2013
11.13

Dear Mr Healy:

I received your packet of information and letter dated November 7th, 2013. The most recent Order of Court we have is the order dated May 9th, 2011 entered by the Honorable Carolyn Carluccio. APL terminates when the Divorce is Ordered. There are no additional Orders with regard to support that would permit reinstatement at this time.

Sincerely,
Gary Kline

2013-11-16 15.29.02A typical non-responsive letter to the questions asked, while entirely indicative of the reason for their harassment.

So the apparent answer to everything that is wrong is Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio. A defective and void order by a corrupt judge causes the denial of EVERYTHING. And for some reason is the answer to everything. And the reason for no hearings meeting or correspondence. It prevents a letter from being delivered and filed.

The defective and void order which was designed to destroy every ASPECT OF MY LIFE. because without that destructive order, the prior judges corruption would be exposed and prosecuted. Carolyn Carluccio’s corrupt actions would void judicial immunity. The deliberate actions of a judge to destroy a person.

THE DEFECTIVE AND VOID ORDER YOU REFER TO HAS BEEN UNDER APPEAL SINCE 2011. BOTH PARTIES HAVE SWORN TO IT BEING INVALID. STOP ENABLING THE TERROR OF CAROLYN CARLUCCIO.

2013
11.13

logo1

Operation Greylord was an investigation conducted jointly by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the IRS Criminal Investigation Division, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, the Chicago Police Internal Affairs Division and the Illinois State Police into corruption in the judiciary of Cook County, Illinois (the Chicago jurisdiction).

A total of 92 people were indicted, including 17 judges, 48 lawyers, ten deputy sheriffs, eight policemen, eight court officials, and a state legislator.

Operation Greylord lead to many other similar investigations targeting corruption in Cook County including Operation Silver Shovel, Incubator, Lantern, Operation Gambat, and Safebet.

The key undercover FBI agents and lawyers were David Grossman, David Reis and Terrence Hake. Hake was a Cook County prosecutor, who complained about the bribery and corruption in the Murder and Sexual Assault preliminary hearing courtroom in Chicago.

The Bar Association and the Judiciary were determined that something like this would never happen again. It was then that Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information became LAW in each state preventing injustice and judicial corruption from being reported to authorities by attorneys and judges.

Preventing District Attorneys from prosecuting corruption and other crimes which would expose the corruption.

Preventing Attorneys General from prosecuting corruption and other crimes which would expose the corruption.

Each judge forced to sacrifice their integrity to conceal the lack of integrity of other members of the judiciary.

The moment the Supreme Court in each state illegally enacted the LAW, it became ILLEGAL for them to remove it. It would expose their violation – the Supreme Court does not enact law. The legislature and the Governor enact law. BUT, The Supreme Court of the State would be violating the law if they exposed it as unconstitutional, unlawful, or improperly enacted.

Rule 1.6 has destroyed too many people, and families.

Rule 1.6 has no purpose or reason other than to conceal injustice, prevent truth and permit corruption.

Rule 1.6 is a nullity. Not a Law, as it is unconstitutional. For that reason every judge and attorney who has heard of the Constitutional Challenge has an obligation to stand up and defend the US Constitution and restore the rights of the People of the United States.

Read the FBI report on Operation Greylord…. The roundup of prosecuted corrupt court and law enforcement personnel in Greylord is considerably smaller than those who participated in the Terroristic Divorce.

There is ONLY one person who is an attorney who is permitted to address Rule 1.6 and expose it. The US Attorney General Eric Holder. Federal law dictates that NO LAW may be written which prevents the US Attorney General from action.

Other lawyers could lawfully address it, BUT they would be taking the risk that the disciplinary actions would occur before they were able to present the unconstitutionality, the criminality and the mandatory corruption enabled by Rule 1.6.

Resurrect Justice.