A Terroristic Divorce

When a corrupt judge issues a corrupt and defective order (AND DOES SO WITH DELIBERATE INTENT TO ISSUE A VOID ORDER), it causes lawlessness and terror which cannot be addressed. NO ONE WILL ADDRESS THE CORRUPT JUDGE’s CRIME AND INJUSTICE. Your life becomes daily terror, additional injustice and constant frustration – 24 HOURS A DAY.

Any and all lies and fraud are ignored, because if you attempt to assert your rights or the truth, the corrupt judge will be exposed. It doesn’t matter how many people become involved in the crimes against you. You have little recourse but to suffer continuing criminal acts against you.

All anyone has to do is connect the void and defective order of the corrupt judge to their actions and you get hurt. There is no escape until they kill you.

Healy v Miller is a case where I am attempting to recover my home and property. By law, the home and property is mine. By deed, the home and property is mine. Miller invalidly asserts 3 words on one page of a defective order against the facts. For the last 2 years, Law enforcement will not prosecute the theft of my home, or the theft of the Miller’s money.

Until I succeed, I remain homeless and destitute. That was the intent of the 18 judges involved in my divorce. I received my injustice (and death sentence) when Judge Rhonda Daniele issued a secret order in my divorce. The order was hidden for 3 years and destroyed my life, my relationships with everyone, my reputation, caused problems with law enforcement and denied me my children. No hearing. I’ve never seen Judge Rhonda Daniele. Judge Rhonda Daniele was never assigned to my case, yet her corrupt order was the impetus to injustice and denial of civil human and parental rights since 2007. Through 17 other judges who sacrificed their integrity to conceal her crime – terrorizing my life in the process.

When the secret order was found and presented in court, the retaliation from the court became worse. The corruption and and retaliation escalated taking everything from me. It has been two years since that defective and void order was issued. It was issued defective and void intentionally so that no one would ever address the evil that Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio was executing. They return to attack constantly. I cannot get hearings, but everyone else does. The hearing then delivers another injustice. In March 2013, Judge Garrett page ordered me to pay over $300,000 for a penalty of contempt BUT without a finding of contempt. A contempt order will put a person in jail until it is satisfied. Their goal was Jail. It lead to the proof necessary to demonstrate complete loss of rights when the matter made it to the superior Court. It lead to the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6. It proved the corruption was based on the Rule. And the Rule proved to be so much more evil by design and intent.

I present the facts in court and when the judge realizes the corruption of the court, the judge perpetrates further terror. Eighteen judges have terrorized me since 2007.

CASE DOCUMENTS
Civil Complaint – Action in Ejectment ( PDF )

Emergency Praecipe for Immediate Eviction / Order of Possession( PDF )

Emergency Praecipe for Immediate Eviction/Order of Possession (Addendum)( PDF )

Defendant’s Preliminary Objections and Defendant’s Memorandum of Law ( PDF )

Plaintiff Responds to Defendant’s Preliminary Objections and Defendant’s Memorandum of Law
( PDF )

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

A 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.

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.

( PDF )

IN THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
NORRISTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA

Terance Healy	:
	: #2013-29976
v.	:
	:
David R. Miller	:
Jennifer K. Miller	:

PLAINTIFF RESPONDS TO DEFENDANTS PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
And
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF LAW

1. Defendants, David R. Miller and Jennifer K. Miller, represented by Philip A. Magen and Scott E. Goldstein, have failed to produce a valid deed or title demonstrating to this Honorable Court a valid claim to the property and residence.

2. Defendants allege the existence of a power of attorney, but have failed to produce a valid power of attorney instrument.

3. Defendants have introduced, as Exhibit 2, a defective and void divorce decree suggesting the Court ignore where (1) the Court lacked jurisdiction to issue any such order; (2) ignore the defectiveness of the order; (3) ignore the lack of the order being a power of attorney in any legal form; (4) ignore the law which makes any power of attorney a nullity within a divorce decree; (5) ignore that every agent acting in the transaction was aware of the inadequacy of the document as authorization.

NO POWER OF ATTORNEY

4. Terance Healy has never granted a Power of Attorney at any person at any time.

5. There is no record of any such Power of Attorney relating to Terance Healy being recorded with the Montgomery County Recorder of Deeds.

6. There is no record of any such Power of Attorney relating to Terance Healy being recorded in the Montgomery County Court Docket.

7. There is no record of any such Power of Attorney being produced or provided to the parties involved in the fraudulent conveyance.

8. On August 8, 2011, Jodi Marlow of Genuine Title indicated to Christina Grucella, Keller Williams Real Estate; Patricia Tagliolini, Coldwell Banker Real Estate; and Alex Mikhelson of Genuine Title that the contract “is not signed properly by the sellers”, and that “we need Mr Healy to sign the sales contract or we need a copy of the Power of Attorney.” [ Exhibit A ]

9. On August 9, 2011, Jodi Marlow of Genuine Title has attempted “to explain to the realtor that even though it states the wife can be a POA to sell the property that we will still need an original POA signed by the husband and notarized.” [ Exhibit B ]

10. On August 9, 2011, BJ Bratzel, an underwriter at Fidelity National Agency Solutions writes “if the husband will cooperate, getting a POA out of him would certainly make it cleaner and easier.” [ Exhibit B ] Terance Healy was not aware of the activity, nor was he a party to the fraudulent conveyance of his home.

11. BJ Bratzel indicates the necessity to ‘Record a certified copy of it’. There is no recorded copy of any additional document with the deed. [ Exhibit B ]

12. In an email on September 7, 2011, Cheryl Hertsch of Genuine Title indicates to Ann Markley of SOS that she has ‘the original document that is to be recorded appointing her [Sonya Healy] to sign on behalf of Terance’. [ Exhibit C ] There is no such document recorded.

13. There is no Power of Attorney instrument filed as a part of any documents with the Montgomery County Recorder of Deeds.

POWER OF ATTORNEY

14. Pennsylvania Law Chapter 56 Sections 5601 through 5611 inclusive govern all powers of attorney.

15. The defective and void divorce order does not follow the General Provisions 56012 with regard to execution, notice and acknowledgement.

16. The defective and void divorce order does not follow the Form of power of attorney 5602 with regard to specification of powers, appointment and filing of the instrument.

17. The defective and void divorce order was not properly implemented with regard to 5603 Implementation of power of attorney.

18. The defective and void divorce order was not handled in accordance with 5604 Durable powers of attorney as it was improperly misrepresented and used to deny Plaintiff from any and all information regarding the property conveyance transaction.

19. The defective and void divorce order could not have been used as a power of attorney as 5605(c) indicates power of attorney is revoked after either principal files an action in divorce.

20. As such, pursuant to Pennsylvania Law the defective and void divorce order presented by Defendants in support of their claim could not be a valid power of attorney instrument.

DEFECTIVE AND VOID DIVORCE DECREE

21. A defective and void defective Divorce Decree was entered in the divorce matter on May 11, 2011. It is a nullity.

22. An Order for Equitable Distribution may only be entered with a valid Divorce Decree, as such the Order of May 9, 2011 is void in its entirety. It is a nullity.

PENDING APPEAL

23. A Notice of Appeal was filed timely on August 15, 2011 and acknowledged by Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio in her Order of August 22, 2013. [ Exhibit D ]

24. A Concise Statement of Errors Complained of On Appeal was filed on September 15, 2011.

EFFORTS TO AVOID THE FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE

25. All information regarding the sale and fraudulent conveyance of the home was prevented from the Plaintiff.

26. The filing of the Notice of Appeal in the matter lawfully served as a superceadas to the execution of any actions by either party.

27. A Title Search Document from TitlePrep (Global Data Source) Title Processing Services on July 25, 2011 accurately indicates NO FINAL DECREE ENTERED AS OF THIS COVER DATE. [ Exhibit E ]

28. Multiple phone calls to Christine Grucella and the Keller Williams office were not returned. I was forwarded by their receptionist to their attorney who inexplicably refused to provide information.

29. Plaintiff met with Christine Grucella in person at the residence where she indicated she had no information regarding the sale of the home. Christine Grucella lives a few doors away from the property.

30. Letters to Christine Grucella and the management at Keller Williams on August 29, 2011 informed them of the Appeal in process and the acknowledgement of the Appeal by the Court. [ Exhibit F ]

31. A Petition requesting the documents executed by Sonya Healy relating to the Sale was filed with the Court on September 1, 2011.

32. On September 1, 2011, an Injunction Blocking the Sale of the Home was filed with the Court.

33. On September 6, 2011, upon request by Valerie Angst of Angst & Angst, all hearings previously scheduled for Septemeber 20, 2011 were immediately continued to Friday September 23, 2011 by Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio.

34. The fraudulent conveyance of the property took place on September 20, 2011.

35. On September 23, 2011, in Court at the commencement of the proceeding Plaintiff Terance Healy was informed of the fraudulent conveyance of his home and property on September 20, 2011.

36. On September 23, 2011, Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio threatened Terance Healy with contempt and jail if he did not immediately endorse over to Sonya Healy all of the checks from the closing.

37. Pursuant to a verbal Order by Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio all of the Plaintiffs personal possessions – everything of his that was in his house – were disposed of on the closing date which the he had been prevented from learning.
– Prevented by Sonya Healy
– Prevented by Valerie Angst of Angst & Angst
– Prevented by Robert Angst of Angst & Angst
– Prevented by Christine Grucella of Keller Williams
– Prevented by Jason Drissel at Keller Williams
– Prevented by Bruce Neumann, attorney for Keller Williams
– Prevented by Court Administration
– Prevented by Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio

OBSTRUCTION

38. After receiving the Concise Statement of Issue Complained of on Appeal, the Appeal filed on August 15, 2011 was obstructed and prevented from being transmitted to the Superior Court by the Montgomery County Prothonotary at the direction of Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio.

DENIAL OF RIGHTS

It has been the Plaintiff’s divorce experience which has caused him to find himself in the unique position to act lawfully with proper standing while having a valid cause for relief in the proper forum to Challenge the Constitutionality of Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information of the Rules of Professional Conduct filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on August 8, 2013 – Civil Action 13-4614.

Filed by the Plaintiff on behalf of the entire country to address the loss of constitutionally protected civil rights and liberties; restore the integrity of the judiciary and the legal profession; and deliver to the legislature the ability to perform the duties of their office.

In the response to the challenge, Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane indicated that the Law being challenged was improperly enacted, not written by the legislature, nor signed by a Governor. The same law has been unlawfully enacted in every State.

The author of the Law is the American Bar Association.

During 2011, Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio was the President of the Montgomery County Bar Association.

FAILURE TO DEMONSTRATE OWNERSHIP

39. The deed mentioned in the Defendants objections is incomplete and improperly filed with the Montgomery County Recorder of Deeds.

40. The suggested Decree and Order dated May 9, 2011 is defective, void and a nullity.

41. The suggested Decree and Order dated May 9, 2011 is not a Power of Attorney instrument.

42. The suggested Decree and Order dated May 9, 2011 cannot grant power of attorney to a divorcing spouse. A divorce decree invalidates a power of attorney one spouse may have for the other.

FRAUD AND FORGERY

43. The closing documents demonstrate the fraud alleged in the Plaintiff’s complaint.

44. Sonya Healy misrepresented several pages of a defective and void divorce decree and equitable distribution order as or some sort of power of attorney.

BAD POWER OF ATTORNEY

45. Sonya Healy did not have any authorization, power of attorney or valid court order to sign any documents for the Plaintiff.

MISREPRESENTATION OF MARITAL STATUS

46. Sonya Healy signed a Continuous Marriage Affidavit document at the closing indicating that she was legally married. [ Exhibit G ]

47. Sonya Healy used a defective and void divorce order to misrepresent her having a power of attorney.

48. Sonya Healy is correct that she is legally married. In swearing to that statement she acknowledges the defective and void divorce decree. Further evidence that she did NOT AT ANY TIME have a power of attorney or authorization which would have allowed her to sign for the Plaintiff.

49. The Court may excuse a party for actions tasken unknowingly when a divorce decree is questioned as long as their actions indicate a consistent belief of either being divorced or married.

50. Sonya Healy swears she is married during the transaction where she purports to have a power of attorney based on a dicvoce decree. Her actioons are inexcusable and deliberate and made with the intent to commit fraud.

SUBPEONAS FOR INFORMATION

51. Plaintiff has served participants in the fraudulent conveyance with subpoenas for documents. Those documents will be organized, prepared and filed with this court.

52. Documents received from Genuine Title indicate “speak to our corp counsel” and “don;t give any info unless supeana”. [ Exhibit H ]

53. Jay Zuckerberg, President of Genuine Title responded to requests for information by emailing “Sir, you will need to go through the courts as we went off the courts instructions as well.” There were NO COURT INSTRUICTIONS in thwe documents provided after Genuine Title was served with a subpeona.

MEMORANDUM FORMAT.

54. Where the represented parties in this case have submitted identical documents to this Honorable Court, one numbered and titled as “Preliminary Objections” and the other unnumbered and titled as a “Memorandum of Law”, the pro se Plaintiff respectfully begs the Courts direction if this is an expectation or a necessary requirement to duplicate pleadings before this Court.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court restore the Plaintiff’s property to the true and rightful owner by issuing an Order for Ejectment to the Defendants to immediately vacate the property and residence.

Respectfully,

Terance Healy

---

CASE DOCUMENTS
Civil Complaint – Action in Ejectment ( PDF )

Emergency Praecipe for Immediate Eviction / Order of Possession( PDF )

Emergency Praecipe for Immediate Eviction/Order of Possession (Addendum)( PDF )

Defendant’s Preliminary Objections and Defendant’s Memorandum of Law ( PDF )

Plaintiff Responds to Defendant’s Preliminary Objections and Defendant’s Memorandum of Law
( PDF )

Sheriff Eileen Behr
Montgomery County
Norristown, PA 19404

Sheriff Behr,

Please accept and review the attached letter to Gary Kline about an experience at the Domestic Relations Office on November 7, 2013. County Deputies continue to act on false information from Court personnel.

This issue in the DRO was addressed with Corporal Kohl yesterday. This circumstance was pointed out to he and Corporal Haas years ago. your deputies have recognized that it is the County Personnel who are acting to deny access to the court, to harass, deter and prevent information from being available. The County Personnel are misinforming and using your staff to hinder, undermine and threaten my efforts and my freedom.

I take my freedom and my liberty seriously. The survival of my experience since 2007 in the Courthouse has documented and exposed the criminal sedition of the Pennsylvania Government by judges and lawyers who are unable to address or correct their damage. I have raised the matter in the Federal Courts for myself and on behalf of those who have not survived, baited into jail, forced into homelessness, drugs, isolation and suicide.

The criminal fraudulent conveyance of my home has been documented and proven, yet there has been no action. i remain homeless. Denied access to the District Court by Court Administration. prevented from hearings by Court Administration. Why am I still homeless while the crime is ignored and my home is occupied by people without a valid title to the property. if someone stole a car or a wallet, THAT would have been returned and the crime addressed.

The criminal fraud provided to domestic Relations Office is being ignored. In the past they have denied my rights falsely indicating paperwork was not properly provided to them and served. Their own records demonstrate the files have been deleted. My file is marked CONFIDENTIAL and not available for review.

I remain homeless and destitute and continue to be terrorized and threatened by the harassment and intrusions into my life. I again request your intervention and support. Thank you as always for the professionalism of your deputies.

Sincerely

Terance Healy

Joseph P. Walsh
Jeffrey W. McDonnell
Robert J. Birch
Candyce Fleuhr Chimera
Michael J. Fox

My home at 110 Banbury Avenue was fraudulently conveyed on September 20, 2013. Usingf an invalid, defective and void court order, along with misinformation and false testimony the transaction took place without my being informed.

Police have refused to take a complaint ion the matter.

Judge Andrea Duffy was prevented from hearing the complaint by her court administrator.

Judge Patricia Coonahan has the matter in her court, however court administration has failed to schedule any hearing.

The fraudulent conveyance is clear. Based on fraud, forgery, bad power of attorney, misrepresentation of marital status, undue influence, mistakes in recording legal documents, falsified title records, and representations on legal documenta which are invalid or incorrect.

The fraud has been confirmed by Nancy Becker, Montgomery County Recorder of Deeds.

The fraud has been reported to Montgomery Township Police.

The fraud has been reported to Montgomery County Sheriff Eileen Behr.

I have been homeless since these malicious actions regarding my home commenced in June 2011.

Montgomery township police have threatened ME with arrest based on a false report after current occupants were served with the Civil Action in Ejectment. This is inexplicable. If someone stole a car it would be returned to the owner. This is my home which has been stolen.

What I have discovered is that I lost my civil rights when an act of judicial misconduct occurred in 2007. There is no lawful way to address the judicial misconduct, as any lawyer, district attorney or attorney general must follow Rule 1.6 of the rules of Professional Conduct which prohibit lawyers from taking actions which might implicate a member of the judiciary in a crime.

This is why Cash for Kids in Luzerne County went on for years. As over 5000 children and families were affected by the criminal corruption of a judge. No one copuld stop him. No one could explain their inaction to the requests of the victims.

This is why the foreclosure crisis has resulted in millions of people being removed from their homes because a fraudulent deed presented in court was the misconduct necessary to effectively result in the loss of civil rights and liberties – as the misconduct could not be addressed in court or publicly.

I have filed in the Federal Court to address the denial of my rights and liberties protected by the United States Constitution and restope the rights not only for myself but for all Americans. A copy of the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of information of the Rules of Professional Conduct is attached for your review.

Rule 1.6 was not written by the legislature, nor signed by a Governor. it immediately became impossible to address as it was enacted by an act of judicial misconduct. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court illegally and unlawfully enacted the law on October 16, 1987, effective April 1, 1988. Injustice became impossible to address within the state of Pennsylvania.

The same law, same number, same name has been enacted in EVERY state. This is no coincidence. The author of the law is the same in every state.

I would appreciate your help and support regarding the restoration of the constitutional rights of the people of Montgomery Township.

I would appreciate your help and support in the efforts to obtain my home, and to restore the rights of the people in the township, the state and nationwide.

Sincerely,

Terance Healy

John Malcolm
Heritage Foundation
The Heritage Foundation
214 Massachusetts Ave, NE
Washington, DC 20002

Dear Mr Malcolm,

You were contacted my Michael Labate and after an introductory discussion it was suggested that we forward the following documents to you for review.

We have discovered that Rule1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct can result in the denial of constitutionally protected rights and liberties. Once this occurs there is no assistance or escape.

I lost my civil rights when an act of judicial misconduct occurred in 2007. It was kept secret for 3 years while undermining court hearings. Once discovered in 2010, the injustice grew. There was no lawful way to address the judicial misconduct, as any lawyer, district attorney or attorney general must follow Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct which prohibits lawyers from taking any action which might implicate a member of the judiciary in a crime.

The Cash for Kids scandal in Luzerne County PA went on for almost a decade until Federal agents intervened. Over 5000 children and families were affected by the criminal corruption of a judge. Putting children in jail for his own gain. No one could stop him. No one could explain their inaction. No one coudl respond to the requests of the victims for help.

This is also why the foreclosure crisis has resulted in millions of people being removed from their homes. A fraudulent deed presented in court was the misconduct necessary to effectively result in the loss of civivl rights and liberties – the misconduct could not be addressed in the court or publicly.

Rule 1.6 was not written by the legislature, nor signed by the Governor. It immediately became impossible to address as it was enacted by an act of judicial miscondduct. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court illegaly and unl;awfully enacted the law on October 16, 1987, efffective April 1, 1988. Injustice became impossible to address within the state of Pennsylvania.

The same law, same number, same name has been encacted in EVERY state. This is no coincidence. The author of the law is the same in every state.

We have filed in Federal Court. Civil Action 13-4614. The matter is currently proceeding for reconsideration by the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and a concurrent Appeal to the Third Circuit is being prepared.

Any support of assistance that you can provide would be appreciated.

Thank You

Terance Healy
Todd Krautheim

Gary Kline
Domestic Relations Division
Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas
P.O. Box 311
Norristown, PA 19404

Dear Mr. Kline

I attempted before noon today to deliver the attached letter to the Domestic Relations Office (DRO). The treatment I received at the direction of an obese clerk with blond hair and a pink blouse was inexcusable.

When I arrived I proceeded to the check-in folks and asked them to accept a letter and time stamp copies for distribution to the parties. They asked if I had a case number. It was on the letter.

When they looked into their computers, they indicated the file was CONFIDENTIAL. There has never been an explanation ffor my file being confidential. I have been denied access to the file for years without explanation.

The counter person took the letter (and copies) to the back and about 10 minutes later the woman who refused to identify herself indicated I needed to open up a new file. She refused to accept the letter or to time stamp the copies. The counter person then explained to her that I had a PACSES number already. She ignored her. I instructed her this was about delivering a letter to the DRO about an existing case, not initiating a new case.

I asked her to identify herself or contact her supervisor. She ignored me and called the deputies. She falsely indicated she had already given her name. if she had, why would I not have it? or written it? Why would I still be asking for it? Why was she calling the deputies? Why were they saying she had given me her name when they were not there? Why was the delivery of a letter causing such drama? Why was she refusing to provide her name. Even a first name would have been useful. This woman was determined, for no apparent reason, to prevent me from simply delivering a letter and having it time-stamped for distribution to the parties.

In the past no presenting a time-stamped copy of the documents filed with the Domestic Relations Office has been reason for inaction and failure to collect arrears.

As such, I would appreciate your confirmation of the receipt of the attached letter dated November 7, 2013.

I would appreciate the opportunity to review the matter with you and additionally understand why the information in my file is being prevented from me. The DRO activity was initiated on my behalf by my attorney in July 2007.

I would appreciate an opportunity to meet with you to discuss the DRO, discuss my experience, and review and obtain the file contents.

Sincerely

Terance Healy

Metropolitan Tribunal
Archdiocese Of Philadelphia
222 N. 17th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103-1299

Re: Pursel-Healy 381-13

Dear Rev. Msgr Di Girolamo,

Currently, the parties in this matter are not divorced in the State of Pennsylvania.

A defective, invalid and void divorce decree was issued on May 9, 2011. It is currently under an Appeal filed on August 15, 2011, and again on April 29, 2013 raising the matter to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Sonya Healy has additionally testified under oath on September 20, 2011 that she believes herself to be married. (Copy Attached)

Mrs. Healy signed a document swearing to her marriage, however, she was doing so to perpetrate a larger fraud. She was illegally conveying the marital residence and disposing of a lifetime of possessions of her husband. Illegally and in violation of all court orders. The family to whom she illegally sold the home is now in litigation because of the damage she brought upon them.

Mrs. Healy has engaged in conduct that can only be referred to as destructive and terroristic. She has denied her children access to their father. She has lied in court. Her malicious litigation and fraud are well documented in the courts. Sonya Healy is acting out of extreme malice.

Her actions have been so corrupt within the court that it has been before 18 judges of the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas. The Divorce is also in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania as her fraudulent testimony has threatened to incarcerate me. The matter is additionally before the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania as a Federal Issue was discovered. The Federal issue is before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania 13-4614.

I have been a Catholic my entire life. Growing up my family was a founding family at St Robert Bellarmine in Warrington. I went to St. Joseph’s Elementary, Warrington and Archbishop Wood High School, Warminster. My own family was a founding family at Mary, Mother of the Redeemer Parish in North Wales from its inception.

Sonya Healy is a Methodist from Bethany United Methodist Church in Milton, PA. Though she converted after our children were born she was never a practicing Catholic.

She is seeking this annulment in an attempt to inflict further damage to myself, my parents and my children by attacking through my religion. We have been married for over 25 years. I would greatly appreciate copies of any documents which Sonya Healy has provided to the Tribunal.

Sincerely,

Terance Healy
871 Mustang Road
Warrington, PA 18976

Cc:
Rev. Msgr. Robert J. Powell, DMA
Rev. Msgr. Paul A. Di Girolamo, JCD
Rev Eduardo Montero, JCL
Rev. Sean Bransfield, JCL

Copy attached:
Sworn Statement from Sonya Healy that she is married on September 20, 2011

Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct – This case is based on the extreme malicious injustice brought about through Sonya Healy’s terroristic divorce actions.

Cross Reference:
Court Docket #2007-12477 Healy v Healy
Court Docket #2013-29976 Healy v Miller
Superior Court Docket #1330 EDA 2013
Supreme Court Of Pennsylvania #155 MM 2013
US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania #13-4614

How did the American Bar Association overthrow EVERY state government and get away with it. They followed what Nazi’s did in Germany and perfected their state government overthrow while distracting the people… and leading everyone to believe that the victims were non-existent. A very nazi-esque way of thinking.

They created a LAW. Illegally enacted it. The LAW prevented lawyers from lawfully addressing their overthrow. In exchange the law excused judicial corruption. The judges could excuse the lawyers crimes when presented in court. The victims were denied justice and denied their rights. Victims are left with no where to turn but a court which cannot address their injustice. The LAW prevents it.

The rhetoric scripted through the American Bar Association convinced law abiding people to abandon their ethics and morals. MANDATING judges to sacrifice their integrity to protect the corruption and crimes of other judges. Destroying individuals and families everywhere… terrorizing them to the point of suicide or to where they were ostracized because of constant attacks. They lacked any constitutional rights and no one could explain it.

I lived it. I experienced it. I found their crime. Rule 1.6. It terrorizes people everyday.

Even with my exposing their crime to the Federal Court, a lone lawyer Randall Henzes acted to prevent Constitutional Rights from being restored. He acted without presenting proper authority. He usurped the authority of Attorney General Kathleen Kane of Pennsylvania.

ONCE HE ACTED, the act of misconduct in a court of law by an officer of the court, no one could touch him or expose him because Rule 1.6 prevented him from being lawfully prosecuted for his crime. Kathleen Kane’s authority was stripped from her because of a unconstitutional law which she must follow because it is in the Rules of Professional Conduct. Attorney General kathleen Kane got Rule 1.6’d.

Eric Holder, US ATTORNEY GENERAL. Are you watching the power of this Rule 1.6 as it destroys the country. You, Eric, are the only LAWYER in the country who may lawfully take action against Rule 1.6.

No law may be written which prevents the US Attorney General from acting to address it. The US Attorney General. ALONE.

Eric, baby… Restore the Constitution. Shut down the largest and most corrupt and seditious and treasonous organization in the country. A monopoly of corruption with mandatory membership organized in every county with District Attorneys and Attorneys General among their membership. An organized crime syndicate known as The American Bar Association. The largest RICO organization in the country. Sedition and treason in every state would justify their prosecution.

The only other lawful way to address Rule 1.6 is through Pro Se litigants. Terance Healy and Todd Krautheim on behalf of the United States of America.

The team of lawyers assisting an 85 year old Senior Judge in the Eastern District Court obstructed justice by drafting for his signature an order which fails to address the constitutional issue presented. They could not lawfully do so under Rule 1.6.

You can try to convince me that an 85 year old crafted the dismissal of the Constitutional Challenge, but understand the first question in the appeal will relate to the authors and editors of the order failing to identify their conflict of interest. WHERE THE AUTHOR COULD NOT LAWFULLY ADDRESS THE ISSUE PRESENTED, THAT AUTHOR SHOULD HAVE CONFESSED TO THE CONFLICT TO THE JUDGE. The judge would have immediately recognized the basic constitutional matter before him.

Let’s not embarrass Judge Thomas O’Neill after his lifetime of service.
A Motion for Reconsideration is being prepared concurrent with appeal documents.

JUSTICE IS COMING.