Involvement of federal judges in corrruption, cover-ups, and tragedies.

<body> How Supreme Court Justices Are Implicated in a Pattern of Corruption with Deadly Consequences Judicial and other records show the following: Criminal activities were discovered by a group of government agents, including Rodney Stich, who were determined to report and expose the federal crimes. Encountering a pattern of cover-ups in the executive and legislative branches of government, they decided to make a record of the criminal activities by reporting them to a federal judges under the specific mandatory requirements of the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 and the citizens' right to seek a court order to halt the unlawful conduct provided by Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Former agent Rodney Stich commenced the filing of lawsuits to report the criminal activities and was repeatedly blocked by federal judges. Federal judges retaliated against that former government agent for attempting to report the criminal activities. Parallel efforts were made to halt Stich's exposure of the criminal activities through a sham lawsuit filed by a CIA-front law firm. (Friedman, Sloan and Ross, San Francisco). That lawsuit violated and was barred by dozens of California and federal laws, which were then violated by California judges and federal judges acting to support the scheme by the CIA-front law firm. These acts violated numerous federally protected rights for which federal remedies existed. Federal judges blocked each of these federal remedies, retaliated against Stich for exercising them. Supreme Court justices, who have supervisory responsibilities over the federal judges committing the dual crimes of obstruction of justice and retaliating against a former federal agent, were repeatedly made aware of these offenses. By refusing to act on the obstruction of justice and the misuse of federal courts and judicial positions in the commission of the crimes related to obstruction of justice, then became implicated. Once a record was made of these criminal acts, the decision was made to continue, partly to protect the earlier participants in the misconduct. The catastrophic events of September 11, 2001, are only one day's consequences in only one of the many areas enabled by the corruption that implicates the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. First In Series of Cover-ups by Supreme Court Justices The first in a series of cover-ups and complicity by justices of the U.S. Supreme Court occurred in the late 1970s and early 1980s, when former federal aviation safety agent Rodney Stich filed federal lawsuits seeking to circumvent the numerous blocks he encountered at every level in government offices. The heavy death toll in preventable airline crashes arising from the deep pattern of corruption in the government's aviation safety offices--enabled by cover-ups and indifference--caused Stich to use the law in a creative manner. Eventually, he again sought to report criminal activities under the federal crime reporting statute commencing in 1986 after starting to receive information and evidence from an increasing number of other former and present government agents. Concurrent with these filings lawyers and law firms started filing sham lawsuits against him to strip him of the $10 million in assets that funded his exposure activities. Only One Favorable Response in 30 Years Letter from U.S. Supreme Court justice Byron R. White (October 28, 1991) in response to report of corrupt activities in government and in the federal courts, implying the seriousness of Stich's allegations but stating that as a single justice--without the cooperation of other justices--"I can be of no help to you." Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court do not send personal letters to any of the thousands of letters or briefs filed in the court. It appeared that he would have liked to help buts court not do so, by himself. As a matter of law, this is not correct, but real-world conditions are often quite different from what the law says. Partial List of Letters Sent to the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court Letters were sent to the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court for the past 20 years seeking to report criminal activities under the federal crime reporting statute (18 U.S.C. § 4), reporting the pattern of obstruction of justice by federal justices over whom they had supervisory responsibilities, reporting the misuse of judicial positions and the federal courts in a pattern of civil and constitutions violations that were part of the judicial tactics to block the reporting of serious criminal activities that Stich and his group of other federal agents sought to report. In every case, Supreme Court Justices refused to respond (with the exception of Supreme Court Justice White). This refusal made possible the continued criminal misuse of the courts, the cover-ups of criminal and even subversive activities, and the continued harm inflicted upon the United States and many innocent people. In later letters, after it was obvious there would be no response, Stich's intent was to make a record showing that the Justices had been informed of corrupt and criminal activities affecting national security and the involvement of large numbers of federal judges over whom they had supervisory responsibilities and vicarious liability. Letters to Supreme Court Justices in 2003: Letter to Rehnquist October 21, 2003. This letter was an extensive description of the criminal activities, the felony cover-ups by federal judges, and the sham legal actions that violated large numbers of federally protected rights for which federal remedies existed, which were denied to me by federal judges. The significance of the sham lawsuits was dual efforts to halt Stich's exposure activities by stripping him of the $10 million in assets that funded his exposure activities. Note: Every letter sent to Chief Justice William Rehnquist had copies sent to each of the other Justices. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, October 21, 2003, describing the criminal activities, including those areas constituting the primary and the secondary areas of blame for the conditions that enabled terrorists to hijack four airliners on 9/11, and the judges blocking the reports of such federal offenses, and the judges misusing federal courts to retaliate (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Rehnquist February 6, 2003. (Word) (Adobe) Letter to Rehnquist January 26, 2003. (Word) (Adobe) Letters to Supreme Court justices in 2002: Letter to Rehnquist December 16, 2002. (Word) (Adobe) Letter dated December 12, 2002, to clerk of U.S. Supreme Court addressing his lying in a previous letter as the clerk sought to support his refusal to file a petition with the court. (Word) (Adobe) Letter to Rehnquist October 14, 2002. (Word) (Adobe) (HTML) Letter dated May 1, 2002. (Word) (Adobe) (HTML) Letter to Justice Thomas May 3, 2002. (Word) (Adobe) (HTML) Petition to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas dated May 2, 2002. The primary issues in the petition were the massive civil and constitutional violations being inflicted upon Stich by a CIA-front law firm and the aiding and abetting by federal judges. The petition included details of how federal judges were blocking the reporting of criminal activities, and listed some of the criminal activities for which Stich and his group of other former government agents had discovered and sought to report. Justice Thomas refused to provide any relief, thereby aiding and abetting the criminal activities, some of which played key roles enabling the events of September 11, 2001, thereby insuring a continuation of the years of deja vu tragedies. (Word) Letter to Rehnquist January 2, 2002. (Word) (Adobe) (HTML) Letters to Supreme Court justices in 2001: Letters sent to Chief Justice Rehnquist and each of the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States (April 11, 2001). Word) (Adobe) Petition for emergency relief to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas dated March 3, 2001. The purpose of this petition was to obtain relief from the civil and constitutional violations being inflicted upon Stich in efforts to block his exposure of criminal activities, paralleling the judicial block to such reports. The petition also reported the criminal activities that Stich sought to report under the federal crime reporting statute (Title 18 U.S.C. § 4). Some of the criminal activities that Stich sought to report were primarily responsible for the success of the September 11, 2001, terrorist hijackings. If Thomas--or any of the others who knew of these crimes--had responded to these charges, it is probable that the hijackers could not have succeeded in their plans that had such massive immediate and subsequent catastrophic consequences. Letter to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas (February 15, 2001), describing the corruption in the lower federal courts, their obstruction of justice tactics, their felony retaliation against the former federal agent seeking to report criminal activities under the federal crime reporting statute. This letter was a follow-up to an emergency petition submitted to Justice Thomas. No response. (Word) Petition for emergency relief February 8, 2001 to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Letter to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, February 5, 2001. Letter to Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist, January 2, 2001. The letter described documented misconduct by federal judges, including their blocking of reports of criminal activities, retaliating against the former federal agent for seeking to report the criminal activities, and the civil rights violations that were part of the scheme initiated by a CIA related law firm in San Francisco (Friedman, Sloan and Ross) to block Stich's reporting of the criminal activities Stich discovered within the FAA and other government offices. No response. (Word) January 2, 2001, letter to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, reminding him of the criminal activities and the judicial cover-ups and retaliation from Ninth Circuits judges--where he was a court of appeals judge before being appointed to the Supreme Court. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letters to Supreme Court justices in 2000: U.S. Supreme Court Petition for writ of certiorari, November 10, 2000. This petition described the pattern by federal judges of blocking the reports of criminal activities that amounted to obstruction of justice, the civil rights violations that were part of the scheme to block these reports, and other violations. (Word) Letter to Justice Rehnquist April 11, 2000. (Word) (Adobe) (HTML) Letter to Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist, March 16, 2000, with similar information. No response. (Word) (Adobe) (html) Letters to Supreme Court justices in 1998: Notice of appeal of the contempt of court charge, in retaliation for a former federal agent seeking to report federal crimes in the government's aviation safety offices that enabled to occur numerous specific airline crashes--and which would continue for years thereafter--making possible the conditions enabling four groups of terrorists to hijack four airliners on 9/11. Petition filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals (October 5, 1988) for emergency stay pending appeal of the six-month prison sentence for the former federal agent. The charges made in this petition, and the catastrophic consequences if the charges were true, and the actions of the federal judges, exposes one of the greatest sources of harm to the United States, which continues to an even greater extent today. This is not exaggeration!! (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letters to Supreme Court justices in 1997: Petition submitted to U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit Judge Anthony Kennedy seeking stay of the prison sentence pending appeal of the judgment and sentence. Kennedy received this emergency appeal after he was named to be a Supreme Court Justice but before he left for the position. In that petition, Kennedy was notified of the criminal activities that former federal agent Rodney Stich had discovered, and that of other former government agents; the deaths associated with some of the corrupt activities, and the harmful effect upon other national issues, including national security due to the involvement of the FAA, FBI, and CIA. The wording on this petition to Judge Kennedy was similar to the wording filed on October 5, 1988, with the Ninth Circuit court of appeals. (After Kennedy denied the stay, Stich was sent to federal prison, where he filed another request, which was granted. Stich was released, only to be returned t federal prison when his appeal was denied, including denial en banc by the entire 9th Circuit list of judges. The great numbers of federal judges implicated in the criminal cover-ups and criminal retaliation reveals the awesome extent of judicial corruption and judges complicit in the resulting consequences of the criminal activities. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to the clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court, clerk, William K. Sutter, (August 23, 1997) making reference to his role in fraudulently refusing to file a petition for writ of certiorari which would have made a judicial record of certain major segments of the judicial and other corruption which Stich and his group of government agents had discovered, including the pattern of CIA drug trafficking into the United States, the Justice Department retaliation against Stich and his coalition for seeking to report these criminal acts, and the role of federal judges in these actions. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition in August 1997 to the United States Supreme Court reporting the corruption relating to a series of prior airline crashes and the judicial and Justice Department actions to block these reports, was submitted to the Court in August 1997. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Partial List of Legal Submissions to Supreme Court Justices 1997 Petition for Writ of Certiorari to U.S. Supreme Court, which would have exposed a broad pattern of criminal and subversive activities as defined in Stich's books, the third editions of Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America, and Drugging America. This filing would have made a Supreme Court record of these matters, and required the Justices to engage in a documented cover-ups of the grave charges. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) This petition was submitted on August 15, 1997. It was unlawfully refused to be filed, apparently to avoid making a record of the corrupt activities by federal judges over whom the Justices of the Supreme Court have supervisory responsibilities. This tactic repeated the prior pattern, which would be duplicated in the future, of Supreme Court judges blocking the reports of criminal activities and misusing the federal courts as a racketeering tool through judicially perpetrated civil rights violations while concurrently voiding legal and constitutional defenses. Petition for writ of certiorari to U.S. Supreme Court submitted on November 10, 2000, under Supreme Court rule 12, Title 28 U.S.C. § 1651, and Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. No response. The court never responded to this petition and never filed it, despite the legal requirement to do so. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letters to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy (and the other Supreme Court Justices), January 2, 2001, sent to each of the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court referring to documented pattern of corruption by federal judges in the West Coast's Ninth Circuit, which included a 20 year pattern of repeatedly blocking the reporting of criminal activities, judicial retaliation for attempting to make such reports that were required to be made under the federal crime reporting statute, and the involvement of numerous federal judges in a scheme to take Stich's $10 million in assets that funded his public-spirited exposure of criminal activities. That scheme required 20 years of uninterrupted violations of dozens of state and federal laws compounded by violations of every legal and constitutional due process defense guaranteed to all citizens. No response to these letters stating documented facts revealing major crimes against the United States, including those perpetrated by federal judges over whom they have supervisory responsibilities and vicarious liabilities. This non-response, the cover-up, the obstruction of justice, reflects the seriousness of the corruption against the people by those in control of the system. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition for emergency writ to Supreme Court Justice Sandra O'Connor, submitted on January 5, 2001, under the authority of Supreme Court Rule 12 and Rule 22 providing for application to an individual Justice, and Title 28 U.S.C. § 1651. Even if relief was denied, a response is required under Supreme Court Rule 22.6, which says: "The Clerk will advise all parties concerned, by appropriately speedy means, of the disposition made of an application." Following their standard practice, the submission was never acknowledged. To have done so would have made a record of the fact that the Justices were made aware of the very serious charges and did nothing about them. No response, despite the legal responsibility to at least answer, such as denying the petition. But to do so would make an official record of their cover-ups and obstruction of justice. Petition for emergency writ to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, submitted on February 15, 2001, under the same authority as in the emergency writ to Justice Sandra O'Connor. No response. Letter to each of the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States (April 11, 2001) listing key highlights of the pattern by federal judges blocking the reporting of criminal and subversive activities, retaliating against a former federal agent for attempting to make these reports, and combining a 20-year pattern of hard-core civil and constitutional violations to carry out the obstruction of justice. Sampling of Petitions Sent to U.S. Supreme Court The first four petitions were sent to the U.S. Supreme Court as a result of the cover-ups by Ninth Circuit district and appellate judges blocking the reporting of criminal activities implicated in a series of aviation disasters, implicating people in the two government aviation safety agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board. March 4, 1991, Petition for emergency relief to Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking relief from the criminal contempt of court charges for attempting to report criminal activities to a federal court under the federal crime reporting statute (and for exercising federal due process remedies against record-setting violations of state and federal laws initiated by a CIA-front law firm). (html) From 1986 to 1995, a succession of criminal contempt of court charges confined Stich to his home pending trial for attempting to report criminal activities under the federal crime reporting statute. Numerous other petitions were sent to the U.S. Supreme Court from 1986 to the present date. Some will be uploaded as time permits. The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the cases. The significance of this was that the Justices: Were refusing to receive evidence of deadly criminal activities that were being reported under the federal crime reporting statute. Were covering up for the felony cover-ups and obstruction of justice by federal judges over whom they had supervisory responsibilities. Had legal and moral liability for the deaths in aviation disasters that occurred, enabled by the cover-ups of Supreme Court justices. (Later, as they were made aware of criminal activities in other government offices adversely affecting other areas of national interests, they became complicit in these crimes and the consequences.) Once the cover-ups and the consequences occurred, the decision was made to continue the judicial cover-ups, despite the consequences. Among the one-day consequences were the hijackings of four airliners on September 11, 2001, enabled by the misconduct in the government's aviation safety offices (and to a smaller extent, the government's intelligence gathering offices) that prevented the federal government from ordering the known and obvious preventative measures. Sham Excuses to Block Reports and Deny Due Process Some of the Supreme Court refusals were based on such excuses as the double spacing placed on the lines by the word processing program allegedly did not meet Supreme Court requirements, or the filings were late (which was not correct), or simply no response. To insure that the Justices were aware of the serious allegations, Stich sent one copy to each of the Justices, often by certified mail to make a record of such submission. Tragic Consequences Made Possible by Misconduct of Supreme Court Justices The Supreme Court pattern of documented misconduct were not simply matters of academic interest. Starting with the Supreme Court misconduct in the 1970s, their misconduct made possible the: Continuation of criminal activities that inflicted great personal and financial harm, even death, upon countless numbers of people, arising from the misconduct and enabled by the cover-ups. Harm upon matters effecting national security and other major national issues. Catastrophic consequences of September 11, 2001. And much more, as described in the books written by government insiders. Unprecedented Lawsuit Against Justices of U.S. Supreme Court A federal lawsuit was filed against the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court on the basis of their cover-ups and complicity with other federal judges. The statements in that lawsuit, and their response, reveal that they were fully aware of the charges of criminal activities, the consequences, for which they claimed judicial immunity. This may sound bizarre, but the seriousness of the charges, the gravity of the consequences to the United States from the criminal activities and the cover-ups, dictated unusual attempts to circumvent the blocks. Related Web Sites and Information on Revealing Books Chronology of decades of corrupt activities by the CIA, U.S. politicians, and other members of the system, as described in the book, Defrauding America. Chronology of the arrogant and corrupt war on drugs--against the American people--as described in the book, Drugging America. Chronology of arrogant and corrupt activities in the deadly politics of aviation safety, as described in the book, Unfriendly Skies. Chronology of covert and corrupt activities in which the American people suffered the consequences of blowback, as described in the e-book, Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-ups. List of other books written by and with the input of government and other insiders. Informational print and e-books books describing these matters can be ordered by clicking here. Help fund our exposure activities by placing orders for any amazon.com products through our links. RETURN TO TOP </body>