A Terroristic Divorce

I have been asked what will happen if the Federal Court grants Attorney General Kathleen Kane’s Motion to Dismiss.

The answer. Appeal.

Which continues in front of another Federal court. SCOTUS?

Rule 1.6 is a parasite that feeds on the integrity of the court. It craves the higher court. It fears only one thing – exposure.

So much effort is placed in concealing it’s existence. The smokescreen of the way it is written. The ridiculous notion that keeping lies a secret builds trust between lawyer and client. It’s even called CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION. Clearly, Rule 1.6 wants to be unknown.

There is only one method which prevents Rule 1.6 from consuming the integrity of the court.

In my case, it spread through 18 judges in Montgomery County. Only one (1) judge in my case in Montgomery County suffered no loss of integrity. He was also the one best positioned to KNOW what occurs when Rule 1.6 is involved in a matter.

He did NOTHING.

He was the only one who did NOT make it worse. No better. But uniquely, Judge Haaz is the only one who did not make it worse. Which was the best move for everyone involved. He suffered no loss of integrity – because he did not hold the hearing; he did not respond to letters; he ignored the case.

I keep thinking “First, do no further harm” best describes Judge Haaz handling of the case. Immediately. When the criteria for RULE 1.6 were presented in his court, Judge Haaz did nothing. The best he could do in the situation.

Judge Bertin did not go willingly into the corruption of my case. He could not make things better. Rule 1.6 prevents it.

Judge Carluccio delighted in the malice and destruction. Her intent was clear – suicide. When I could not oblige, the case was prevented from the Superior Court. A temporary situation waiting for the target to … go away.

Judge Page thought he had integrity, even after being warned that each judge had sacrificed their integrity to protect the integrity of the prior judges. Ironically, his was the fastest, most informed and most blatantly visible loss of integrity.

The integrity of the Superior Court was about to be served. Salvaging the integrity of the Superior Court, and the Supreme Court of PA which was next could only be accomplished in a Federal Court with jurisdiction, standing and a cause for relief etc… no divorces… Yes, we had a constitutional complaint as soon as we find the law that caused everything. Rule 1.6 was clearly responsible.

Rule 1.6 is NOT a good thing. Look what it does to good people. Judicial integrity, ethics, morals sacrificed to conceal the injustice cause by Rule 1.6. No redeeming qualities. Rule 1.6 could cause a holocaust and avoid exposure. Kids for Cash in Luzerne County comes immediately to mind.

The only way to bring mandatory lawful injustice to an end is to face it as a nation. The current Attorneys General have the opportunity to act lawfully to address the situation. IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 1.6, THEY TAKE NO ACTION WHICH REVEALS MISCONDUCT AND CORRUPTION.

The recent decision and order by Judge Thomas O’Neill demonstrates an understanding of the situation. Yes, I noticed. Well played, your Honor.

When issuing the order to extend the deadline for AG Kane to respond, and further extending the deadline for the remaining responses to 30 days after his decision on AG Kane’s motion, Judge O’Neill did not indicate a due date for AG Kane’s response. An indefinite hold? It would do no further harm.

That thought is sincerely appreciated and respected.

Todd Krautheim and Terance Healy filed the Challenge on behalf of the United States of America and served it to the Attorneys General of the United States. All 56, because this state law is a national issue. Our cases are special only in that we survive. There are alot of Americans suffering under the injustice of Rule 1.6.

In the name of Thomas Ball of New Hampshire, I pray the court acts with all due haste. The efforts of the Attorneys General should be on what will happen once Rule 1.6 is declared unconstitutional, not on delaying the now inevitable resurrection of justice.

The problem has been discovered and identified and lawfully presented. Ordering AG Kane to provide her response sometime last year would immediately eliminate the injustice caused by Rule 1.6, by default, quietly, and with prevention to address the court. Rule 1.6 style. And the deadline for an appeal has passed. Thank You.

Let’s fix this. Rule 1.6 does not affect every legal proceeding. Rule 1.6 should not affect ANY legal proceeding. Never again.

I spoke with an attorney representing one of the Attorney Generals the other day. I don’t know if he was joking, or not, when he indicated over the course of his career with the AGs office he has never encountered a case where a person had lost their rights. I responded that he was likely correct because THEY DO NOT GET IN THE DOOR. I had tried for years to get the Attorney General to help in my situation the closest I got was the Consumer Form Letter. When every report was dismissed as beyond the realm of any possibility without ever meeting – how would he know a real one when it came along?

I told him that I had met many people who had lost their rights and had been able to recognize their stories and the loss of rights/liberties. I suggested we get together to review the circumstances which have occurred.

It got me thinking. How do you identify the victim of a loss of civil rights? I asked people who had been through the experience. Their responses were accurate, a few off-the-wall quips, all accurate. The first thing you must face. CRAZY. It’s the word you are called (though you are not crazy). It’s the word people say when you tell them about any experience. “They can’t do that.” “Well They Did!” “That’s crazy.” At which point there is no point in continuing that conversation. You cannot validate a situation which should NOT have occurred by throwing even more ‘crazy’ at it.

The second part is the dismissal – They can’t do that. That’s not right. You agree, BUT it did happen. People who witness the events confirm the experience. They realize and understand completely when they tell people about what they witnessed and they are told. ‘That’s crazy’ “They can’t do that.”

No one is following the procedure. No one is following the law. No one explains their actions which are contrary to anything anyone believes, knows, or researches.

The third part was that no situation ever improved. Things just kept getting worse because every one acting against the expectation (and the law) was also acting as if it was you that did no understand… and they were not going to tell you. Nothing happened ‘correctly’. No one helped. No one corrected their previous error.

I realized the answer to my question of how to identify the victim was in front of me every day and had been there for years. There was one message I needed to put out with every post to the web because it was exhausting AND DEMORALIZING to go through the “They Can’t – They Did – That’s Crazy” routine. The Header of the web site since it was started read:
“I am a sane man dealing with an absolutely insane situation. Every person in a position to help has acted improperly in direct violation of procedures and the law preventing the resolution of any matter… they each make the situation worse… NO ONE HELPS.”

The statement describes accurately what identifies the victim.

As the call was ending, I again asked about meeting to review the case. The response: I will meet with you to discuss the case, ONLY IF YOU WILL AGREE TO DROP KATHLEEN KANE FROM THE MATTER. Umm. YES, that is crazy. It was repeated/confirmed that I heard correctly. A meeting could not provide any relief – whether he believed the evidence or not. The Constitutional Challenge was a necessity. Dropping Pennsylvania is … He had to be joking. Yea.

In almost every situation since 2007, I have had to endure a diminishing remark, disrespect, further injustice, or a humiliation of some sort. The victim of a loss of his rights loses everything. The hopelessness brings many to their end. The American belief in justice is strong. The victim of injustice keeps going back knowing they will be delivered further injustice, BUT STILL BELIEVING IN JUSTICE.

There have been times where the only person in the courtroom who expects justice is the victim. Everyone else knows they are participating in the injustice against him. They know their testimony is lies and their evidence is fraud. And they will WIN… because Rule 1.6 mandates lies, fraud, lawlessness and injustice. Rule 1.6 rapes the integrity of the court and compels judges to perpetuate that loss of integrity.

Those who have stood up against Rule 1.6 have been disbarred. Ethics and morality have no place in a court where Rule 1.6 TRUMPS EVERYTHING. LAWFULLY TRUMPS EVERYTHING. My Constitution finds Rule 1.6 repugnant.

We won’t be having that meeting. I do look forward to introducing myself.
I’ll be the first victim he has seen. He will be so excited. I’ll also be his last.
JUSTICE IS COMING.