Sequence of Parallel Actions by Hoard of Lawyers
And Judges Blocking Publicizing of
High-Level Corruption

This page provides highlights on a half century of schemes involving dozens of federal judges and over 50 lawyers and law firms that made them enablers to great American tragedies. Together, they engaged in parallel corrupt and criminal actions to block former federal agent Rodney Stich and his coalition of other government agents and insiders from reporting and publicizing::


25 Years of Legal Schemes
To Prevent Exposing High-Level Corruption

After former federal agent Rodney Stich started getting publicity from his books and hundreds of radio and TV appearances exposing high-level corruption, a series of attacks by a hoard of lawyers and judges started in 1982 and continued until 2005. Their actions knowinglyand intentionallygreatly hindered his ability to get attention to the ongoing corruption responsible for a continue series of preventable airline disasters, and the consequences suffered by the public and the nation from other criminal activities.

 


Initial Complicity of Federal Judges
Starting in the 1970s

In the late 1970s, former federal agent Rodney Stich, who had discovered and documented a culture of corruption in the government's aviation safety officer that caused conditions to exist that resulted in a series of continuing airline disasters. Encountering what he would later learn to be an endemic cover-up in virtually every government and non-government check and balance. He filed the first of a series of lawsuits under the provisions of the federal crime reporting statute and the right of any citizen under Title 28 USC § 1361.

Among the pages at this site that relate to these attempts are the following:


Sending Former Federal Agent To Prison
For Reporting High-Level Corruption

When judicial blocks to reporting the criminal activities did not stop Stich from attempting to expose the crimes to the public, and when seizing the assets that funded his exposure actions didn't stop him, DOJ prosecutors and federal judges (and Supreme Court Justices) entered into a coalition sending him to prison. Click here for the details.  Ironically, the very same corruption that he sought to report, and for which he was sent to prison, made possible, among other tragedies, the hijackings of four airliners on 9/11. And to this day, the public still has not reacted to that!

Sampling of related files:


Corrupt Judicial Orders Seizing Assets That
Funded Activities Exposing Corruption

Judge Jones rendered a verbal order refusing to accept jurisdiction, which was followed by a signed order refusing to accept jurisdiction. The written order was never vacated and a motion was never filed to again regain jurisdiction. While these orders refusing to accept jurisdiction existed, Judge Jones signed two orders on October 8, 1987, seizing Stich's personal and corporate assets and appointing Charles Duck as trustee.

The orders falsely stated there had been a hearing on that date. Court records show there was no hearing on either the personal or the corporate cases on that date, or any other date, or any notice of such hearing. (Two years later, while Duck was liquidating Stich's assets, Duck was sentenced to federal prison. The media reported he committed the worst trustee looting in the nation's history.)

Federal law is clear; orders rendered without jurisdiction, or in violation of due process, are void orders, and all orders subsequently rendered on the basis of such void orders are also void.

There was never any legal basis for seizing and destroying Stich's properties. They were all in excellent financial condition and the mortgages were being paid monthly.

Supreme Court decisions are clear. Any order rendered without jurisdiction is forever a void order, and any subsequent order based upon that void order is also void. (The absence of jurisdiction in this case resulted from the judge's orders refusing to accept jurisdiction.)

Further, Supreme Court decisions are also clear that an order rendered without due process is a void order. Stich never had any notice that his life's assets would be seized, and he was never given any notice to defend against this taking.

Stich's properties were turned over to trustee Charles Duck, who then promptly started liquidating the properties at pennies on the dollars. (One of Stich's CIA assets, described in Defrauding America and Unfriendly Skies books, described covert CIA meetings with Charles Duck, indicating that Duck was a CIA asset. For attorneys naive about these matters, this will seem far out.) Destroying this financial healthy businesses deprived the government of tax revenue.

In March 1999, a final order distributing the last of Stich's assets to attorneys who played a role in the conspiracy.

Law relating to void orders/judgments

A judgment of a court without hearing the party or giving him an opportunity to be heard is not a judicial determination of his rights. Sabariego v Maverick, 124 US 261, 31 L Ed 430, 8 S Ct 461, and is not entitled to respect in any other tribunal. (The California judges also lacked jurisdiction under the Family Law Act when there existed a prior divorce judgment.)

A void judgment, or proceedings founded on void judgments, are void. 30A Am Jur Judgments '' 43, 44, 45. A void judgment is a simulated one, or one apparently rendered, where some essential element, which would authorize the court to proceed to judgment, is lacking. Henderson v. Henderson, 232 NC 380, 100 SE2d 227. See Restatement, Judgments, § 8.

A void judgment is not entitled to the respect accorded a valid adjudication. All proceedings founded on the void judgment are themselves regarded as invalid. A void judgment is regarded as a nullity, and the situation is the same as it would be if there were no judgment. 30A Am Jur Judgments '' 43, 44, 45. It is attended by none of the consequences of a valid adjudication. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at any place. ... It is not entitled to enforcement ... All proceedings founded on the void judgment are themselves regarded as invalid. 30A Am Jur Judgments § 44, 45.

Jordon v. Gilligan, 500 F.2d 701, 710 (6th Cir. 1974)("a void judgment is no judgment at all and is without legal effect.") Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Bd. No. 27, 453 F.2d 645 (1st Cir. 1972). "a court must vacate any judgment entered in excess of its jurisdiction."); U.S. v. Holtzman, 762 F.2d 720 (9th Cir. 1985)

An illegal order is forever void. An order that exceeds the jurisdiction of the court, is void, or voidable, and can be attacked in any proceeding in any court where the validity of the judgment comes into issue. (See Rose v. Himely (1808) 4 Cranch 241, 2 L ed 608; Pennoyer v. Neff (1877) 95 US 714, 24 L ed 565; Thompson v. Whitman (1873) 18 Wall 457, 21 l ED 897; Windsor v. McVeigh (1876) 93 US 274, 23 L ed 914; McDonald v. Mabee (1917) 243 US 90, 37 Sct 343, 61 L ed 608.

A judgment may not be rendered in violation of constitutional protections. The validity of a judgment may be affected by a failure to give the constitutionally required due process notice. Prather v Loyd, 86 Idaho 45, 382 P2d 910. See also Restatements, Judgments § 4(b) and an opportunity to be heard. Earle v. McVeigh, 91 US 503, 23 L Ed 398.

The limitations inherent in the requirements of due process and equal protection of the law extend to judicial as well as political branches of government, so that a judgment may not be rendered in violation of those constitutional limitations and guarantees. Hanson v Denckla, 357 US 235, 2 L Ed 2d 1283, 78 S Ct 1228.

A void judgment is not entitled to the respect accorded a valid adjudication, but may be entirely disregarded, or declared inoperative by any tribunal in which effect is sought to be given to it. It is attended by none of the consequences of a valid adjudication. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at any place. ... It is not entitled to enforcement ...

All proceedings founded on the void judgment are themselves regarded as invalid. 30A Am Jur Judgments §§ 44, 45.

The validity of a judgment may be affected by fraud in the obtainment thereof. Nudd v. Burrows, 91 US 26, 23 L Ed 286; Wyman v. Newhouse (CA2d) 93 F2d 313, 115 ALR 460, cert den 303 US 664, 82 L Ed 1122, 58 S Ct 831; or by collusion between the parties. Branan v. Feldman, 158 Ga 377, 123 SE 710, especially where the complaining party was prevented from having his interest fairly presented or fully considered by the court, and the court was imposed upon. Harjo v. Johnston, 187 Okla 561, 104 P2d 985.

Fraud or collusion in connection with the rendition of a judgment is regarded as rendering the judgment void. League v. DeYoung US 11 How 184, 13 L Ed 657.

No Statute of Limitations For Reclaiming Assets

Under the void judgment doctrine, the corrupt judicial seizure of Stich's $10 million in real estate assets are void orders and can be brought to court for relief at any time. There is no statute of limitations. (The assets are now worth over $20 million, and would be free and clear.)

Only problem: no lawyer will take on the corrupt judges and risk lifetime consequences.


Sabotaged by Hired Las Vegas Lawyer

Sabotaged by his Las Vegas attorney. Unknown to Stich, his Las Vegas attorney, Joshua Landish, during a subsequent hearing of which Stich was kept in the dark, strongly urged the judge to rescind the relief that he had earlier ordered for Stich, and order Stich's assets seized and liquidated. (This is shown by transcripts and court audiotapes of that hearing.) It is possible that a Marin attorney that Stich hired to protect Stich's interest, and who worked with Landish, may have been involved in that. Either way, he had an obligation to protect Stich from that sabotage.

His conduct, like the others involved, indicated a powerful force somewhere in the federal government was directing him to sabotage his client, and a force that would protect him against the consequences.


Last Attempt to Report Corruption
Before The Next and Even Worse
Catastrophic Consequences

The last attempt to report these criminal activities to a federal court−prior to the terroristattacks 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, and the parallel obstruction of justice tactics by lawyers and judges that sought to prevent the exposure of the criminal activities. Among the corruption being exposed was that responsible for the conditions within the government's aviation safety offices that blocked the known preventative measures that would have prevented the 9/11 hijackings.

  1. 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. 
     
  2. 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.

Viagra online available in various online pharmacies can be adopted to get back the normal sexual health once more at any age. Generic cialis is also a drug which is highly adopted for the treatment of sexual dysfunction. This drug unlike any online pharmacy other similar drug does not affect blood pressure of the patient under any circumstances and thus highly appreciated.

Post 9/11 Federal Lawsuits Reporting
Corruption Enabling the 9/11
Hijackings to Occur

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. That lawsuit was submitted for filing to the U.S. district court at New York City on August 18, 2002. (Word) (Adobe)

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 by Chief Judge Michael Mukasey. it wasn't until Stich sent letters to each of the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, advising them of the latest obstruction of justice tactic by a federal judge over whom they had supervisory responsibilities that Mukasey allowed the lawsuit to be filed13 months after it was received.

Violating standard due process requirements of notice of hearing, and a hearing, and to determine if a federal cause of action had been stated in filing, Mukasey issued an order dismissing the attempt to report the ongoing criminal activities that had already enabled to occur the nation's worst terrorist attacks in its history. In addition to blatant violation of the most fundamental due process right, Mukasey also violated the requirement to receive the report of federal crimes as provided by the federal crime reporting statute. In that way he continued the obstruction of justice felonies to an even worse degree that prior federal judges. Obviously, a group high in the federal government was protecting Mukasey against the consequences of his serious criminal conduct.

 Stich then filed a notice of appeal on October 20, 2003. (Word) (Adobe PDF)


Court of Appeal Brief
Ensnared the Entire Judicial Circuit

Appeal brief submitted to the U.S. district court in New York on January 5, 2004, which had 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, 2004but 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 courtwhich 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
Reappeared on the Scene

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 Appelle 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.


Continuation of Judicial Obstruction
Of Justice by Every Judge
In That Judicial Circui
t

After filing an appeal brief, Stich appeared before the three-judge court of appeal panel in New York City to give oral argument. Within two weeks, the court of appeal judges rendered a decision upholding the order by Mukasey blocking the reports of the ongoing corruption that would surely enable the same resulting consequences to occur that had been occurring for the prior 40 years. By blocking these reports these same federal judges:


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. 

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.


Continuing Complicity by
Supreme Court Justices

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.

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.

Partial list of letters and petitions to Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court show a history of involvement by the Justices in cover-ups, obstruction of justice, and violations of civil rights.

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:

May 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.


Unprecedented Filing of Lawsuit Against
Justices of U.S. Supreme Court

Former federal agent Rodney Stich filed a lawsuit naming the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court as defendants. Without looking a the charges in the lawsuit, the filing of such a lawsuit against the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court sounds like the act of a radical. However, the filing was proper, and justified, and stated multiple federal causes of actions for which due process requires that the court allow the lawsuit to proceed. The basis for the lawsuit included:

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.

Partial list of letters and petitions to Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court show a history of involvement by the Justices in cover-ups, obstruction of justice, and violations of civil rights.

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:

May 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.


Hoard of Lawyers in Parallel
Efforts to Halt Attempts to Publicize
And Halt the High-Level Corruption

After former federal agent Rodney Stich started getting publicity from his books and hundreds of radio and TV appearances exposing high-level corruption, a series of attacks by a hoard of lawyers and judges started in 1982 and continued until 2005. Their actions knowinglyand intentionallygreatly hindered his ability to get attention to the ongoing corruption responsible for a continue series of preventable airline disasters, and the consequences suffered by the public and the nation from other criminal activities.

The discovery of the multiple areas of corruption arose from a combination of:

There are over 1,000 pages of description and documents at this Internet site, and this page provides a few highlights on the involvement of over 50 lawyers and law firms, some with CIA-FBI connections, that filed a continuing series of sham lawsuits against the former federal agent that continued from m1982 to 2005, and could restart at any time.

Those lawyers knew they were hindering the reporting and publicity of the ongoing corrupt and criminal activities, and that by their conduct the crimes against the United States would continue, along with the consequences. And throughout that period, the consequences did continueas they surely knew they would.

Among the consequences were the hijackings of four airliners on September 11, 2001, that killed nearly 3,000 people, followed by other ripple effects that involved thousands of American military people being killed, over one million dead Iraqis, with no end in sight. These legal enablers deserve, surely, some type of recognition for the amount of horror that their arrogant and corrupt conduct enabled to occur.

Details of the sham legal attacks and how they played key roles in covering up for the corruption that continues to this day and the national tragedies they made possible are detailed in the book, Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centuries.


CIA-FBI-Related Law Firm
Start of 25 Years of Sham Legal Actions

In 1982, and continuing to 2006, over 50 lawyers and law firms filed a continuing series of sham legal actions seeking to halt former federal agent Rodney Stich from reporting high-level corruption that was continuing to inflict great harm upon the United States and its people. Their actions attempted to block the exposure of ongoing crimes against the United States responsible for repeated instances of great harm. These obstruction-of-justice tactics by lawyers were parallel to the obstruction of justice tactics by federal judges and personnel of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Sampling of related pages:


9/11 Be Damned: Smith and Collins Lawyers
Continued the Deadly Obstruction of Justice Tactics

The continuing sham legal attacks by the hoard of lawyers−being protected by California and federal judges−greatly hampered the efforts by the former federal agent and his coalition of other government agents and insiders from publicizing the ongoing corrupt and criminal activities. During this period of time, the misconduct continued to inflict great harm upon the American people and upon national security.

Twenty years after the start of the sham legal attacks, and after the 9/11 catastrophic events were made possible by the corruption Stich was trying to expose, another sham lawsuit was filed against Stich and the publishing firm of Diablo Western Press. That lawsuit was filed 3,000 miles from Stich's residence, 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.

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 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 was filed naming him as a plaintiff, Gratzer was reportedly a prison guard in South Carolina. Ironically, the straw man used to file that lawsuit could be the person who murdered his wife.

Filing False Claim of Libel In
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.

Cserna told Stich 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 following is what was stated in the book, Drugging America:

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.

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.


Only Assets Available for Seizure:
Books Exposing High-Level Corruption

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. These books were Unfriendly Skies; Defrauding America; and Drugging America, by author Rodney Stich. There are now over a dozen books by Stich on the endemic corruption in high-level government positions, the endemic cover-ups, and the series of resulting tragic, deadly, and catastrophic consequences.

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.

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, and members of Congress.

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.

Viagra online available in various online pharmacies can be adopted to get back the normal sexual health once more at any age. Generic cialis is also a drug which is highly adopted for the treatment of sexual dysfunction. This drug unlike any online pharmacy other similar drug does not affect blood pressure of the patient under any circumstances and thus highly appreciated.

Reentry of California Judges in The
Obstruction of Justice Schemes

Despite the nearly 3,000 deaths on 9/11 due to their early role in the obstruction of justice tactics, the same group of California judges that protected the start of the sham legal actions filed by the San Francisco law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross again intervened to keep the schemes from unraveling. California judges entered the sham South Carolina default judgment of $3 million dollars as a California judgment, and then upped that amount to over $4 million That tactic insured that the former federal agent would never in his lifetime ever acquire funds to restart his efforts to expose the high-level corruption that by this time had vastly expanded.

Although Collins knew that federal judges had seized all of Stich's assets and that he had none to seize, hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees were spent to continue the action.

In trying to seize the books, the South Carolina law firm hired California lawyers, J. Eskimos and Barry Adler of Concord, California.

California law provided protection against that sham lawsuit, including decisional law relating to the SLAPP doctrine. That doctrine provides defense against lawsuits seeking to retaliate against people exposing corruption, including corruption in government offices. In this case, the 3,000 deaths on 9/11 were only one-day's consequences made possible by the corruption, cover-ups, and parallel legal and judicial attacks.

Legal Filings

California judge William E. McGuiness, ignored Stich's protests, joining the many California judges who several years earlier joined with the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross in San Francisco, insuring the success of the initial legal action to block Stich's reports of the corrupt activities.  He increased the amount of the default judgment to over $4 million.

Stich filed a notice of appeal on May 3, 2002. A notice was then sent to Stich that he was barred from filing a notice of appeal. The notice stated:

This court has received notice from the Superior Court of Contra Costa County that you are seeking to appeal the superior court's judgment or order. This court has determined that you were previously found to be a vexatious litigant. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 391.7, you may not appeal to this court.

Stich then filed a petition for emergency writ with the California Supreme Court on May 16, 2002, and this was refused, stating he had been forever barred from filing an papers in the California courts because California judges called him a vexatious litigant. That label was applied after Stich exercised the specific California defenses remedies against the sham lawsuit filed by the San Francisco CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross (a key ACLU law firm).

Just as every level of the California judiciary did during the sham CIA-front law firm, the same happened again. The California Supreme Court sent a notice back saying Stich was barred from filing any papers with the California Supreme Court. The May 20, 2002, notice stated:

Dear Mr. Stich: Returned unfiled is your petition for writ of mandate received today because as a vexatious litigant you are required to have a prefiling order beforehand.

The only litigation Stich had in the California courts arose from the sham lawsuit filed by the San Francisco CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross. That lawsuit was barred by, and violated dozens of California statutes and Supreme Court decisions, and federal statutes and U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Judges repeatedly issues orders without personal or subject matter jurisdiction. Every time that Stich exercised a defense specifically provided by California law, the California judges* protecting the CIA-front law firm labeled it a frivolous filing and declared Stich a vexatious litigant. In the process, Stich was stripped of his multi-million real estate assets, made homeless, and converted from a multi-millionaire to a state of poverty.

Smith and Collins Law Firm Had 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.


Pasadena Lawyer John Guerrini
And Other Lawyers Joined the Scheme

On July 20, 2006, Pasadena lawyer John Guerrini starting filing motions in the California courts at Martinez, every action taken was to halt Stich's exposure actions, being a thinly-veiled obstruction of justice action.

Prior to Guerrini joining the "enterprise," another attorney, Mark Wray of Reno, was asked to take over the collection of the judgment. During a telephone conversation on August 8, 2003, Wray advised Stich he would have nothing to do with the action.

A question arose as to who was paying the hundreds or thousands of hours spent by the law firms and firms in repeatedly attacking the former federal agent for the purpose of halting his costly efforts to expose high-level corruption.

Related files:


Lawyers Seeking Court Order to Seize Books
Exposing Corruption in 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 29, 2007). (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.

By that time, the books had to conveyed to another corporation, and unavailable for seizure.


Definition of Conduct
Constituting Federal Crimes

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.

Other legal definitions pertain to the conduct of federal judges.

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


Criminal Acts of Those Who Knew
Of the Violations And Did
Nothing to Report or Halt Them

Liability of those who knew of the civil rights violations and either did nothing, or in most or all cases, took advantage of the violations for their own self-enrichment, is shown by the following:

Title 42 U.S.C. § 1986. Action for neglect to prevent conspiracy

Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in the preceding section [42 U.S.C.S. § 1985], are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses to do so, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by such wrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented;

And such damages may be recovered in an action on the case; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action, and if the death of any party be caused by any such wrongful act and neglect, the legal representatives of the deceased shall have such action therefore, and may recover not exceeding five thousand dollars damages therein, for the benefit of the widow of the deceased, if there be one, and if there be no widow, then for the benefit of the next of kin of the deceased. But no action under the provisions of this section shall be sustained which is not commenced within one year after the cause of action has accrued.

See also the obstruction of justice statutes.

Among the people who knew were:

  • Other federal judges, who chose to protect the corruption and engage in conduct that were criminal acts of their own.

  • Supreme Court Justices, who had knowledge of the corruption and obstruction of justice by federal judges from the first lawsuit filed in 1978, and became complicit through the obstruction of justice statutes.

  • FBI personnel whose responsibilities includes prosecuting those whose civil rights they violate.


People Who Don't Report Knowledge
Of a Crime Are Guilty as Principals

Title 18 U.S.C. § 2. Principals. (a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal. (b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

Note: The legislative intent to punish as a principal not only one who directly commits an offense and one who "aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures" another to commit an offense, but also anyone who causes the doing of an act which if done by him directly would render him guilty of an offense against the United States. Case law decisions: Rothenburg v. United States, 1918, 38 S.Ct. 18, 245 U.S. 480, 62 L.Ed. 414, and United States v. Giles, 1937, 57 S.Ct. 340, 300 U.S. 41, 81 L.Ed. 493.


Corruption-Enabled Events That Motivated The
Former Government Agent Whistleblower

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.

Sampling of Early Consequences

   

          

 

   

TWA Flight  800

U.S. Embassy Bombings

9/11 Easily-Preventable Multiple Hijackings

   

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 Die—
Made Possible by Many Enablers in United States

Consequences of Corruption, Cover-Ups, And
Retaliation Felonies Not Limited to Aviation

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.

  • And many other forms.

These offenses are described in the books written by insiders.

Corruption of the Type Described at this site does not occur in a vacuum. High-level corruption in one area is simply one tentacle of a widespread culture of corruption. And the consequences of that corruption−and the endemic cover-ups−have consequences in other areas. The culture of corruption affects the people and the nation in many other ways, That includes the latest series of financial frauds that has occurred in the housing and financial sectors. Also, the effect of the endemic corruption and endemic cover-ups−major parts of the culture in the United States−that enablers successful terrorist attacks upon U.S. interests.

Harm to People Overseas From Culture Of
High-Level Corruption and Lies 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. politicianssupported 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 Afghanistanwith the help of a dumbed-down American public that is mostly too lazy to learn the truth.


Books for Serious People by Serious Professionals

   

   

   

     

   

   

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.

Thanks to the Very Few Who Care Enough

Thanks are given to those very very few who have contributed funds to the non-profit organization that helps to fund these exposure activities.


 

 

 

 

 


Make 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 service. Click on the following graphic for information
and quick start.


Return to:

www.defraudingamerica.com

www.druggingamerica.com

www.unfriendlyskies.com

www.defraudingamericablog.com

Viagra online available in various online pharmacies can be adopted to get back the normal sexual health once more at any age. Generic cialis is also a drug which is highly adopted for the treatment of sexual dysfunction. This drug unlike any online pharmacy other similar drug does not affect blood pressure of the patient under any circumstances and thus highly appreciated.