|
http://www.skolnicksreport.com McVeigh And 'Fraud Upon The Court' By Sherman H. Skolnick 6-3-1 There is one term lawyers seldom study about or use. Perhaps reading about this will help you understand why. That phrase is "fraud upon the court". In Anglo-Saxon Law, lawyers are "officers of the court", pledged to uphold the court system. In the beginning of this nation, the lawyers and judges in the colonies, generally were Tories who supported the Crown, the Monarchy in England that sought to tax the colonists without representation. With the Declaration of INDEPENDENCE from England and the American Revolutionary War, among other things, the non-lawyer colonists rose up against the lawyers and lawyers acting as judges. To identify these enemies of the people, the colonists painted black the chimneys of lawyers and judges, many of whom fled to Canada. From the standpoint of lawyers and judges, the most troublesome "fraud upon the court" involves a corrupter or "bagman", working a malign if not corrupt influence on the judge or judges to procure an arbitrary ruling. In the whole history of jurisprudence in the United States, with just one rare exception of record, lawyers have NOT been the ones invoking, in court, the principle of "fraud upon the court" to challenge a court ruling by fingering the judge. Even to this day, lawyers generally by what they do and say in court, support the system, upholding whatever nowadays constitutes the "Crown". With that one exception of record, in the entire history of the United States, all the invoking in court of "fraud upon the court" as to corrupt judges has been done in the last four decades by me and my associates in our court reform, investigation, and research group, Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts, of which since 1963 I have been the founder/chairman. As a group, we early on by our work came to understand the general principles of judicial corruption endemic in America. Such as namely, oftentimes, the judges in the courthouse building own and operate a bank, together with their lawyers/cronies/corrupters. And, surprisingly, very often that selfsame bank is right across the alley or right across the street from the courthouse. Identified by others as the greatest bribery-of-judges scandal in American history, was caused by us in 1969. The State courthouse in Chicago at the time was called the Civic Center. It housed the Circuit Court of Cook County; and the next higher level in a three-tier state court system, the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, being Cook County; and the Chicago offices of three of the seven Justices of Illinois' highest tribunal, the Illinois Supreme Court whose court building is in the state capitol. Through an intense investigation, we as non-lawyers but self-educated in law, and not wishing to be members of the bar, unearthed documents and details supporting the following: 1. That across the street from the Civic Center was a small, CLOSELY HELD bank. Following the cynical tradition in America. it was called, naturally, the Civic Center Bank. 2. From all the details, we understood it was a quiet money laundry for criminal purposes. We called it "the shuttle bus to Switzerland". 3. It was founded by Illinois' chief tax collector, Theodore J. Isaacs, who had been Director of the Illinois Department of Revenue, interlocked with the highly corrupt Chicago District office of the Internal Revenue Service. 4. Isaacs brought into his bank enterprise as fellow owners the Chief Bank Examiner; Otto Kerner, Jr., Governor of Illinois and later, made a federal appeals court judge; together with thirty state and federal judges and nine name-brand Chicago-area gangsters. 5. To assure himself that the pressfakers would censor any negative stories about the criminal operation, Isaacs also brought in as fellow owners the head of Field Enterprises that at that time owned the Chicago Sun-Times and the Chicago Daily News; and the political editor of the Chicago Tribune; and a further assortment of City Hall and media bigshots. Because of his previous activities, Isaacs was convicted of state criminal offenses. His appeal was pending in the Illinois Supreme Court. Being a man that understands the American judicial system, he did a natural thing. Just two weeks before the oral argument and presentation of his appeal, he brought into the bank, as fellow owners, most of the judges of the Illinois Supreme Court. The high court judges did a natural thing. As banker-judges they understood the judicial system such as it is. They overturned the conviction of their fellow bank-owner Isaacs. [As we have pointed out on our website, the court system is riddled in key places with Banker-Judges. They do not disqualify themselves when their bank is in their court. Guess who wins in their crooked court?] Our policy is and has always been: when we are convinced that certain judges are corrupt, we file and present, to their face, an extra-ordinary court petition, accusing the judge or judges openly that certain court judgments were procured by a malign if not corrupt influence on the judges. We do not engage in secret poison pen letters, or mere rumors, or tactics of disguise and evasion. Direct confrontation is our motto and my job, as chairman, founder, and spokesman of our group since 1963. It is a hazard and jeopardy required by a court system which does not cure itself by the internal operation of the Bench and the Bar. Designating ourselves as amici curiae, "friends of the court", I and an associate of mine, by an extra-ordinary motion, filed in the criminal case of People of the State of Illinois versus Theodore J. Isaacs, directly confronted the state high court judges with their own crimes in their purported temple of justice. Angry at our audacity, they ordered and supervised a Chicago judge to grill me. Under threat of jail, I was ordered by the accused high court judges to divulge all our methods of investigation of them. They evidently figured, that since I am a paraplegic from polio in a wheelchair since childhood, that I am a weakling and will fold up and disappear. I refused to divulge our methods to the accused judges and their hang-man. Dealing with me as if I were a desperate and dangerous bank robber, they had four state troopers haul me to prison in an armored truck. After two weeks of the resulting public commotions, I was vindicated. The high court Chief Justice and an Associate Justice were ordered removed from the bench. A third accused high court justice promptly bugged out; he died under fire. A fourth high court justice and the remaining Associate Justices somehow escaped. As an institution of stone sitting on a hill, the state high court fell into the dark pit of infamy. It was a beautiful but temporary moment in history. Thereafter, in the federal court system, likewise designating myself as a "friend of the court", I filed an extra-ordinary court petition. I accused Chicago Federal Appeals Judge Otto Kerner, Jr., a pal of Isaacs, of specific bribery. After having been Illinois Governor, Kerner had been appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit, Chicago. Judge Kerner arranged with the Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court in Chicago to try to jail me for "contempt of court". When that did not stop me, Kerner held a press conference, trying to smear me as a "liar". Like a gangster making too much noise, when a pillar of the Government Establishment does not do his dirty work quietly, the Establishment throws him away. He serves no further purpose. No "sensible" bagman or fellow banker will corrupt him. Kerner was prosecuted and jailed on my charges and died an ex-convict. He became the highest level sitting federal judge in American history to be jailed for bribery. [Isaacs was sent to jail as well on federal charges.] The preceding are just two examples of our work as a group over the last four decades. In the Timothy McVeigh murder case, the chief defense counsel, Stephen Jones, prior to the start of the trial, brought an extra-ordinary petition in the next higher court, U.S. Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit, Denver. In the 185-page document, Jones sought to compel trial Judge Richard Matsch to be required to force the American CIA and other espionage agencies to divulge the details of Iraqi involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing. In his court papers, called Petition for Mandamus AGAINST JUDGE MATSCH, Jones referred to secret portions of the court records as well as other evidence showing the CIA cover up; that the CIA and other espionage agencies had prior knowledge of the bombing. And that there were others involved. [At the close of the Persian Gulf War, 1991, then President George Herbert Walker Bush arranged to quietly bring into the United States, some four thousand Iraqi military officers, supposed defectors, many from Iraqi intelligence units, with their families. Some two thousand of these live in Oklahoma City or right nearby. Bush was in a position to know that some of them were double agents. The FBI has concealed that they have closed circuit video showing an Iraqi military officer supervising the bombings; multiple devices were used, some around or strapped to the pillars of the Alfred P. Murrah Building.] Using U.S. domestic dissidents, as patsies and surrogates, apparently insulated from knowing about the Iraqi link, Iraq thus got revenge upon the United States by the worst, so far, terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Iraq and others consider the Oklahoma bombings justified. Some have contended that at the close of the Persian Gulf War, the U.S. committed war crimes in that our military was ordered to shoot in the back some 150 thousand Iraqi soldiers, mostly conscripts, proceeding under a white flag of surrender. With bulldozers, the U.S. military buried many of them, still alive, in mass graves in the desert. The only even remotely similar event was late in World War Two, at the "Battle of the Bulge", when German troops slaughtered some 86 U.S. soldiers proceeding under a white flag of surrender. Can 86 soldiers be compared to 150 thousand? In the only case of its kind of record in U.S. history, is outlined, step by step, the procedure that is to be used in unearthing whether a court judgment or verdict has been procured by a malign if not corrupt influence on a judge, constituting a "fraud upon the court". That case, invoked by us in the Illinois Supreme Court mess and the Kerner matter, is Root Refining Co. versus Universal Oil Products Co. In law libraries it is Volume 169 Federal Reporter Second Series, starting at page 514. Legal researchers cite it as 169 F.2d 514 (3rd Circuit, 1948). This rare case provides that: (A) A court, regardless of its level in the court system whether trial court or reviewing court, has inherent power and original jurisdiction, at any time (even years and years later) to inquire whether its judgments and decrees had been procured by a "fraud upon the court", poisoning up the temple of justice. That is, by some happening not known at the time of judgment and not previously in the court record but becoming known at a later date. (B) This inherent power is particularly so when the judgments and decrees had been obtained by a malign if not corrupt influence on one or more Judges of the court. (C) To supervise the investigation, and to assure the public that there will not be a cover up, the Chief Justice of the United States has to designate judges from faraway to specifically sit in the district of the inquiry. Such faraway judges should appoint a Master, that is, a court-appointed taker-of-evidence, to quiz witnesses, to compile evidence and documents, and to submit a report to the special panel of faraway judges. And that the special panel consider the same. (D) Without exception, every possible witness, document, and means is to be used, using court process,to compel the appearance of witnesses and production of documents,in order to be able to effectively unearth the "fraud upon the court". (E) The circumstances of the accused judges and how they went about entering the challenged and tainted judgments and decrees are to be examined and scrutinized, or whether others unlawfully and secretly entered such judgments and decrees for or on behalf of such judges. [One of the examined judges in the Root case, was an elderly senile judge. Court orders were secretly entered by corrupters in his name without his apparent knowledge.] The circumstances have to be examined to determine if corrupters worked a malign if not corrupt influence on the accused judge or judges. (F) To assist in the inquiry, there is to be permitted outsiders, not themselves directly involved in the judgments or decrees; that is, as amicus curiae, "friends of the court". (G) The special panel of faraway judges has to determine whether the court judgments, orders, and decrees, shown to be tainted by having been procured by malign influence and corruption, are to now be purged from the court records. (H) The special panel has to consider whether the now identified perpetrators of the "fraud upon the court", are to hereafter be barred from the courthouse and not allowed to be further heard. In the claim of "fraud upon the court", the defense attorneys in the McVeigh case have not focussed on the tainted role of the judges which should be considered. Those in the McVeigh case who should be questioned under oath by a panel of faraway judges, designated by the Chief Justice of the United States to especially sit in Denver to consider the extra-ordinary situation should include the following: * Denver Federal District Judge Richard Matsch who apparently had been told certain matters are to be covered up because of "national security", that is, the Iraqi connection. Also, Judge Matsch has reportedly been terrorized and intimidated by the reported murder of his daughter who fell or was pushed into a volcano in Hawaii. Judge Matsch refused to compel the American CIA and other espionage agencies to produce records, which by other factual data they are known to have, showing prior U.S. government knowledge of the Murrah Building Bombings. The Judge should have compelled the American CIA to divulge their records as to Andreas Strassmeier, connected to German Counter-Intelligence, and supervised by a secret CIA unit in the Justice Department. Strassmeier reportedly was a go-between for Iraqis and the American domestic dissidents as surrogates and patsies. And remember our prior stories about German Counter-Intelligence having advance knowledge of the murder of Clinton White House Deputy Counsel Vincent W. Foster, Jr. German big business supplied weapons to Iraq. * Oklahoma City U.S. District Judge Wayne Alley who was given, by federal officials, advance warning of a bombing to be at the Murrah Building on April 19, 1995. Judge Alley purposely did not come to his office that day. His office is close by the Murrah Building. Judge Alley admitted his prior knowledge in an interview in the newspaper the Oregonian, in his original home state of Oregon. Those who forewarned him should be compelled to be identified. * Former President George Herbert Walker Bush, to testify under oath, subject to penalty for perjury about (a) how he arranged to bring into the U.S. the 4 thousand Iraqi military defectors, some of whom were known to Bush as being double-agents. And the inter-face arrangement between Bush and President Clinton as to the housing, payment, and work provided for the defectors some two thousand of whom live in Oklahoma City or right nearby. (b)The Elder Bush and his son George W. Bush should be questioned under oath about the private business partnership of the Elder Bush with Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein for the decade of the 1980s; to cover up the bank records of the same, a federal suit was brought in Chicago 1990-91, at the hearing of which the only journalist was Skolnick. * Judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit, Denver, who were told in private that they should not compel Judge Matsch to force out the records of the CIA and other espionage agencies, because of so-called "national security", being a link to Iraq. They were also terrorized and intimidated by the reported murder of Matsch's daughter. * William Rockefeller Clinton should be forced to testify under sworn oath, subject to penalty for perjury, about his interface with the Elder Bush and George W. Bush, as to the Iraqi defectors, some of them known double-agents, brought into the U.S., with some two thousand of them in Oklahoma City or right nearby. Clinton should be grilled as to why he had a U.S. Secret Service agent, Alan Whitcher, re-assigned to the Murrah Building where he died in the bombings. As known to Clinton, the agent had lots of knowledge about Clinton's treason with the Red Chinese Secret Police. With Clinton's prior knowledge of the bombings, Clinton thus arranged to snuff out the Secret Service agent. Showing fake remorse, Clinton as President attended a post-bombings memorial for the agent. * FBI agents and officials current and former, should be questioned under sworn oath, subject to penalty for perjury, about the close circuit video FBI has showing an Iraqi military officer supervising the multiple bombings of the Murrah Building, as well as FBI knowledge of the Strassmeier matters. A free lance journalist interviewing Timothy McVeigh in prison wanted to ask him a question without being overheard. So the journalist wrote down the letters CIA on a piece of paper, and with a questioning look on the journalist's face and holding up the paper for McVeigh to see while the journalist pointed to McVeigh for an answer, McVeigh nodded his head, YES. * Past and present relevant Directors of Central Intelligence as to some of the matters here mentioned. * Past and present members of Counter-Intelligence of Saudi, a U.S. ally, as to the Iraqi connection and U.S. intelligence prior knowledge of the Murrah Building bombings. The defense attorneys for Timothy McVeigh and their bringing up the matter of "fraud upon the court"; nowhere do they seem ready or willing to bring up any matters of the judges operating in the McVeigh matter under a malign if not corrupt influence, constituting the strongest showing of a "fraud upon the court". At the minimum, bringing up some of the matters mentioned here would constitute strong grounds for a new trial and/or changing the death penalty for McVeigh. Like attorneys throughout the history of American courts, the McVeigh attorneys are not inclined to finger judges, even if rightfully necessary. In plain lingo, the lawyers are too chicken or they simply go along with supporting the "Crown", regardless of the truth. More coming. Stay tuned. |
