FEDERAL COURT CALLS COMPLAINT RE. CALIFORNIA STATE SUPERIOR COURT’S PERJURY TO BE AN “INCOMPLETE REPRESENTATION TO [FEDERAL] COURT”

FEDERAL COURT CALLS COMPLAINT RE. CALIFORNIA STATE SUPERIOR COURT’S PERJURY TO BE AN “INCOMPLETE REPRESENTATION TO [FEDERAL] COURT”

San Jose, California, January 19, 2016

  Two private Plaintiffs’ have sued California Superior Court, County of Santa Clara for latter’s failure to comply with the ADA [Americans With Disabilities] Act. The lawsuit initiated in January 2013 is expected to reach trial in March 2016.

  The January 19, 2016, Federal Court Order, Docket #451, issued by Magistrate Judge Paul Singh Grewal of the United States District Court, Northern District, states in pertinent part

  “Plaintiffs jointly move for sanctions against SCCA [Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara] and [California Sixth District Appellate Court Clerk, Beth Miller] Miller’s counsel for violating a protective order, committing perjury and failing to appear at a deposition”, p.8:6-7

Beth Miller, California Sixth District Appellate Court Clerk

  “Plaintiffs’ perjury claim pertains to [California Superior Court] counsel’s representation that Plaintiffs did not provide Defendants with the audio or video recording”, p.8:12-13

  The Federal Court Order goes on to call Plaintiffs’ complaint of perjury as [California Superior Court, Santa Clara County] “counsel’s representation to the court was incomplete”, p.9:5-6

  The party whose representation to the court was incomplete is California Superior Court, County of Santa Clara. The counsel for California Superior Court, County of Santa Clara is James (Jim) Brown, of Sedgwick, LLC.

California Superior Court, County of Santa Clara Counsel, James (Jim) Brown

  It is ironic that the very institution, the California Superior Court that is supposed to epitomize justice and which compels the rest of the world to make complete representations to it in cases before them, itself, appears to engage in blatant disregard of stating the truth under oath, and is not practicing what it preaches to the rest of the world.

  The United States District Court Judges at the San Jose Federal Court consists entirely of ex-California Superior Court Judges, like Judge Edward Davila, Judge Lucy Koh, Judge Beth Freeman, Judge Jeremy Fogel, Judge Ronald M. Whyte, the latter being the assigned judge on this instant case, despite his close association and immediate last employment with the Defendant California Superior Court, in the very same Santa Clara County, and despite his open admission that his spouse, Ann Whyte, earns her living provide services to the Superior Court, Santa Clara County and has been listed as working with state court judge L [Lincoln] Michael Clark, who is the named defendant in the underlying Federal Case.

Senior District Judge Ronald M. Whyte, San Jose Courthouse, Courtroom 6 - 4th Floor, 280 South 1st Street, San Jose, CA 95113

 

L [Lincoln] Michael Clark, Judge, California Superior Court, County of Santa Clara

 Federal Court Judges have life-long appointments, no oversight, complete monopoly over the judiciary business, meaning no alternative competition. The judges have created their own civil judicial immunity that prevents them from being sued, or even deposed as  a witness in a case, on “mental process” immunity grounds. "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”, John Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton

  The public suspicion of RICO [Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations] acts between the San Jose Federal Court Judges and the Defendant California Superior Court appears to be intensifying and is more likely than not to result in a public inquiry and a Department of Justice investigation.

  For feedback and inquiries, please contact judicialirregularities@gmail.com