one day you or someone you love, find yourself wrapped up in
some unexpected litigation, whether civil or criminal. (Statistically
speaking, everyone in America will, at some time in their life,
be a party in a lawsuit.)
three years ago,RMichaelRKathreinrtruly
believed courtrooms were places where judges listened to the
facts carefully and decided cases honestly.
he got the lesson of his life.
judge in his case could, and did, cheat. Opposing counsels could,
and did, cheat. And once they coordinated their cheating, no
fact, law or procedure could save him. He was set up to lose.
you think of a “corrupt” judge, you may think of
one who trades rulings for cash. As far as we know, that obvious
sort of corruption is rare. You must appreciate however, that
corruption may take subtle but equally destructive forms.
other things, a dishonest judge can ignore evidence, twist rules
and procedure, obstruct the record, retaliate, manufacture facts
or ignore others, allow infirm claims or dismiss valid ones,
deny admission of evidence prejudicial to the favored party,
suborn perjury, mischaracterize pleadings, engage in ex parte
communication and misapply the law.
he or she does these things intentionally, (motivation is a
separate issue) he commits a crime. Petty or grand, the acts
are still crimes. It takes surprisingly little to “steer”
the American Revolution, our Constitution was conceived and
adopted as the mechanical foundation of our government. For
ordinary citizens, the independent
grand jury was the only tool of salvation from
judicial corruption. Without this critical tool of redress,
American civil rights exist only at the will of a judge. That
tool (unfettered access to a grand jury) has been taken away.
simply snatched it from us. They did it by enacting “judicial
legislation,” i.e., by “ruling” that
private citizens had no right of access to the grand jury.
They took the grand jury from us and they gave it to themselves,
and they use their "gatekeeping" power to protect
themselves (from accountability) all the time.
decided, “What will be the law?” Judges did.
is supposed to decide, “What will be the law?” Congress
under Congress's nose, the entire judicial branch of our government
placed itself out of reach. They eliminated all means to be
held accountable to the public for their actions.
are now, above the law.
judges and federal prosecutors routinely block the access common
citizens are supposed to have to the federal grand jury.
is a logical but not legal, reason for this.
you have ever seen someone hustled through the courthouse
cattle chute, you will understand that “equity” and “justice”
have little to do with the process. Judges can be determined
to make things turn out the way they want them to and
naturally, prosecutors are always determined to get
convictions. In many ways, equity, justice, facts and law, interfere
with the process.
you ever stopped to consider that public defenders (the poor
man’s lawyer) don’t investigate anything? Public
defenders do not have police or detective resources at their
disposal…only prosecutors do. Your defense will rely almost
entirely upon the evidence the prosecutor decides to “share”
with your lawyer. If the prosecutor “forgets” or
“loses” evidence that would help your case, or decides
to ignore an important lead, he will win and you will lose.
is not merely misbehavior, that is criminal behavior. The very
last thing a prosecutor (or judge) wants is a properly operating,
independent grand jury.
ONLY recourse that remains now, against a corrupt judge, is
to respectfully "request" that the judge evaluate
himself for honesty.
criminal wouldn’t desire the power to block an investigation
of their own crime? It is hard to imagine a more fundamental
or structural conflict of interest than that.
nature takes over.
protect the sanctity of the judiciary, otherwise honest judges
are driven to shield the misdeeds of their crooked brothers at
the bar. Perfectly understandable human nature, yes... but when
this behavior is at the expense of the public trust, it is utterly
unpardonable. The courtroom is no place for situational
judge who is honest 99% of the time is useless to the people.
If this judge is your judge, his 1% of corruption equals your
100% of conviction. Your right to a fair trial does not go away
just because nine out of ten people did get one. And
your right to challenge a man for criminal behavior should not
go away just because that man wears a black robe.
cannot tolerate exceptions. Just like a cop, a priest, or a bank
teller, if they cross the line once, they have to go.
is extremely difficult to detect and prove. External, independent,
unbiased inquiry is the only solution.
wasn’t always like this.
have taken control of the “right” to assert your guaranteed
rights, i.e., they are no longer inalienable as guaranteed
in the Constitution. You have them only when a judge feels like
letting you have them. If he doesn’t, you don’t. There
you can do.
judges “dispense” our rights at their whim and pleasure
with total impunity.
ordinary citizens have no other means to enjoy or enforce their
civil rights except
through that same court system. What this means is that without
a mechanism for remedy, (the court) you have no rights. If a judge
refuses to order relief, then you don’t get any. Therefore,
citizens have no choice but to (literally) pray to a judge for
leave to assert their rights. Where their prayers are denied,
their rights are denied.
type of abuse is exactly why our forefathers granted ordinary
citizens the right to access the Grand Jury directly.
It is a centuries old system of checks and balances imported from
England, installed in America to protect ordinary citizens against
access to a grand jury is the victim’s path (us) around the
victimizer’s (bad judges) roadblock.
you will see a perfect example of justice thwarted by the very
people (judges and the U.S. Attorney) who are supposed to ensure
that justice is done.
to expose and eliminate
this unfair Conflict of Interest.
did the Seventh Circuit try so hard to bury his case? Because
to allow a common citizen direct access to the federal grand jury
is to expose the judiciary's Achilles heel... accountability to
18 U. S. C. § 242 provides that judges are liable for
criminal acts committed under “color
of law” meaning that judges may be immune from prosecution
for civil misbehavior, but they are NOT immune from prosecution
for criminal behavior.
only way to make a judge answer for criminal behavior is to bring
criminal charges against him. The ultimate irony here is that
the only way to bring criminal charges against a bad judge is
to ask another judge for permission to pursue the bad judge. As
noted above, that will never happen.
long as the subjects of the investigation (judges) are the gatekeepers
of the investigation, there will be no investigation. Therefore,
judges have rendered Title
18 U. S. C. § 242 unenforceable.
win this fight to bring evidence of judicial misbehavior directly
to a grand jury, then all Americans who are victims of §
242 crimes are denied their civil rights. It
will become forever impossible to get a complaint against
a judge, past a judge.
is why his complaint matters so much to so many... because you
never know if the judge on your case is going to do his job.
he decides to steer the proceedings against you, you will wrongly
lose your property, your liberty and perhaps your life. You MUST
have a way to protect yourself.
to understand how this barricade affects all of us...in ways you
would never suspect.
Call your Congressman,
Tell him, to tell the Supreme Court, to answer this question.