Government Grievance Virginia Courts are Racist, Predatory and Dishonest
Government Grievance Virginia Courts are Racist, Predatory and Dishonest
Virginia IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR COUNTY OF ORANGE
CL 2100 0427 - 00 Jury Trial Demanded
Janice Wolk Grenadier
Chief Judge Donald May Haddock
Judge Thomas Padrick
Chief Justice Donald Wayne Lemons
Judge James Clyde Clark
Janice Wolk Grenadier
JUDGES AND LAWYERS JUDGING JUDGES AND LAWYERS CORRUPTION
Justice John F. Molloy wrote a book that was published in 2004, The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion
an attorney in Arizona who went on to serve as a judge on the Arizona Superior Court bench. He is probably best known for his time serving as Chief Justice to Court of Appeals for the State of Arizona, where he authored the famous Miranda decision that was subsequently appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and overturned, resulting in what is known today as the "Miranda Rights" which law enforcement now quotes to suspected criminals upon arrest. Stated:
The legal profession has evolved dramatically during my 87 years. I am a second-generation lawyer from an Irish immigrant family that settled in Yuma. My father, who passed the Bar with a fifth-grade education, ended up arguing a case before the U.S. Supreme Court during his career.
The law changed dramatically during my years in the profession. For example, when I accepted my first appointment as a Pima County judge in 1957, I saw that lawyers expected me to act more as a referee than a judge. The county court I presided over resembled a gladiator arena, with dueling lawyers jockeying for points and one-upping each other with calculated and ingenuous briefs
That was just the beginning. By the time I ended my 50-year career as a trial attorney, judge and president of southern Arizona's largest law firm, I no longer had confidence in the legal fraternity I had participated in and, yes, profited from.
I was the ultimate insider, but as I looked back, I felt I had to write a book about serious issues in the legal profession and the implications for clients and society as a whole. The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion was 10 years in the making and has become my call to action for legal reform.
Our Constitution intended that only elected lawmakers be permitted to create law. Yet judges create their own law in the judicial system based on their own opinions and rulings. It's called case law, and it is churned out daily through the rulings of judges. When a judge hands down a ruling and that ruling survives appeal with the next tier of judges, it then becomes case law, or legal precedent. This now happens so consistently that we've become more subject to the case rulings of judges rather than to laws made by the lawmaking bodies outlined in our Constitution.
This case-law system is a constitutional nightmare because it continuously modifies constitutional intent. For lawyers, however, it creates endless business opportunities. That's because case law is technically complicated and requires a lawyer's expertise to guide and move you through the system. The judicial system may begin with enacted laws, but the variations that result from a judge's application of case law all too often change the ultimate meaning.
When a lawyer puts on a robe and takes the bench, he or she is called a judge. But in reality, when judges look down from the bench they are lawyers looking upon fellow members of their fraternity. In any other area of the free-enterprise system, this would be seen as a conflict of interest.
When a lawyer takes an oath as a judge, it merely enhances the ruling class of lawyers and judges. First of all, in Maricopa and Pima counties, judges are not elected but nominated by committees of lawyers, along with concerned citizens. How can they be expected not to be beholden to those who elevated them to the bench?
When they leave the bench, many return to large and successful law firms that leverage their names and relationships.
The Dark Side A law treatise on judging
By Caroline George Dougles, J.D. x-wife to
Congressman & New Hampshire Supreme Court Chief Judge Charles G. Douglas, III
Country Club Rules of Judges
Private Court Club Rules and Responsibilities (unwritten, unspoken, yet mandatory)
Members pledge their first allegiance to judges. This means unquestionable loyalty.
Members pay dues and all Court Financial Obligations promptly.
Members volunteer help to insiders over outsiders, and may expect reciprocity (Eventually). a member favor begets a reciprocal obligation back to the member or his designate.
Favors (and these rules) are mentally noted and tallied, not recorded or formally written down.
Members practice conformity, they may not descent outside the club. They must practice loyalty to all judges, but especially those who support them with fees and case referrals. All members (plus others who function in any part of the court system) are to treat every judge as a top-boss.
Maintain and promote exclusivity. Do not help outsiders, as they are competition for legal fees, and are not really qualified to appear in court without a member. Outsiders represent dangerous wild cards, requiring ultimate control and Swift and Harsh punishment.
Ordinary citizens will obey and give deference to all members, especially judges, (regardless of judicial error, mistake, or bias.) members hold an inherent superiority over lay people in court.
Keep club disciplinary business business within the clubhouse. This means no whistleblowing, public criticism are Judges complaints.
Speak nicely to other members in court - practice unnatural civility in the face of adversity. While obnoxious, manipulative behavior is understood to be part of the professional legal persona, it is to be masked with Ritualistic Clubhouse language and customs in court.
Club rules and the honor code are all members, but they are secret and have a flexible interpretation for different circumstances and people (depending on Rank, Chits, and Judicial Favors.)
Club membership means this class is more qualified than any other to handle legal problems. Lay people need legal technicians are not to be trusted. To maintain order and law, it is an obsessive requirement that lay people be deferential at all times, and they be made to respect a judge by showing difference as they obey.
Loss of control over lay people means anarchy. Each lay individual is to be treated as a threat to be controlled by the entire profession / system. Diligence and maintaining control is a professional obsession.
For this book, the powerful in this club are called INSIDERS or OL’BOYS. If a club member is very connected, privileged and influential, I may refer to him using both terms (INSIDER and OL”BOY- capitalized or not. What is not capitalized in this club are individuals, common people, outsiders, most court users and member whistleblowers.
Special thanks was given to Linda Kennedy who lost her license to practice law for standing up and speaking out. Linda Kennedy also did an intervene in support of JWG CASE NO: 1:17-cv-1106 HEH USDC of the Eastern Division (Alexandria) JWG sued 43 Federal Judges for ignoring the information included in this recuse and other information. https://judicialpedia.com/listing/civil-rights-constitutional-judge-henry-hudson/
Judge POSNER Could not have said it any better for how JWG is being treated:
Posner: Most judges regard pro se litigants as 'kind of trash not worth the time'
BY DEBRA CASSENS WEISS
SEPTEMBER 11, 2017, 11:57 AM CDT
Judge Richard Posner cites boredom with judging as well as rebuffed efforts to aid pro se litigants in a new interview explaining his decision to suddenly retire from the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Posner, 78, told the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin last week that he decided to retire because of conflicts with his colleagues over the treatment of pro se litigants, who represent themselves. In a new interview with the New York Times, Posner elaborated on his concerns about the treatment of such litigants.
“The basic thing is that most judges regard these people as kind of trash not worth the time of a federal judge,” Posner said.
In the 7th Circuit, staff lawyers review appeals from pro se litigants, and their recommendations are generally rubber-stamped by judges, he noted.
Posner wanted to give the pro se litigants a better shake by reviewing all of the staff attorney memos before they went to the panel of judges. Posner had approval from the director of the staff attorney program. “But the judges, my colleagues, all 11 of them, turned it down and refused to give me any significant role. I was very frustrated by that,” Posner said.
Posner has written about the pro se issue in an upcoming book, and its publication “would be particularly awkward” if he remained on the court because it “implicitly or explicitly” criticizes the other judges, he said.
Posner said he began to focus on the problems of pro se litigants about six months ago when he “awoke from a slumber of 35 years.” He decided to write the book and “realized, in the course of that, that I had really lost interest in the cases,” he told the Times.
“And then I started asking myself, what kind of person wants to have the same identical job for 35 years? And I decided 35 years is plenty. It’s too much. Why didn’t I quit 10 years ago? I’ve written 3,300-plus judicial opinions.” https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/posner_most_judges_regard_pro_se_litigants_as_kind_of_trash_nor_worth_the_t
When will the Predatory Judiciary Fall Like Catholic Priests?
RICHARD LEE ABRAMS 29 MARCH 2021 https://citywatchla.com/index.php/cw/los-angeles/21447-when-will-the-predatory-judiciary-fall-like-catholic-priests
MY TURN--The common element of predatory abusers is their power over their victims.
Whether it is the husband who beats his wife or the judge who steals a widow’s income, the abuser’s power over the victim is crucial. The maxim that power tends to corrupt applies to individuals and to the institutions. For generations priests abused young boys. The abusive nature of Catholic schools was no secret in the 1950's, but the Church was too powerful to stop.
Slowly, our society has been turning against predators, but the battle is far from over as the hideous murder of George Floyd proved. Officer Derek Chauvin’s deliberate 7 minute 46 second murder by kneeing on George Floyd’s neck was such a depraved act that we have no word for it.
Under the doctrine of defense of others, a by-stander would have been legally justified to put a bullet into Officer Derek Chauvin, but we all know that person would have been instantly murdered by the other senior cop. Barbarism is too mild to explain why the other officers did not save George Floyd. When Black Lives Matters says that the problem is systemic, they are correct. The only officers who even questioned Chauvin were the trainees. The longer an officer is subjected to the system, the more acceptable a vicious murder becomes.
The Courts Are America’s Most Maliciously Predatory Institution
While there are varying degrees of judicial abuse from state to state, overall the judiciary has become America’s most abusive institution. None of the other predators would have thrived for so many decades without judicial protection. The courts protected the Catholic Church, the Boy Scouts, predators in entertainment, law enforcement, etc.
When the videotaped beating of Rodney King gave the Los Angeles County District Attorney no choice but to prosecute his buddies in the LAPD, the appellate court protected the officers. Through machinations which should have fooled no one, the appellate courts gave three options for the trial: (1) Simi Valley, a bedroom community for cops, (2) Riverside and (3) far away Alameda County. Since the police, their friends in the DA’s office and Judge Weisberg all wanted the officers acquitted, they selected Simi Valley. Fifty-four people paid with the lives for this judicial manipulation to protect predators from the consequences of their actions.
Why society has recently moved against some powerful predators is somewhat a mystery. The courts themselves are as corrupt as ever, but now they allow the prosecutions of Harvey Weinstein, priests and Scout leaders, etc. The courts have to ask whether the constant mowing down of one predatory institution after another can be stopped. While the judges sit all smug knowing that they get to alter facts and the law at will, they should remember that the worm turns. California’s judiciary faces a question not of if, but of when.
Like the Slave Holding Confederate States, California’s Courts Are among the Most Vicious
California has a tripartite judicial system: (1) the courts themselves, (2) the Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP), and (3) the State Bar. Each is dominated by the same individual, Tani Gorre Cantil-Sakauye, Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court. Too much power in one person’s hands results in too much corruption. Under an absurd interpretation of Cal. Const. Article VI Section 10, the judges may do what they will inside their courtrooms except step on the toes of a more powerful judge. Along with the doctrine of judicial immunity, the role of the CJP is to protect abusive judges, while the State Bar acts like a mafia hit man on attorneys who complain about corruption.
Predators Have to Be Driven out
In the last days of the Third Reich, Hitler ordered the continued extermination of Jews. Auschwitz accelerated its genocide. In the face of the advancing Red Army, the Nazi predators continued unabated. That is the nature of predators. Derek Chauvin proceeded with his murder knowing that he was being videoed.
Most Americans are unaware of the crimes which the courts perpetrate each day. We hear statistics about the disproportionate number of minorities who are incarcerated and naively think, “They must deserve it,” just as Germans thought Jews and Gypsies should be carted off to camps. Unless one has experienced Family Court, one has no idea how families are fodder for the judges’ profit and amusement. The Probate-Conservatorship Court is run to enrich the judges and their avaricious coterie of mediators and court appointed attorneys, while stealing the life savings of the elderly. As lawyer Thomas Girardi shows, attorneys can steal hundreds of millions of dollars from clients as the judges remain silent. The judges and the State Bar knew what Girardi was doing since he wisely became their benefactor. Now, they are scrambling to cover their tracks. Will Thomas Girardi be to the courts what Dr. Larry Nassar was to the Olympics?
As with the #MeToo Movement, the submerged anger against the judges is akin to the molten lava beneath a seemingly dormant volcano. Bill Cosby was advertising Jell-O to children; now he’s in prison. The statute of limitations to sue Catholic Priests and Scout leaders was abated. Judicial immunity does not extend to money laundering with its offshore bank accounts, gifts from attorneys, insurance companies and banks. Louis XVI, slavery, the Third Reich are gone. The judges should fear that when victims turn on them, mercy for the predators will not be the number one goal.
(Richard Lee Abrams is a Los Angeles attorney and a CityWatch contributor. He can be reached at: Rickleeabrams@Gmail.com. Abrams’ views are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of CityWatch.)
THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
The phrase “Equal justice under law” is engraved above the entrance of the United States Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. It is hardly “Equal justice under law” when the Supreme Court blatantly discriminates against a class of litigants who represent themselves by putting a rule in place disallowing the pro se litigants from the oral argument process. It is blatantly unfair to be collecting filing fees from pro se litigants to file their cases while at the same time refusing to allow them the same opportunity to participate in the oral argument process afforded to represented litigants. This is blatant systemic discrimination based on class. The Supreme Court should either remove the engraving “Equal justice under law” from the Supreme Court building, or it should remove its discriminatory Rule 28(8) and allow pro se litigants to equally present oral arguments before the court. The Supreme Court cannot have it both ways.
THE VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE SECRECY OF CHOOSING JUDGES
Virginia Legislature - Courts of Justice
Virginia Judicial Interviews Go “Off the Rails”
“This is a f**king shitshow”
when the SECRECY of CHOOSING JUDGES IS CHALLENGED By: The Public
THIS SHOWS HOW AND WHERE THE CORRUPTION IN THE COURTS OF VIRGINIA STATE
Twice a year and maybe more the Courts of Justice of Virginia choses NEW JUDGES and RENEWS old Judges, and the JIRC committee members.
This is done as SECRETLY as they can. The information is difficult to find on the site and emails with the times of the meeting are not usually on auto email as other meetings are.
You should remember when a complaint of a Judge or lawyer is made all should take it very seriously, in Virginia it is ignored.
That Justice in Virginia is only available for the very Rich and Powerful. JudicalPedia.com was launched in July of 2020 to show this.
That it is so rampant in Virginia that more and more people are standing up and speaking out - This is just one of the people’s videos for February of 2021:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lfoZjGQvM0&t=190s Where the Court’s of Justice for just questioning having an applicant to become a Circuit Court Judge questioned for the City of Alexandria Circuit Court Judgeship goes “CRAZY”
After watching this - you might understand how and why we have a corrupt Judiciary in Virginia - NO TRANSPARENCY and Judges chosen who will do as the “OLD BOYS NETWORK” wants them to do.
Also Reported By:
Home Virginia Politics VIDEO: Virginia Judicial Interviews Go “Off the Rails”; “Like a courtroom drama”;... VIRGINIA POLITICS VIDEO: Virginia Judicial Interviews
Go “Off the Rails”; “Like a courtroom drama”; “This is a f**king shitshow” https://bluevirginia.us/2021/02/virginia-judicial-interviews-go-off-the-rails-like-a-courtroom-drama-this-is-a-fking-shitshow
Wow, what on earth is going on here?!? Can’t wait to see the video…
General Assembly’s judicial interviews devolve into ‘s***show’
By Ned Oliver -February 10, 202
Channel 12 VIRGINIA MERCURY
General Assembly’s judicial interviews devolve into ‘s***show’ https://www.nbc12.com/2021/02/10/general-assemblys-judicial-interviews-devolve-into-sshow/
GENERAL ASSEMBLY General Assembly judicial interview devolves into spectacle
NED OLIVER The Virginia Mercury
Ned, a Lexington native, has more than a decade’s worth of experience in journalism, beginning at The News-Gazette in Lexington, and including stints at the Berkshire Eagle, in
Berkshire County, Mass., and the Times-Dispatch and Style Weekly in Richmond. He is a graduate of Bard College at Simon’s Rock, in Great Barrington, Mass. Contact him at email@example.com
Virginia Courts in Brief
Virginia's Judicial System’s mission appears to ensure that unless you are “RICH and POWERFUL” with the right connections to the “HOOKERS” Club or the “OLD BOY’S NETWORK” you have no chance to win in an Honest Court in Virginia, as they do not exist.
The Judges are all chosen by the Courts of Justice in “SECRET” and when a case becomes an issue they bring in a retired Judge to “FIX IT” for the appropriate party of Virginia's Judicial System to assure that the disputes are handled the way Chief Justice Lemons wants.
The present system consists of four levels of courts: the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, the circuit courts, and the district courts. In addition, magistrates serve as judicial officers with authority to issue various types of processes. The courts are organized into 31 judicial circuits and 32 similar judicial districts. More than 2,600 people, including judges, clerks, and magistrates, work within the judicial branch of government with the goal of providing the citizens of the Commonwealth prompt, efficient service.
In December of 2020 the following Judges were questioned by the public:
The Public was treated rudely and ignored. That in January the Judges were re-appointed with no discussion by the Courts of Justice.
JIRC Members Judge James E Plowman & citizen Terrie N Thompson Virginia Courts of Justice renewal
Judicial inquiry review commission aka the JIRC. Reviews the judicial complaints in Virginia. It basically ignores your complaint of a Judge.
Judge Kemler citizens speak at Virginia Judicial Review 11Dec20
City of Alexandria Chief Judge Kemler citizens speak at Virginia Judicial Review 11Dec20
Cases of Complaint Mike Field, Janice Wolk Grenadier, Natalia Dalton, Said Chamone and many more
Judge John Tran Fairfax County, Virginia Judicial Review
Judge John Tran rewarded a Judgeship for what he did to Janice Wolk Grenadier through the law firm DiMuroGinsberg where Ben DiMuro announced years ago his donation of 10% of his estate to the Virginia State to buy his and his buddies freedom of the Ethics Rules and other Rules of the VSB
Judge Carroll A. Weimer Jr Prince William County, Virginia Judicial Reviews
Judge Carroll Weimer of PWC further supported and empowered Divorce Lawyer Ilona Ely Freedman Grenadier Heckman in the Sonia Grenadier Trust Thefts through her law firm
Judge Pamela O’Berry Judicial Review Part
The state of Virginia held Judicial Reviews
reviews for the following year December 11, 2020
Judge Pamela O’Berry - Chesterfield VA Part 2 11Dec20 Judicial Reviews
On Friday, December 11, 2020 the Virginia courts of justice Senate and delegates heals The Judicial reviews. Virginia and South Carolina are the only two states where the legislature chooses their judges. All other states vote on there judges. The public has the ability to have a say in their Judges.
Matt Skarlatos speaks out against Judge Thomas P. Sotelo Fairfax Va
Virginia judicial reviews by the courts of justice committee of the Virginia legislature on December 11, 2020