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.
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, 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.Complicity of Smith and Collins Law Firm in South Carolina
The filing of that Reno lawsuit started another series of obstruction of justice legal filings by South Carolina lawyers. Twenty years after the start of the sham legal attacks upon Stich by the San Francisco CIA-front law firm, 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.
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. Ironically, the straw man used to file that lawsuit could be the person who murdered his wife.
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.
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.
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, 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.
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 Heavily Implicated
In Obstruction of Justice Tactics
The record-setting violations of substantive and procedural due process by California judges from the lowest courts to the California Supreme Court, had to have been orchestrated at some unknown powerful source in the federal government, and in unison with the CIA-front law firm. In the process, these California judges knowingly blocked Stich and his group of other former government agents from reporting the criminal activities that were continuing to inflict deaths in airline disasters arising from the misconduct in the government's aviation safety offices (the area of primary blame for the successful 9/11 hijackings), and responsible for continuing the corruption in such other offices as the FBI-DOJ and CIA--where the area of secondary blame existed for carrying out the 9/11 scheme.
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.
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.
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 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.
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)
Making all this even more bizarre was the fact that the latest attack used someone as the "strawman" who may have murdered his wife.
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.
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. (Word)
(Adobe
PDF)The original corruption that Stich sought to report had expanded into so many different areas that it was even more unlikely that any of the checks and balances would ever address these matters.
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, 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
By Federal Judges in New York
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:
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.
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 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.
Partial List of Judges Directly Implicated
List of federal judges and justices directly 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.List of California judges directly implicated.
Various Reasons for the
Judicial
Obstruction of Justice
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.
Lawsuit
Filed Against Supreme Court Justices
On
Basic of Their Complicity
The basis and purposes of the lawsuit were to:
Never before have so many tools to fight judicial and legal corruption been available to inform and arose the anger of good people capable of showing outrage and doing something about it. If this material is used by enough people significant reduction in the judicial and legal corruption can be brought about. This material, if properly used, can:
If these legal attacks upon Stich had to be funded by some unknown source, the cost would have been in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Just in the latest scheme started by the Smith and Collins lawyers, involving half a dozen law firms and dozens of lawyers, the cost would easily exceed $100,000. Whose paying for this vast legal obstruction of justice tactics?
Since 1982, against Stich, had involved over 100 lawyers, law firms, California and federal judges. Apparently the urgency of silencing Stich supported the Herculean efforts. The evidence, including the repeated violations of large numbers of state and federal laws and constitutional protections, thee total denial of all procedural defenses, and the involvement of state and federal personnel, strongly indicated that a powerful force somewhere in government had been orchestrating these events from the beginning, using the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross in San Francisco and their lawyers.
The most probable location of this power, strange as it may seem, and based upon the control over state and federal judges and lawyers nationwide, is the federal judiciary. Whatever the source, it would add still another area of corruption subverting the United States from within.
How Do They Get Away With Their Crimes?
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.
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.
These books are now the latest attempt by a coterie of lawyers and judges seeking to seize the books that expose their own complicity in the many areas of corrupt activities.
If you wish to help us continue these efforts, and make available for free downloading segments of any of the books, please make donations via Paypal using your credit card or your Paypal account. If sufficient donations are received, the full segments of the books will be provided free for those who want the information.
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:
Hot cell phone 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: