-Caveat Lector- from: http://www.druggingamerica.com/ Dave Hartley http://www.Asheville-Computer.com http://www.ioa.com/~davehart =========================================== http://www.druggingamerica.com/ http://www.druggingamerica.com/judges.html PARTIAL LIST OF GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL, INCLUDING JUDGES AND JUSTICES, IMPLICATED IN THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES DETAILED AND DOCUMENTED IN THE 1998 THIRD EDITION OF DEFRAUDING AMERICA This is a partial list of the federal judges involved in coverups, obstruction of justice, judicial fraud, or criminal retaliation against government agents and people seeking to expose government corruption. If any of the following judges had performed their duty, instead of joining the scheme to block the reporting of major criminal activities in government (as described in the third editions of Defrauding America and Unfriendly Skies, major ongoing criminal activities adversely affecting people in the United States could not have continued as they have. To fully understand and believe these statements, you must read and understand the contents of the books. As a matter of law, these criminal acts by federal judges far exceed the gravity of the offenses charged against most federal prisoners. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Corrupt Federal Judges Directly Involved In the Scheme To Silence the Exposure of High-Level Criminal Activities Robert Schnacke (U.S. District Court, San Francisco) He was the first judge to receive a federal brief filed by Stich. (Stich v. United States, et al, 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977). The lawsuit sought to expose government corruption by key people in the Federal Aviation Administration, compounded by obstruction of justice from Justice Department employees. It was filed in 1976 under various federal statutes, including the federal crime-reporting statute, Title 18 USC Section 4, and statutes directed to obtaining a court order halting government officials from engaging in unlawful activities and requiring them to comply with the law. Justice Department employees argued to have that action dismissed, thereby protecting the corruption that had played a major role in many prior airline crashes. Judge Schnacke, and then three judges in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, sympathized with Stich, but held that it was the responsibility of Congress, and not the court, to address these matters. That argument was contrary to what statutory and case law stated. Stich then filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, and they also covered up for the serious government corruption. By covering up for the FAA corruption, several subsequent air disasters were closely associated with the same type of misconduct, which continues to this day. James R. Browning (U.S. District Court.) He was the district court judge who heard Stich's lawsuit against the National Transportation Safety Board (Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977) in which Stich sought a court order forcing the NTSB to open the accident investigation into the 1978 Pacific Southwest Airlines (PSA) disaster in San Diego and admit major evidence revealing the primary reason why the disaster occurred (as revealed in the third edition of Unfriendly Skies). Browning sympathized with Stich, and stated, as repeated by the three judges in the ninth circuit court of appeals that Stich had no standing to seek this remedy (despite the U.S. attorney at San Francisco initially agreeing to support Stich's actions. Aided by Justice Department and judicial misconduct, the pattern of NTSB coverups continued, as described in Unfriendly Skies, and in the tragic TWA Flight 800 disaster. Milton Schwartz (U.S. District Court, Sacramento). He initially showed concern about the reports of high-level government corruption that Rodney Stich sought to report under federal crime-reporting statutes, including Title 18 USC Section 4, and then a month later and refused to receive the evidence. Compounding his refusal to receive the evidence offered under federal crime reporting statutes, Schwartz rendered an order barring Stich--for life--from federal court access (which was illegal and unconstitutional, and obviously intended to block Stich from reporting criminal activities that he and his government agents were seeking to report. This was a clear obstruction of justice, aiding and abetting the criminal activities being reported, and constituted federal crimes worse than the offenses for which many people languish in federal prison. Schwartz initiated corrupt judicial acts that enabled federal and California judges to seize and loot Stich's life's assets. Schwartz' crimes in these areas expanded through Schwartz' coverups, obstruction of justice, misprision of felonies, and his various civil rights violations against Stich. Not only did Schwartz commit criminal acts involving the obstruction of justice and retaliation against Stich, but he unlawfully and criminally blocked the exercise of what is the most important federal criminal statute available to the public when federal officials are guilty of criminal acts. That statute is Title 18 USC Section 4. Raul Ramirez (U.S. District Court, Sacramento-now in private practice in the Sacramento area.) Ramirez enlarged upon the corrupt acts by Judge Schwartz, charging Stich with criminal contempt of court after Stich sought to report to a federal court in Sacramento the criminal activities that Stich and other federal agents and deep-cover operatives had discovered. Ramirez, as with other judges, was corruptly charging Stich with criminal contempt of court for exercising the mandatory crime-reporting requirement of Title 18 USC Section 4. That statute required Stich to make such report to a federal judge or other federal officer. Ramirez, as with other judges, was blocking the exercise of the most important statute available to the public when federal officials are themselves implicated in criminal activities. John Moulds (Magistrate in U.S. District Court, Sacramento--also in private practice in Sacramento) Moulds was first contacted by Stich on the basis of his constitutional law expertise, seeking to halt the bizarre California lawsuit initiated by the CIA-related law firm, Friedman, Sloan and Ross. Possibly realizing the government's involvement, he refused to provide Stich any help. Later, he conducted a non-jury "trial" in which Stich was being charged by Justice Department prosecutors and Judge Milton Schwartz with criminal contempt of court in retaliation for Stich filing under Title 18 USC Section 4 (seeking to report additional criminal activities that Stich had discovered and seeking federal intervention under federal law against the actions taken to silence Stich via the sham California lawsuit). Moulds' misconduct resulted in Stich being sent to federal prison for six months for attempting to report to a federal court the criminal acts that he, or anyone else, must report. This sentence handed down by Moulds was then approved by U.S. District Judge Raul Ramirez (now in private practice in Sacramento). The entire Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals at San Francisco then upheld the right to imprison anyone seeking to report government crimes under Title 18 USC Section 4. Stich filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Justices also approved of this constitutional, statutory, and criminal outrage. The Justices of the Supreme Court were now involved even further in the criminal coverups as defined by federal criminal statutes. While Stich was in prison, federal judges ordered Stich's life's assets seized, and this was followed by judge-appointed trustees looting his $10 million estate. Starting from Stich's attempts to report the corruption at United Airlines and the FAA, and subsequently other corruption documented in Defrauding America, Stich was corruptly converted from a multi-millionaire to a state of poverty. The evidence indicates that these activities were intended to break Stich's spirit and halt his aggressive exposure activities by stripping him of the assets that funded them. (Ironically, Stich's attempts to halt the corruption-related crashes at United Airlines led to years of financial and personal tragedies, paralleling the consequences suffered by many passengers and next-of-kin as a result of the crashes and misconduct.) Marilyn Petal (U.S. District Court, San Francisco). One of the most vicious of all the federal judges, Petal's enlarged on the prior judicial misconduct, aiding and abetting the continuation of the criminal activities described and documented in the third editions of Defrauding America and Unfriendly Skies. Information provided to Stich by CIA sources indicated that Petal was deeply involved with CIA activities. Vaughn Walker (U.S. District Court, San Francisco). Walker closely assisted Judge Petal in blocking the exposure of the high-level criminal activities and in seeking to return Stich to prison in retaliation for having exercised the mandatory federal crime-reporting statute. (Title 18 USC Section 4.) Walker's orders kept Stich under almost complete house arrest from 1990 to 1995, until the charges were suddenly dropped in 1995 without notice to Stich. (Walker rendered orders that provided unusual relief to major drug traffickers, possibly because of a CIA drug connection.) Samuel Conti (U.S. District Court, Sacramento) He aided and abetted the actions by the other federal judges, with the same felony violations and prostitution of his judicial duties. David F. Levi (U.S. District Court, Sacramento). Levi was the U.S. attorney who joined Judge Schwartz in the scheme that charged Stich with criminal contempt of court and the judicial actions leading to the judicial seizure and looting of Stich's assets. Although it would have been a criminal offense if Stich had not sought to report the criminal activities to a federal judge, this Justice Department prosecutor (with the blessing of Judge Schwartz and the other judges and Supreme Court Justices) reversed the law and charged Stich with criminal contempt for seeking to report high-level federal crimes (that Stich was required to report to a federal judge under federal crime reporting statutes, including Title 18 USC Section 4). Oddly, or coincidentally, Justice Department employees and federal judges were earlier identified by Stich in aiding and abetting the criminal acts documented in Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America. After completing these attacks upon Stich, Levi was promoted to the position of federal judge, being another judicial position whose function could be to block any exposure of government corruption and to assist Justice Department retaliation against any government whistleblower. (It is standard practice to put people in key positions throughout the courts and other government entities who are either criminally involved or sympathetic to the activities of the literal "secret government." Edward Garcia (U.S. District Court, Sacramento). Garcia played a role in the above activities. Lowell Jensen (U.S. District Court, San Francisco) Jensen played a role in the above activities. He was directly and corruptly involved as a Department of Justice attorney in the Inslaw scandal (described in Defrauding America) and was rewarded with a federal judge position. Lawrence Silberman (U.S. Court of Appeals, Washington, DC). Silberman played key roles in blocking Stich from exposing the high-level government corruption by dismissing a lawsuit raising these matters, including the attempts by Stich and his coalition of government agents and deep-cover operatives from exposing CIA crimes (CIA drug trafficking, savings and loan fraud, among others). Coincidentally, Silberman was a former legal counsel for the CIA. Stanley Sporkin (U.S. Court of Appeals, Washington, DC). Sporkin also played key roles in blocking Stich's exposure activities. Sporkin was at one time the head legal counsel for the CIA, was legal counsel for the covert CIA operation, Southern Air Transport, and identified by Terry Reed in his book, Compromised, as involved in CIA Arkansas drug smuggling activities. Others who were closely involved in blocking the exposure of high-level government corruption will be added to this list as time permits. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- The Most Important Statute Available To Protect the Public Against Corrupt Government Officials Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4 (misprision of felon). "Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- SAMPLING OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE BANKRUPTCY COURT CORRUPTION Robert Jones (U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Las Vegas). Jones was the judge who criminally misused his judicial office to seize Stich's assets and place them in the hands of known embezzler, Charles Duck (formerly a Santa Rosa, California court-appointed trustee with a long history of looting assets and reportedly a CIA asset). The Jones' story is found in the third editions of Defrauding America and Unfriendly Skies. Judge Jones' actions were especially important for the convoluted scheme to block Stich's exposure of high-level corruption to succeed. Edward Jellen (U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Oakland). Especially crude were the actions of Judge Jellen, who sentenced Stich to federal prison for filing objections to the looting of Stich's assets by corrupt trustee Charles Duck and the others who worked with him. Allan Jaroslovsky (U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Santa Rosa, California). A well-known figure in the judicial corruption in the bankruptcy courts. More names will be added as time permits. COMPLICITY BY JUSTICES OF U.S. SUPREME COURT As detailed and documented in the third editions of Defrauding America and Unfriendly Skies, Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court have repeatedly aided and abetted the criminal and subversive activities that Stich and his coalition of government agents sought to expose and correct. Repeatedly, Stich filed federal actions in U.S. District Courts seeking to report to federal courts the high-level criminal activities, such as CIA drug trafficking and the judicial corruption in bankruptcy courts, and was blocked from doing so. He even suffered judicial retaliation in the form of contempt-of-court charges and sentences and the seizure of his life's assets. In each of these cases he brought the matters to the U.S. Supreme Court in petitions for writ of certiorari. In each case, the Justices of the Supreme Court refused to correct the serious violations of federal criminal statutes and due process rights, and refused to act when they themselves were made aware of the criminal activities brought to them under federal crime-reporting statutes, including Title 18 USC Section 4. Under federal criminal statutes, the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court are criminally implicated in many of the criminal activities described in author Rodney Stich's books. Under federal crime reporting statutes, and especially the very important Title 18 USC Section 4, anyone knowing of a federal crime is himself or herself guilty of a crime if that person does not promptly report the crime/s to a federal judge or other federal official. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- SAMPLING OF CORRUPT CALIFORNIA JUDGES WHO AIDED THE FEDERAL SCHEME TO BLOCK STICH'S EXPOSURE ACTIVITIES California judges aided and abetted the federal actions to block Stich's reporting of the high-level government corruption, as detailed and documented in the third editions of Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America). California judges openly and repeatedly violated large numbers of California and federal statutes, related decisional law, rules of court, as they played their part in stripping Stich of over $10 million in assets (1987 value). These assets funded his exposure activities. Under federal criminal statutes, they became criminally implicated in the scheme to block the reporting of federal crimes. Included in this group were the following: Dennis Bunting (Solano County, Fairfield, CA, who later became county counsel for Solano County in Fairfield, California.) Dwight Ely (Solano County, Fairfield, CA) William Jensen (Solano County, Fairfield, CA, promoted to California Court of Appeals) Michael McInnis (Solano County, Fairfield, CA, now retired). Clinton Peterson (Solano County, Fairfield, CA, promoted thereafter to California Court of Appeals. He then retired and became a private judicial arbitrator.) Richard Harris (Solano County, Fairfield, CA) Harry W. Low (California Court of Appeals) Donald B. King (California Court of Appeals) Zane P. Haning (California Court of Appeals) LAW FIRMS AND ATTORNEYS WHO JOINED THE SCHEME Friedman, Sloan and Ross (San Francisco law firm, reportedly a CIA front or asset). This is the law firm that commenced the sham action against Stich, that was barred by state and federal law. Lawrence Gibbs (attorney with Friedman, Sloan and Ross and now an attorney in the San Francisco-Berkeley area). A key attorney in the scheme to strip Stich of the assets that funded Stich's exposure of high-level government corruption. Goldberg, Stinnett & MacDonald (San Francisco law firm). A major player in the scheme that blocked the exposure of high-level government corruption and the looting of Stich's assets. Goldberg, Stinnett, Meyers & Davis (Modified partner structure of Goldberg, Stinnett & MacDonald). Working with convicted embezzler and trustee Charles Duck and others, they assisted in looting Stich's assets and the violations of numerous federal civil and criminal statutes. Murray and Murray (Law firm in Palo Alto). Worked closely with court-appointed trustees looting assets seized from people exercising statutory protections of Chapter 11, including joining the scheme against Stich which helped block the reporting of major criminal activities. Sid Saperstein (worked with Friedman, Sloan and Ross in carrying out the scheme against Rodney Stich, as part of the scheme to block Stich's reporting of the criminal activities that he uncovered in government). Jo Anne Speers, legal counsel with Judge Milton Schwartz, who assisted and conspired with Judge Schwartz in the sham attacks upon Stich as described in both books. At this time she is an attorney with the California league of California cities, based in Sacramento. Joshua Landish, Las Vegas attorney, who sabotaged his client, Rodney Stich, paving the way for Judge Jones to strip Stich of the assets funding Stich's exposure activities. Carl Larson, court-appointed attorney to Rodney Stich, and who sabotaged Stich's defenses when Stich was charged with contempt of court for seeking to report criminal activities in government that must be reported under federal crime-reporting statute, Title 18 USC Section 4. Joel Pegg, attorney in the Sacramento, California area. Hired by Stich to defend against the sham contempt of court charge and in the sham California action, Pegg sabotaged Stich in both cases, making possible the loss of Stich's $10 million in assets and Stich's imprisonment on a contempt of court charge (Justice Department and judicial retaliation for having filed an action with the federal courts under Title 18 USC Section 4, seeking to report the criminal activities (in which federal judges and Justice Department personnel were earlier implicated through coverups). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Sampling Of Federal Actions Filed In An Attempt To Expose High Level Government Corruption Related to Fraud-Related Airline Crashes Stich v. United States, et al, 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.)(table), cert.denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977). This was an action against the Federal Aviation Administration that went to the U.S. Supreme Court. Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982). This action attempted to force the NTSB to reopen the accident record of the PSA crash into San Diego (the world's worst crash at that time), to admit major evidence that constituted the primary cause of that great disaster. (This natter is described in the third edition of Defrauding America.) Initially, an assistant U.S. attorney in the San Francisco office supported Stich's actions, but was then blocked by the Department of Justice in Washington. It went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California. In this action, Stich filed a friend of the court brief in the Paris DC-10 crash litigation, offering evidence of a pattern of FAA corruption that would explain why the major safety defects on the DC-10 were part of the politics of air safety in the FAA Western Region. The lead trial attorneys had to, and did, approve of my filing. Stich v. United Airlines. This action was filed in the U.S. District Court at Reno, Nevada, but the enormity of the Justice Department and judicial retaliation against Stich caused him to abandon the lawsuit. The intent of the lawsuit was to show the pattern of government-documented corruption at United Airlines that caused, and/or allowed to occur, a 20-year pattern of fatal airline crashes. Others will be listed as time permits, and which focus on government corruption in the bankruptcy courts, in drug smuggling, and other crimes against the people of the United States. Return To Beginning DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
