Governmental Corruption
AND FRAUDS LIKE JUDICIAL WATCH THAT ENABLE CORRUPTION
Independence Hall
Judges maliciously lie, cover up evidence, and defy the rule of law with impunity; this is not only because oversight entities like the FBI and the Department of Justice are pervasively corrupt, but also because oversight lawmakers are corrupt. And of course the media, whose most important function is to report governmental wrong doing, is corrupt.
DISCLAIMER: I am a supporter of President Trump. This website demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt the deliberate violation of federal law by his sister Judge Maryanne Trump-Barry who in 2019 retired from the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in the midst of an investigation into possible tax fraud by her. Maryanne Trump-Barry regardless of her possible tax fraud is a demonstrable criminal who, prior to her retirement, maliciously covered up relevant evidence in order to hurt a plaintiff and to protect corrupt judges and policemen. The cover up of evidence by Trump-Barry was a deliberate act to deny a civil right guaranteed by law (42 USC section 1983) to me, and violated 18 USC section 242 (denial of rights); the civil right in this case was the qualified right to present evidence to a federal jury regarding police retaliation because of my efforts to call attention to local judicial corruption in New Jersey.
Toward the end of this page I review the legal elements (and provide the evidence that is built into this website) that are required in order to indict and convict numerous federal judges for their cover up of trial winning evidence, specifically evidence of police retaliation against me that is linked to my refusal to stop calling attention to local judicial corruption in New Jersey.
The story behind the above photographs rivals a story that Hollywood could produce. The story starts out with a registered nurse (RN, me), who makes a complaint to a state oversight entity after years of futile efforts to have a harmful practice addressed at his place of employment, a hospital named Community Medical Center in Toms River, NJ. Shortly after making my complaint I was accused by the hospital of morphine theft and suspended pending the outcome of an investigation; while suspended I was fired from my job for being a substandard record keeper. I filed whistle blowing litigation against the hospital and ultimately won a jury trial while representing myself. The story continues below and involves multiple arrests (mine), repeated attempts to deny my exercise of free speech, an attempted confinement to a psychiatric facility, and a failed attempt to imprison me.
There are two purposes of this website: to demonstrate the pervasive corruption that exists within the federal judiciary; and to expose nationally known figures who claim to be foes of corruption or who wear the mantle we are devoted to Constitutional principles but who in reality are knowing enablers of corruption. These frauds are often guests on FOX cable news programs or on YouTube presentations that exclusively discuss instances of governmental wrong doing. These frauds include Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, former federal prosecutor Joe diGenova, lawyer Harmeet Dhillon, Lindsey Graham, Jim Jordan, Ted Cruz, and Landmark Legal Foundation board member Mark Levin who frequently on his radio show decries judicial corruption but who turned a blind eye to evidence of malicious judicial corruption in my case.
DISCLAIMER: I am a Constitutional conservative, and I recognize that corruption is not restricted to any political party. I was once a registered republican but I am no longer a registered anything because I am a convicted felon; the intent of law was perverted and was weaponized against me in retaliation because of my efforts to call attention to local judicial corruption in New Jersey.
I will show you the evidence that was covered up by four different federal courts that guaranteed my trial win regarding litigation that I filed (after the failed attempt to imprison me) pursuant to 42 USC section 1983. In order to win a trial in my case I had only to demonstrate to a jury
retaliation against me under color of law because of my efforts to call attention to local judicial corruption in New Jersey. The police of my lifelong hometown falsely accused me of an offense, that mandated imprisonment upon conviction, on the day following the suspension of my driver’s license; my license was unlawfully suspended because of my refusal to stop calling attention to local judicial corruption.
The story begins…..
After my termination from the hospital I employed a succession of three lawyers all of whom required payment from me rather than working on contingency; I lost almost $40,000 of my life savings before firing my third lawyer who told me that I had a weak case against my former employer who was affiliated with New Jersey’s largest health care system.
After I fired my third lawyer and started to represent myself, called acting pro se, my case was dismissed by a local superior court judge named Edward Oles. Oles submitted a written opinion in support of his decision to dismiss my case that was characterized by malicious lies, distortions of facts, omissions of relevant facts that were favorable to me, and omissions of facts that were damning to the hospital.
I amazingly won an appeal that reversed Ole’s dismissal of my case; it was amazing in consideration of the pervasive corruption that infests New Jersey. I then won my 5-day long whistle blowing trial on my first time out before a jury while fighting the legal team of the state’s largest health care system and a trial judge who not only tried to sabotage my case in front of the jury but who also made sure that I received no remedies after winning at trial. The conditions under which I won my trial imply the strength of the evidence that was covered up by judge Oles.
Remedies refer to job reinstatement, return of lost wages (5 years for me), reimbursement of lost legal fees, and damages for malicious actions that were taken against me by my former employer.
Frank Buczynski was the corrupt trial judge who made sure that I received no remedies after winning at trial. Buczynski is a deceiving liar who not only protected my former employer regarding the violation of civil law but also regarding violation of criminal law that is associated with orchestrating a morphine theft that was attributed to me.
Prior to my whistle blowing trial I had obtained overwhelming evidence that the hospital orchestrated the morphine theft that was blamed on me. I also obtained evidence that identified the nurse (who conspired with hospital management) who stole my identity in order to orchestrate the morphine theft that was blamed on me; her name is Delia Cabelerro and I welcome her defamation litigation. During trial I of course presented evidence of the orchestration to the jury, but when it was clear that I was getting close to convincing the jury regarding the orchestration Buczysnski interrupted me and stated in front of the jury that the morphine theft was irrelevant to the trial, and informed the jury that I was terminated for being a substandard record keeper, not for stealing morphine.
After my suspension because of suspected morphine theft the hospital conducted a sham investigation. Since the hospital orchestrated the morphine theft no evidence could be obtained that pointed to my guilt unless it was fabricated. The Achilles’ heel of hospital bedside nurses is record keeping, because the reality of a busy nursing unit is that the physical care of patients is the priority with record keeping taking place many hours after events. Consequently record keeping lapses occur.
The jury at my whistle blowing trial clearly understood the Achilles’ heel concept as it pertained to my termination for supposedly being a bad record keeper after initially being suspended for suspected morphine theft. Buczynski exposed his bias because of his statement (that referred to my firing by the hospital) that was reported by a small town newspaper (right).
But of course my suspension shortly after my whistle blowing complaint was obviously retaliatory and Buczynski knew it; the morphine theft was therefore VERY relevant. Every judge associated with my case from local judges, the appellate judges, and to the black-robed clan of clowns on the New Jersey Supreme Court either tried to negate the relevance of the morphine theft or else completely ignored the evidence that I submitted to them regarding the orchestration of the morphine theft.
After winning at trial and being denied job reinstatement I found myself not only unemployed but without the life savings that existed before taking on my former employer. Not only was a I a whistle blower, a fact that was obviously transmitted to every hospital in NJ, but I was a trial-winning whistle blower; my career as a hospital staff nurse was over.
It was well known that the legislative intent of the whistle blowing law is to guarantee remedies to those who win at trial. The demonstrable corruption of Oles’ who initially dismissed my case in order to prevent me from accessing a jury was clearly also continued by Buczynski who made sure that I received no remedies after winning at trial. I presented evidence of judicial corruption to every conceivable media and state government oversight entity, but I was stonewalled by all.
Click here to view a full size PDF copy of the notice regarding my alleged violation of municipal code 25-624E.
Corruption in New Jersey is pervasive in part because the media in New Jersey is corrupt and covers up governmental wrong doing, hence my signs that I displayed on my truck in order to do the job that should have been done by the media. Before displaying my signs on my truck I made sure that such a display was lawful. However, when I checked with local and state entities regarding my plans to display a sign on my truck I did not inform them that my plans were to call attention to pervasive corruption; I informed them that I planned to display a sign that called for supporting the troops (military). I already knew of a landmark United States Supreme Court decision from 1939 in the case Hague v. CIO that ruled that citizens have the right to use spaces such as the shoulder of the road in front of my house in order to exercise free speech.
Click here to view a PDF copy of a letter sent to me regarding the display of signs on my truck.
Constitutional rights such as the right to free speech can be taken away by corrupt local governments that are supported by corrupt state governments that are both protected by a corrupt media.
The intent of municipal code 25-624E (photo to the right, circled) is to control the placement, for example, of signs on the lawn in front of the town hall or inside of municipal buildings. In my case the intent of this code was perverted in order to prevent me from prominently displaying my signs in front of my home that was situated along the main road that ran through town. My hometown Seaside Park, that borders along the Atlantic Ocean with beautiful white sandy beaches, receives thousands of visitors especially in the summer months.
Of course the town council was never going to give me permission, that I did not need, to display my signs that called attention to public corruption. And of course the municipal judge went along with the attempt to take away my free speech that was directed to exposing public corruption of which he was a part.
After receiving repeated summons to appear in municipal court regarding alleged violation of code 25-624E, all of which I ignored due to the corrupt nature of the attempt to silence my free speech, a warrant was issued for my arrest by the municipal judge.
My hometown’s police were lying in wait for me when I attempted to drive to my place of employment in order to report for the 11PM to 7AM shift. My first lifetime arrest occurred at 10:30PM on 21 January 2012. I was able to avoid incarceration in the county jail by paying $500 bail. I displayed the sign (at right) shortly after my arrest.
It was only after my first arrest that I recognized the corruption of my hometown’s police who saw my signs for months before the arrest, and who knew the reason for the arrest warrant.
Within days of first displaying this sign (at left) my hometown’s municipal judge transferred this matter (my arrest) to a neighboring county where the municipal judge unsurprisingly ruled against me, fined me for exercising free speech, and ordered me not to display my signs without permission. That judge violated federal law by punishing me for exercising free speech; the statute is 18 USC section 242.
Despite the ruling by the corrupt judge from the neighboring county I continued to display my signs on my legally parked truck in front of my home. And I received additional summonses for alleged violation of code 25-624E, all of which I ignored.
The Seaside Park municipal judge ordered the suspension of my driver’s license to be effective 31 August 2012, and the official reason for the suspension was my failure to appear in court regarding the alleged violation of code 25-624E; there was not a court in New Jersey that would have supported my right to exercise free speech that was directed to calling attention to public corruption, especially judicial corruption, and I was not going to appear in municipal court in order to again be fined for exercising free speech and ordered not to practice it by displaying signs on my truck.
Click here to view a full size PDF copy of the Seaside Park Municipal Court notice that ordered my driver’s license suspension that became effective on 31 August 2012. The reason for the suspension was my refusal to surrender to the perverted application of municipal code 25-624E. My appearance in the municipal court was guaranteed to result in my being fined, again, for displaying signs on my truck without the permission of the town council, and was guaranteed to result in the municipal judge ordering me to stop displaying my signs until I obtained permission.
Click here to view the notice from the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission that shows that my driver’s license suspension became effective on 31 August 2012.
On the day following my driver’s license suspension the local police were again lying in wait for me when I was en route to work. On 1 September 2012 my second lifetime arrest occurred, also at 10:30 PM, also by the same policeman (and a partner) who arrested me earlier in January; that policeman’s name is Matt Brady.
Shown below is page 1 (lines 1-12) of the police report filed regarding my arrest on 1 September 2012
Click here to view a full size PDF copy of the two-page police report. The report is damning toward me, however it will become clear that this report is a collection of lies. The first indication of attempted deceit by the Seaside Park police is the omission from the report that my driver’s license was suspended at the time of my arrest.
The police report is dated 1 September 2012 that is the day after my driver’s license suspension became effective on 31 August. The time of the report is 2232 hours that translates to 10:32PM. On line 8 the report cites my alleged failure to yield to cross walking pedestrians, but this citation is a lie and was cited as a pretext in the report to justify signaling me to stop; of course the policemen were lying in wait to unlawfully arrest me for driving while suspended. The suspension was also unlawful, and was specifically a violation of federal law 18 USC section 242. Since the police knew the reason for the suspension the report makes no mention whatsoever that my license had been suspended effective the previous day.
Click here to view a full size copy of my driving history from the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission. The court ordered suspension is shown corresponding to the date 31 August 2012 (08/31/2012). The report shows that I had not committed a moving violation in the 24 year period prior to my arrest on 1 September 2012; the last violation prior to 1 September 2012 was on 18 December 1988 (12/18/1988) when I drove my dying mother to the hospital.
According to policeman Brady his reason for signaling me to stop on 1 September 2012 was because of my failure to yield to cross walking pedestrians (line 8); my first alleged moving violation in 24 years coincidentally occurred at 10:30 PM on the day following my driver’s license suspension (not mentioned in the report) that was the time of my arrest in January 2012 also by Brady.
The police report is characterized, like the written reports submitted by judges in my case, by lies and distortions.
On 1 September 2012 Policeman Brady alleged against me second degree eluding. Second degree eluding is a serious offense, and refers to the near killing of or to the near causing of serious injury to others. The allegation resulted in my arrest pending payment of $50,000 bail. I was incarcerated in the county jail until bail could be arranged; I lost a non-returnable $5,000 to a bail bondsman in order to get out of jail.
I only encountered one group of pedestrians on 1 September 2012, and I came to a complete stop for them; this stop was at the northern most part of town just before I would have entered the neighboring town. It was at this time that the following police car, of which I was already aware because of anticipated police harassment on 1 September, activated its emergency lights only in order to signal me to pull over; this incident was of course not mentioned in the police report. The police car additionally activated its siren when I reversed course in order to return 3/4 mile to my home to await certain arrest.
Click here to view the full sized police report dated 1 September 2012.
Above are lines 66-71 of the police report dated 1 September 2012. The $50,000 bail is cited on line 69, and the second degree eluding charge is cited on line 67. The date reported in Box 7 is Sep 02, 2012 presumably because the report was signed by Brady shortly after midnight following my arrest at 10:30 PM on 1 September 2012. Both the New Jersey District Court (federal) and the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals (also federal), that were involved in my litigation following jury acquittal of alleged 2nd degree eluding against me, covered up the alleged 2nd degree eluding charged against me; the reason for the cover up will become clear.
Click here to view a PDF copy of the letter sent to me by a public defender regarding an offer of seven years imprisonment if I pleaded guilty to alleged 2nd degree eluding.
I represented myself at my criminal trial for alleged 2nd degree eluding. Nevertheless the state appoints a public defender to stand by someone who represents himself. The letter from the lawyer who was appointed to assist me (shown above) indicates that I was offered a seven year prison term if I pleaded guilty to the alleged 2nd degree eluding. A conviction of alleged 2nd degree eluding mandates imprisonment in a state facility.
I was released from jail on 3 September 2012 after arranging the payment of the $50,000 bail. The next day 4 September I hand delivered a letter to the town’s police chief, that was copied to the town council, stating my intention to call attention to his support of the effort to deny my exercise of free speech; while driving in town an hour later I was stopped by the police and arrested. I was kept handcuffed to a metal bench in a cold room within police headquarters (I was dressed for the beach) for almost five hours before being transferred to the psychiatric lock-down unit (a jail without guards) of the hospital where I once worked, Community Medical Center.
I was held in the psychiatric unit against my will for 24 hours until I was evaluated by a psychiatrist. I was release shortly after the evaluation, and was sent a bill from the hospital for $8,000 for the overnight stay; I did not pay it although I received more than a dozen threats by the hospital to start legal action against me if I did not pay. A police report was submitted regarding the attempt to confine me to a psychiatric facility that was nothing more than a collection of lies; if I had not experienced police corruption firsthand I probably would not believe that such corruption could exist. I had been a law-abiding citizen all my life, and I now had a history of three police arrests (2 more were to come by my hometown police) as well as a future date in criminal court that could result in my imprisonment…..all because of my refusal to give up my right to call attention to public corruption.
The attempted confinement to a psychiatric facility is reminiscent of the reputed Soviet ploy of confining political dissidents to insane asylums.
On 1 September 2012 Brady accused me of almost killing or causing serious injury to cross walking pedestrians at three locations. One of those pedestrians according to the police report was pushing a baby stroller.
The first group of cross walking pedestrians cited in the police report were encountered at Decatur Avenue that is shown by the photo at right. According to the police report Brady activated both his siren and flashing emergency lights (an ill-conceived lie) at “M” Street that is 900 feet distant or the length of three football fields. The police report states that the speed of both my truck and the following police car was 30 MPH; my truck and the following police car were essentially one unit. Pedestrians at Decatur Avenue, if caught in the crosswalk when Brady activated his flashing lights and siren 900 feet away at 10:30 PM had enough time to clear the crosswalk, and it is not likely that pedestrians about to enter the crosswalk when Brady activated his flashing lights and siren would enter the cross walk. Of course the pedestrians at this location cited in the police report never existed.
Each block between “M” Street and Decatur Avenue is 200 feet wide separated by 40 foot wide side streets. The above image demonstrates the general location of the events of 1 September 2012. The Google map below enables you to enlarge and navigate around the area shown above. The actual fact, not the lies that appear in the police report, is that after I came to a complete stop for cross walking pedestrians at Stockton Avenue (along NE Central Ave, below), and upon being signaled to pull over by the following police car I proceeded to make a right hand off of NE Central Ave onto Porter Ave (shown below, Farragut Ave was one-way and prohibited my right hand turn), and made a right hand turn onto the Boulevard and proceeded in a southerly direction back to my home to await arrest.
Seaside Park is situated on a long peninsula. At the northern end of Seaside Park where the police signaled me to pull over there are two possible escape routes (if one wanted to escape): over a bridge leading to the mainland; or a state highway proceeding north along the peninsula. Eluding and/or escaping police while proceeding back to my home in a southerly direction was impossible even if the police did not know me (see large white banner, police report/line 5); the Atlantic Ocean and the Barnegat Bay flank a southerly route that has a terminus at the Barnegat Inlet (there is no bridge there) after entering Island Beach State Park. Having lived in Seaside Park my entire life (I was 57 years of age at the time) I was aware of the local geography.
Consider the likelihood of pedestrians casually stepping in front of a police car or fire truck that had activated its emergency lights and siren; such a fantastic circumstance not only demonstrates the violation of law by pedestrians who force an emergency vehicle to stop, but if given in testimony by police or if written on a police affidavit can be legally given as proof of perjury. Click here to view the legal elements that are required to convict regarding perjury; circumstances of such character are mentioned at the bottom of page 2/ top of page 3.
The second group of cross walking pedestrians who were allegedly almost killed or injured by me included a pedestrian who was pushing a baby stroller; these pedestrians also never existed. At this location I was proceeding back to my home to await arrest. The police car was still closely following me, but this time my speed was 25 MPH. My truck and the following police car first appeared on this long, straight, two lane road 400 feet away after making a right hand turn, or a little bit more than a football field in length. The crosswalk at this location can be seen to be quite narrow. A pedestrian caught in the crosswalk when the truck-police car combo (with flashing lights and siren) first appeared 400 feet away had enough time to clear the crosswalk, but the police report claims that the pedestrians had to jump out of the way at the last second to avoid being struck by my truck.
According to the police report (lines 28-32) the pedestrian who was pushing a stroller entered the crosswalk at Stockton Avenue (shown above) when my truck-police car combo (with flashing lights and siren) was almost upon him; this qualifies as a circumstance of such character.
The third group of fictitious pedestrians cited in the police report were encountered at “O” Street. I was still proceeding at 25 MPH to my home after reversing course, and the location of this crosswalk is 1000 feet (more than three football fields in length) from the point on this road where my truck-police car combo first appeared. The police car’s flashing lights and siren were still activated according to the police report. Again, to add drama, the police report claimed (lines 34-37) that the alleged cross walking pedestrians had to jump out of the way at the last second to avoid being struck by the truck-police car combo.
Brady arrested me for the third time, also at 10:30 PM, on the day following Thanksgiving 2013. A warrant had been issued for my arrest because of my refusal to appear in municipal court regarding the unlawful suspension of my driver’s license on 31 August 2012; my license was suspended because of my refusal to stop displaying signs on my truck that called attention to local judicial corruption. I was kept handcuffed to a metal bench in the town’s police station for more than nine hours before being transferred to the county jail where my bail was set at $10,000. When Brady signaled me to stop I recognized harassment and intended arrest, and I reversed course and proceeded back to my home 3/4 mile distant at 25 MPH; Brady accused me of the felony 3rd degree eluding.
My driver’s license was again suspended in March 2014 also because of my truck display. After being signaled to stop while driving (with the attached sign shown at right) by a Seaside Park policewoman, when I was 800 feet away from my home, I proceeded to my home to await certain arrest; I was again accused of the felony 3rd degree eluding, transported to the county jail, and held pending payment of $10,000 bail. I lost another $1000 to a bondsman in order to get out of jail.
After my release from jail following my arrest by the Seaside Park policewoman I arranged the reinstatement of my driver’s license. I was driving within Seaside Park several weeks before my scheduled criminal trial for alleged 2nd degree eluding (from 1 September 2012); I was pulled over by two Seaside Park police cars. The prosecutor who was going to try to imprison me ordered my arrest for supposedly violating an order by the judge who was going to preside at my criminal trial; the trumped up excuse for ordering my arrest was that I violated the trial judge’s order that I not drive.
My latest arrest was several weeks before my scheduled criminal trial for alleged 2nd degree eluding that could end with a mandatory prison sentence that could be as long as ten years. My bail was set at a full $75,000 cash; that meant that I had to produce $75,000 in order to get out of jail rather than pay a bondsman a non-returnable $7,500. This was clearly an attempt to keep me in jail and prevent me from preparing for trial at which I was going to represent myself. After much difficulty I arranged a withdrawal from my 401k retirement account.
At my criminal trial in June 2014 two Seaside Park policemen testified against me regarding alleged 2nd degree eluding, specifically that I nearly killed or seriously injured cross walking pedestrians on 1 September 2020; only my testimony countered the sworn testimony of the two policemen. While representing myself a jury acquitted me of alleged 2nd degree eluding; this is a measure of the strength of the evidence of the policemen’s perjury, but they were not on trial. I testified that I was aware that I was signaled to stop by the Seaside Park police on 1 September but that upon the signal, unlike the instance in January 2012 when I came to a stop for Seaside Park police regarding my first lifetime arrest, I reversed course and returned to my home at 25 MPH 3/4 mile distant to await certain arrest. Because the trial judge unsurprisingly prohibited me from showing evidence to the jury of police harassment for exercising my right of free speech all the elements required for conviction of 3rd degree eluding were established; based upon the trial judge’s instructions the jury was compelled to find me guilty of the felony 3rd degree eluding (eluding police without the element of causing harm to others).
Contrast the 1 September 2012 incident with the incident on 18 December 1988 when I drove my dying mother to the hospital. At the time of the 18 December incident four police cars from three municipalities chased me for about six miles before I came to a stop in front of the hospital; I was not charged with eluding, and I was not arrested. However if I was charged with 3rd degree eluding on 18 December, and if I was not allowed to present mitigating evidence to a jury all the elements for conviction of 3rd degree eluding would have been established. The legislative intent of the eluding law was not to make me a felon because of the events on 18 December 1988 or because of the events of 1 September 2012.
After the end of my criminal trial I filed litigation in New Jersey District Court (federal) and claimed violation of 42 USC section 1983. In my case section 1983 guarantees my qualified right to present evidence to a federal jury of police retaliation against me for exercising my right to free speech. Like the written opinion of corrupt superior court judge Oles who dismissed my whistle blowing litigation while covering up evidence that later enabled me to win an appeal and a trial, the New Jersey District Court judge in my case, Peter Sheridan, dismissed my federal litigation while submitting a written opinion that is characterized by malicious lies, distortions of facts, and omissions of relevant facts that were favorable to me.
In order to win a trial in federal court pursuant to section 1983 I had to demonstrate police perjury (retaliation) against me that was linked to my exercise of free speech. The evidence of police perjury shown by the photos above at three pedestrian cross walks is reinforced by jury acquittal of alleged 2nd degree eluding neither of which are mentioned in the written opinion that dismissed my litigation. My arrest on 1 September 2012 was associated with a $50,000 bail and a mandatory prison sentence that could be as long as ten years, yet the events of 1 September 2012 were completely covered up in the written opinion of the New Jersey District Court; therefore when reviewing the written opinion, that is obviously against me, be aware of that criminal omission that represented the violation of 18 USC section 242.
Click here to view a PDF copy of the New Jersey District Court written opinion that dismissed my litigation.
After the dismissal of my litigation by the New Jersey District Court I filed an appeal with the 3rd Circuit Court in Philadelphia. The primary purpose of the appellate court is to address claimed reversible errors by a lower court. Reversible errors in my case referred to the cover up by the New Jersey District Court of alleged 2nd degree eluding and its associations, namely the link to my exercise of free speech, evidence of police perjury, and jury acquittal.
However the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals also dismissed my 1983 action (litigation), and submitted a written opinion in support of its decision to dismiss that was also characterized by lies, distortions, and omissions of relevant facts. Although I prominently cited the alleged 2nd degree eluding/reversible error repeatedly in my brief to the 3rd Circuit Court (written argument) and its significance to winning a trial the 3rd Circuit Court made no mention whatsoever of the alleged 2nd degree eluding.
Click here to view a PDF copy of the written opinion of the 3rd Circuit Court. The opinion was authored by three judges one of whom was Maryanne Trump-Barry. The events of 1 September 2012 are restricted to page 3 of the opinion and make no mention of alleged 2nd degree eluding; the opinion is also against me, but the omission of trial-winning evidence regarding the alleged 2nd degree eluding gives a measure of the opinion’s credibility.
After the three-judge panel of the appellate court dismissed my 1983 action while covering up trial-winning evidence I submitted to the 3rd Circuit Court a request for an en banc hearing; this type of hearing is meant to be presented to all the judges at the court, not just three.
Click here to view a PDF copy of my brief for en banc hearing to the 3rd Circuit Court. I specifically cited the demonstrable corruption of the three judge panel that included Maryanne Trump-Barry that covered up trial winning evidence regarding the alleged 2nd degree eluding.
My request for an en banc hearing was denied without explanation. Fifteen judges were involved in the vote regarding my request, and one of these judges was Thomas Hardiman who is supposedly on President Trump’s short list for possible nomination to the US Supreme Court. The so called vote by appellate judges was not about the interpretation of law but rather about the perpetration of a crime.
Click here to view a PDF copy of the denial without explanation of my request to appeal to all the judges at the 3rd Circuit Court.
At every trial in either civil or criminal court certain required elements must be established in order for a plaintiff (civil court) or a prosecutor (criminal court) to win. These elements are unique to the violation of a particular civil or criminal statute, and each element must be established; if a prosecutor or plaintiff fails to establish merely one of the required elements he loses his case.
Click here for an excerpt from the Department of Justice web site regarding 18 USC section 242. Note that judges are not immune from prosecution regarding violation of 18 USC section 242.
Click here to view a PDF copy that lists the elements that are required in order to convict federal judges in my case for covering up trial winning evidence, specifically alleged 2nd degree eluding and associations that if presented to a jury guaranteed my trial win regarding my 42 USC section 1983 litigation. These elements are published for South Carolina federal courts, but they are applicable to any federal court in any state.
The first element that must be established is that I was present in a state; in this case I was present in Seaside Park NJ at the time of my arrest on 1 September 2012.
First, that (name of victim) was present in South Carolina;
The demonstration of retaliation under color of law that was linked to my exercise of my 1st Amendment right qualified me to provide facts to a jury that is guaranteed by 42 USC section 1983; federal judges denied that right to present facts to a jury while covering up the alleged 2nd degree eluding.
Second, the defendant deprived (name of victim) of a right secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States (the right infringed must be identified)….
Retaliation under color of law in my case is demonstrated by the perjured allegation of 2nd degree eluding against me that is linked to my exercising free speech regarding the signs on my truck. In order to establish the second required element for indictment and conviction a grand jury/jury merely needs to be instructed regarding the two elements that are required for me to present the facts of my 1983 action to a jury, namely police retaliation that is linked to my display of signs on my truck that called attention to local judicial corruption. Presumably a rational grand jury/jury will recognize (as did the jury at my criminal trial for alleged 2nd degree eluding) police perjury regarding the alleged 2nd degree eluding that is dated the day following the suspension of my driver’s license because of my refusal to stop my truck display. After such recognition the grand jury/jury then must review the written opinions of the New Jersey District Court and the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals that made no mention whatsoever of the alleged 2nd degree eluding; in other words, the two courts covered up the alleged 2nd degree eluding in order to justify the denial of my qualified right to present facts to a jury. The grand jury/jury must also review my briefs to the courts in which I repeatedly cite the alleged 2nd degree eluding. My brief in support of my request for an en banc hearing before the 3rd Circuit Court could contain nothing that was not included in my previous briefs to any federal court, and the brief can be reviewed by clicking here.
If a grand jury/jury decides that my trial win was likely based upon covered up alleged 2nd degree eluding and associations then the second element has been established.
The federal judges were acting in their official capacity, or in other words under color of law, when they denied my qualified right pursuant to 42 USC section 1983 to present facts in my case to a jury regarding police retaliation for exercising free speech.
Third, that the defendant acted under color of law; and
My brief in support of my request for an en banc hearing before the entire 3rd Circuit Court (all the judges) cited the deliberate cover up of trial winning evidence by the three-judge appellate panel (that included Maryanne Trump-Barry). Instead of fixing the mistake made by the panel the 3rd Circuit Court doubled down on its criminal denial of my right to present facts to a jury. There can be no question that the entire 3rd Circuit Court willfully and criminally denied my civil right.
Fourth, that the defendant acted willfully.
The judicial criminal cover up of evidence that guaranteed my trial win in a 1983 action included the chief judge at the 3rd Circuit Court; his name was McKee. Click here to view the denial of my request for an en banc hearing after the cover up of evidence by the three judge appellate panel; the denial lists the name of McKee.
After the denial of my request for en banc hearing I immediately submitted an evidence package to the Public Integrity Section (PIN) of the Department of Justice in Washington (DOJ); the PIN has the sole mandate to prosecute federal judges who commit color of law violations. I received an outrageous response from the DOJ. In my letter/package to the PIN I specifically cited the criminal violation of 18 USC section 242 by federal judges and provided the same evidence that appears in this website; the response instead tried to turn this criminal matter into an administrative misconduct matter regarding 28 USC section 351; the response also referred me to the chief judge of the 3rd Circuit Court who was part of the criminal cover up of evidence! Click here to view the letter dated 2 June 2016 from the DOJ.
Because of the outrageous letter from the DOJ dated 2 June 2016 I sent more than a dozen follow up letters demanding specific citation by the PIN of the cover up of alleged 2nd degree eluding and associations; I received no response from the PIN. Beginning with the New Jersey District Court that first covered up the alleged 2nd degree eluding no court or governmental entity, or private entity like Judicial Watch has cited the alleged 2nd degree eluding; this is a common ploy by corrupt entities that seek to avoid mention of damning or dangerous evidence.
I sent repeated letters to different entities within the Department of Justice in Washington; the entities included the office of the Attorney General under the tenures of Lynch, Sessions, and Barr, but I was either stonewalled or I received generic responses that made no mention of alleged 2nd degree eluding and its associations. Many of the responses were not signed.
Click here to view all the absurd responses that I received from the DOJ regarding my efforts to call attention to the criminal cover up of evidence by numerous federal judges. Not a single letter from the DOJ cites the covered up alleged 2nd degree eluding.
I sent repeated letters to the FBI in Washington, Newark (NJ), Trenton, and Philadelphia; I was stonewalled.
Because my letters were repeatedly ignored I traveled to Philadelphia where I met with an FBI representaive. The representative agreed to listen to me, but after several minutes of reviewing the evidence that I had in hand he interrupted me and told me that prosecution of judges was not likely.
I also traveled to Newark (NJ) where an FBI representative (who was from the personnel department…I was told that everyone else is busy) spoke to me through a security gate and refused to give me an appointment to come back and review the evidence. The representative told me to provide the evidence that I had in hand and that I would be contacted later; no response was forthcoming.
Click here to view an excerpt from the FBI web site regarding color of law violations. The first sentence of the excerpt cites judges and their responsibility not to abuse their power. The FBI is truly corrupt. The personalities who state for the cameras that FBI corruption is limited to a handful of bad apples who are restricted to Washington are either frauds or are unbelievably ignorant.
I also submitted repeated letters to House and Senate judicial oversight subcommittees; I was stonewalled. These offices included so called conservative heroes like Jim Jordan, Lou Gomert, Mike Lee, and Ted Cruz. I also sent letters to Charles Grassley and Lindsey Graham who are arguably less respected than the frauds first mentioned (Cruz et al).
Because my letters were ignored I traveled to Washington four times in order to visit congressional oversight offices. I was again stonewalled by office staffs who refused to give me an appointment with oversight lawmakers because I was not a constituent. I tried to reason with staffs that the corruption I was trying to bring to lawmakers’ attention is ultimately linked to my boss-controlled representatives; it was a futile attempt. During my last visit Ted Cruz’s staff called the police to have me removed from his office after I persisted regarding my request for an appointment.
I sent repeated letters and several evidence packages to Judicial Watch that has its office in Washington; the letters and evidence packages were addressed to Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton or director of investigations Chris Farrell; I was stonewalled.
Because my letters were ignored I made a fifth trip to Washington to visit the office of Judicial Watch (JW); I was again stonewalled. A day after my visit I called JW’s office and asked to speak with a representative; JW lawyer Geoff Lyons spoke with me in a curt conversation. Lyons admonished me for representing myself in my federal litigation as if the criminal cover up of evidence by judges is okay if a pro se litigant is not a lawyer. Lyons also admonished me for not appealing to the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS), but the cover up of trial-winning evidence by two federal courts is not a legal issue for resolution by SCOTUS and is rather a criminal matter for consideration by a grand jury. Lyons told me that his superiors at JW were aware of my case but refused to use their pulpit to expose the corrupt judges who are associated with my case.
Click here to view the mission statement of Judicial Watch; what a fraud! I presented to Judicial Watch comprehensive evidence that guaranteed indictment and conviction of numerous federal judges regarding malicious violation of 18 USC section 242, yet Judicial Watch turned a blind eye. Judicial Watch enables corruption. I am no supporter of Hillary and her emails who is a prominent target of Judicial Watch, but public corruption extends far beyond her.
I also sent an evidence package to Joe diGenova who is a Washington lawyer and former federal prosecutor; diGenova counts present (as of 2020) Attorney General William Barr as a friend. The evidence package of course demonstrated the guaranteed indictment and conviction of federal judges in my case. I requested that diGenova verify the evidence and then bypass the corrupt deep state at the Department of Justice (DOJ) and bring the evidence to the attention of William Barr; evidence of criminal conduct by multiple federal judges is worthy of Barr’s attention. DiGenova responded by sending me a form letter. Note that diGenova mentions in the letter that he cannot represent me; I did not ask for representation, and I offered him $5000 to merely validate the evidence and bring it to the attention of Barr.
Click here to view the PDF copy of the letter sent to me from diGenova. DiGenova is a coward, a fraud, and an enabler who wears the anti-corruption mantle. He knowingly turned a blind eye to serious judicial corruption and enabled those judges to continue to victimize citizens like me who are powerless and politically unconnected.
I sent evidence packages to lawyer Harmeet Dhillon who is a frequent guest on FOX cable news shows. Her area of practice includes filing 1983 actions like mine. I requested her help, for which I offered to pay, in order to secure my right that is guaranteed by 42 USC section 1983; she ignored my request although I sent the evidence packages via certified mail to her offices in San Francisco and in New York. I have referred to my guaranteed right, but to be clear I have no doubt that many actions are filed pursuant to section 1983 that are frivolous and deserve to be dismissed; the retaliatory alleged 2nd degree eluding in my case qualified my right, and it is for this reason that it was covered up by two federal courts.
I used to be a great fan of nationally known Mark Levin who has a daily radio show/podcast in addition to a weekly cable television show on FOX. He often praised an entity known as Landmark Legal Foundation (LLF) where he was once president but now he is chairman of the board of directors. I exhausted every conceivable way to bring evidence to honest officials at DOJ who could ensure that the evidence is presented to a grand jury. Levin has guests occasionally on his radio show, and they have included Lou Gohmert, Ted Cruz, Jim Jordan, and Mike Lee; they are all lawmakers in Washington, and they are all on committees/subcommittees for oversight of the DOJ. I sent a comprehensive evidence package to current LLF president Richard Hutchison and asked that he use his resources through Mark Levin to indirectly bring the evidence to the attention of honest DOJ officials. I received no response regarding the provided evidence package, and I sent via certified mail more than a dozen weekly follow up letters requesting his reply; I received no response.
Landmark Legal Foundation (LLF) solicits money donations based upon its claim of being devoted to Constitutional principles; that claim is demonstrably false, and LLF is a fraud. LLF president Hutchison and Mark Levin are enablers of corruption, and are frauds. Mark Levin frequently decries on his show judicial corruption and recently stated after the Roger Stone trial “what are we going to do about judges who defy the rule of law?” Levin is a hypocrite.
Click here to view a copy of one of the letters that I sent to Hutchison for a response to my simple request to bring evidence to the attention of honest officials at the DOJ.
sspdavidmiller@gmail.com