a dozen law firms had put hundreds of hours into this action during the past several years. The latest attorney was John Guerrini and his law firm. The most probable reason for the enormous expenditure of time and money was to halt the distribution of books, which exposed the corruption and the many people implicated―including dozens of lawyers, law firms, California and federal judges.
A description of the various schemes can be found in a various legal filings, including lawsuit filed by Stich in the federal courts at Reno, Nevada. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Details of the South Carolina Lawsuit
The Smith and Collins law firm knew that Stich had no assets to pay for legal counsel 3,000 miles from his home near San Francisco, before a judge who is often in the pocket of certain law firms and attorneys. They knew that the publishing company had no assets other than the books, and that it was literally a non-profit operation. Their goal apparently was to obtain a default judgment and then seize control of the books and the name of the books. This scheme would protect the California and federal judges, the legal fraternity whose involvement in the corruption goes back 40 years, as stated in each of Stich's books, would protect Justice Department personnel, members of Congress, and the corruption at United Airlines that caused such brutal consequences for the victim of its fraud.
Stich had no connection to the State of South Carolina. Neither did Diablo Western Press. It had no office there and solicited no business there. And the charges were clearly disputed by the clear wording in the book.
Although the lawsuit was directed at Stich and the publishing company, people who would be harmed by it would be those who are victimized by the corruption Stich seeks to publicize through his book publishing. That includes the victims of fraud related to air safety; the victims of the arrogant and corrupt was on drugs; the victim of the bankruptcy court fraud; and the victims of the many other criminal activities implicating people in key government positions, federal and California judges, and many others.
Attorney David Athell Collins first contacted Stich through a June 8, 2000 letter, falsely stating that "Stich makes certain accusations against my client. Essentially, Mr. Stich has accused my client of killing his ex-wife and that the murder was covered up." The book clearly did not make any such statement or insinuation. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Stich responded with a June 29, 2000 letter, making it clear that no such charge was made by the clear wording in the book. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Disregarding the absence of jurisdiction over a California resident, the South Carolina judge rendered a $3 million default judgment against Stich and Diablo Western Press.
Smith and Collins law firm then paid California lawyers to file an action in the California courts to enter the South Carolina default judgment as a local California judgment, which would enable them to seize the books exposing the corruption detailed between their covers. Collins knew that federal judges had seized all of Stich's assets and that he had none to seize; only the books.
For more details of this legal scheme, click here.
Proposed statement of decision in the California court opposing the entry of the California judgment as a local judgment. April 15, 2001. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Objection to entry of the South Carolina $3 million default judgment as a local California judgment. April 14, 2002. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Index to involvement of Pasadena law firm, Guerrini, representing Gratzer and the South Carolina law firm.
June 29, 2002. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Notice of appeal filed in the California courts. February 13, 2003. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Federal complaint showing the scheme that commenced in South Carolina using as the plaintiff a former resident of Elko, Nevada, where Stich obtained evidence strongly implicating the South Carolina plaintiff with the murder of his wife.
Interrogatories sent to Steve Gratzer via the South Carolina law firm of Smith and Collins. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Reentry of California Judges in the Scheme
The same California judicial system that had played key roles to silence Stich, in unison with a CIA-front law firm, then refused to recognize California law that barred the filing of the South Carolina default judgment.
One of the protections was the anti-SLAPP legislation, that provides defense against lawsuits retaliating against people exposing misconduct or corruption in government offices. Further, the South Carolina judge had not personal jurisdiction over a California resident who never appeared in South Carolina. California judges then entered the $3 million default judgment as a California judgment.
Stich first sought relief against the SLAPP action in the California courts, encountering the same massive judicial block that he had previously encountered. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Stich then filed a lawsuit in the federal courts at Reno, Nevada (March 28, 2002), and again, encountered the same judicial block as in prior years. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Among those involved in that scheme were the lawyers David Collins, Troy Guerard Knight, Jerome M. Yalon, Irwin J. Eskanos, Barry Adler, and Jeff Daniel; the law firms of Smith and Collins in South Carolina, and Eskianos and Adler; and the person used as the Plaintiff in the action, Steve Gratzer, who moved from Nevada to South Carolina, where he was a prison guard, and whose wife warned that her husband was threatening to kill her.
The Collins law firm hired numerous local attorneys to collect on the judgment, several of whom refused to proceed.
Law Firm Had CIA or Other Government Ties
An article in the San Francisco legal newspaper, Daily Journal, strongly indicated that Collins and his law firm were acting for unknown sources in government, not only against Stich, but against those who were exposing President George Bush's delinquent air national guard record. Similar acts were done to discredit Operation Tailwind.
Seeking Court Order to Seize
Books Exposing
Corruption in Multiple Government Offices
On January 3, 2007, Pasadena lawyer John Guerrini filed a motion for a court order seizing the books exposing decades of corruption implicating key people in government. The motion was the latest tactic in the scheme initiated in a South Carolina court.
Stich filed an objection to the seizure of the books (January 3, 2007). (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Years of Continuous Lawyer Complicity
Years of continuous complicity by lawyers and law firmssome with CIA connections, have been parallel efforts to halt the efforts by a former federal agent from reporting and exposing the corruption in certain government offices. By their documented acts of deception, massive civil rights and RICO violations, attention was diverted from these federal crimes, enabling to continue the corruption that had tragic, sometimes catastrophic, and sometimes deadly consequences. In one area, the ripple effects were felt on September 11, 2001.
On January 3, 2007, Stich filed an objection to the seizure of the books, knowing that the same California judicial fraternity that had become involved with the CIA-front law firm would continue denying and violating every defense existing in law. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
Stich had earlier filed a lawsuit against Guerrini in the California courts at Martinez, California, but due to failing health he had to cancel it before Guerrini was served. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) The lawsuit, at least, made a judicial record of the charges in the event anyone ever wanted to know the sordid history of events that had such grave catastrophic consequences.
The latest Guerrini scheme reminded Stich that he had information, from Dr. Cserna, that implicated the plaintiff that had been used to initiate the law suit: Steve Gratzer, who may have murdered his wife, Doris. Stich then sent several letters (Jan. 1, 2007) to Nevada law enforcement personnel advising them that he had information showing that Steve Gratzer may have murdered his wife in Elko, Nevada (before Gratzer moved to South Carolina, where he is reportedly a prison guard). (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
The Smith and Collins law firm, that had been orchestrating four years of continuing legal actions against Stich, the sole purpose being to halt the available of the books exposing widespread corruption. That same law firm filed a lawsuit seeking to discredit CBS 60-Minute exposure of President George Bush II Texas Air National Guard record, suggesting a connection with some government source.
Evidence of a Powerful Force in the Federal Government
Tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, half a dozen law firms, and dozens of lawyers, were spent just in these latest actions to silence Stich. Before that, continuous legal actions, 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.
List of Other Miscellaneous Legal Postings
- Legal action filed by Steve Gratzer, the husband of a woman who, a week before her murder, told a physician and Idaho national Guard doctor, that if she was found dead, her husband will have done it. The husband then left Nevada and moved to South Carolina, where he is reportedly a prison guard, and who was used in a sham lawsuit to try to halt former federal agent Rodney Stich from continuing his exposure activities. Question arises as to whether he was forced to allow his name to be used in the lawsuit to avoid possible prosecution in his wife's murder. The question applies to the over one-dozen lawyers and half a dozen law firms that got involved in carrying out the scheme, the latest bring Pasadena, California lawyer, John D. Guerrini, and his law firm, The Guerrini Law Firm.
- History of judicial corruption, obstruction of justice, and the deadly consequences.
- Emergency brief filed with Judge Anthony Kennedy just prior to his placement on the U.S. Supreme Court, showing his complicity in the corruption and cover-ups. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF)
- List of various lawsuits.
- Sampling of filings with the U.S. Supreme Court showing that the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court were aware of the criminal activities, the judicial cover-ups, the judicial retaliation, and the tragedies arising from this conduct.
- Sampling of the judicial tactics used to block the reporting and exposure of the tragedy-related corruption implicating people in key government positions.
- Sampling of the many laws that were violated by lawyers, law firms, California judges, and federal judges, during the many years of blocking the reporting of the corrupt and criminal activities.
- Sampling of the laws violated by California judges at every level as they supported the scheme by the CIA-front law firm and lawyers.
- Sampling of the laws violated by federal judges at every level as they joined in the multiple schemes to silence the former federal agent.
- Sampling of criminal obstruction of justice statutes that were repeatedly violated by lawyers and judges in the multiple and parallel schemes to silence the former federal agent.
- Sampling of criminal statutes violated by federal judges as they retaliated and inflicted great harm upon Stich for attempting to report the federal crimes.
- Other criminal statutes involved.
- Sampling of criminal activities covered up by federal judges and DOJ lawyers, assisted by lawyers, law firms, and California judges.
How do they get away with it?
How do they get away with it? A few reasons:
- State and federal judges are as corrupt as most lawyers.
- 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.
Are the Lawyers Complicit in 3000 Deaths?
Consider the following:
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:
IF the culture and corruption within the FAA did in fact exist (as overwhelming documentation shows), which included a history of blocking the implementation of procedures addressing the known safety problems, such as hijackings);
It would explain why the known and obviously long overdue measures to prevent the hijackings of the four airliners on 9/11 were not taken;
And the preventative measures to prevent airline hijackings did exist (and Stich made such recommendations);
And the need for such preventative measures was obvious from years of airline hijackings, plus the knowledge that airline hijackings were planned by Middle East terrorists);
And if lawyers did engage in legal actions knowing that they were blocking reports of the deadly misconduct, and most probably, intended to block the reports;
It becomes obvious that the long overdue preventatives measures were blocked by the legal tactics which constituted criminal obstruction of justice;
It then becomes obvious that if a citizen had perpetrated a minute fraction of these offenses that he would be criminally prosecuted for complicity in events that led to the 9/11 hijackings and 3,000 deaths.
If these lawyers are guilty of any complicity in these events, we also have the complicity of the dozens of members of Congress who knew not only about the underlying criminal activities, but also the criminal obstruction of justice and criminal retaliation against the former federal agent. And the others, in the media and elsewhere, who also knew! Talk about the ugly Americans, what about the criminal Americans!
The next question: What are you going to do about this blatant criminal and even subversive conduct by dozens of lawyers?
Free book segments. For a listing of the books written by former government insiders on the continuing history of corrupt activities responsible for a continuing series of human tragedies, and to download at no charge segments of each of the books, click here.
Email address for the author and activist against corruption in government: stich@unfriendlyskies.com.
For more information relating to the author and his activities put "Rodney Stich" into a search engine such as Google or yahoo.com. The links run into many tens of thousands.Download DVD videos from amazon to rent or to buy, onto your Windows XP operation system computer. For more information, click here.
To order a DVD video download, click on the following amazon link:
Cellphone and service deal from amazon.com, with 30-day return if not satisfied.
Consider placing orders for any product from amazon.com through the following links. There is no extra cost or delay in doing this, while it provides us a small commission to help fund this site and our public-spirited efforts.
Return to: