A Terroristic Divorce

This is the biggest most frustrating lie which for some reason people generally accept without question. People generally believe a lie over the truth. This lie is preposterous.

Sonya Healy and I were married for 20 years. There was no joy in the marriage. There was no violence.

During that 20 year period, we had sex ONLY 12 times. Two times it resulted in pregnancy.

With the arrival of the children, the marriage became an illusion. The family was the focus.

Sonya spent many years sleeping at the foot of our children’s cribs/beds until they were in school.

Sonya did not like to be touched… ANYTIME. The volume of DO NOT TOUCH areas were from head to toe.

Sonya snored LOUDLY. ALOT. Even with the introduction of a CPAP machine, she snored… and took on a look which resembled a b-movie sci-fi villain.

Sonya had chronic bad breath. Doctors unsuccessful efforts to address the odor failed to consider her food and alcohol issues.

Sonya had no self-respect or willpower. The volume of programs through which she unsuccessfully attempted to control her weight included everything – from the offerings of infomercials to the advice of doctors.

Sonya hated everyone. Everyone had mean-spirited nicknames which she used to refer to people.

Oddly, many people whom she has utilized in her efforts appear to think they are her friends. That is sad. She placed their careers and professional licenses on the line. In doing so, she obligated them to continued efforts.

There has NEVER been a moment since the day she abandoned our home in May 2007 that I imagined or entertained a reunion with her. She had secretly conspired with many people since she began planning her divorce in January 2007. This included our children who suffered emotionally, and inexplicably, from the knowledge of what she was doing.

Whenever I explained to anyone that IT IS NOT ABOUT DIVORCE, THIS IS ABOUT DESTRUCTION. I was completely dismissed. I was looking forward to a life after her.

In typical actions, she would tell people that it was me in denial and unable to accept the divorce. I still hear this ridiculous suggestion from people today.

She’s got the lawyer. This should have been over in 2009. But their goal was NOT divorce, it was SUICIDE. Her lawyers actions to prevent the issuance of a divorce decree in 2009 demonstrate this unwillingness to end the marriage. The document which was filed with the court, specifically indicates that no divorce decree should be entered until there has been resolution of all financial matters.

Her actions caused a situation where nothing could be resolved.

It has been her efforts on the advice of her lawyer to conduct illegal surveillance of phones and computers which had crippled my business, and financially affected my clients, which has prevented any resolution.

When caught, the software company lied. My efforts to survive and expose their surveillance provided the software company with research and development which was then used to upgrade their programs.

When caught, a private investigator was hired.

When caught, a false report to a County Drug Task Force was filed.

When caught, a false report to the US DEA was filed.

When caught, her attorney arranged for the Secret Order of Judge Rhonda Daniele with the knowledge and forethought that it would undermine any justice in the courts. FOREVER.

Her attorney then proceeded to execute a constant barrage of vexatious and frivolous litigation to harass in a forum where their success was guaranteed… UNLESS, I could prove their allegations false.

Where I survived their fraud, the court ignored their misconduct.

The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ignored the misconduct of the attorneys.

The Judicial Conduct Board ignored the misconduct of every judge who had been involved in the case.

This has been the case since 2007. I survived under the constant threat of litigation in a forum where I had no opportunity for success. The best I could expect was to survive.

If Sonya wanted her divorce, her attorney could make it legal by providing the court with the jurisdiction necessary to issue a divorce decree. They don’t.

The aggressive zeal for injustice demonstrated by Carolyn Carluccio to clear all petitions and quickly issue a divorce decree would disallow any resolution of the financial issues filed with the court. BUT, CARLUCCIO TOTALLY BLEW IT.

Pennsylvania Law does not allow for the issuance of a decree by surprise. It is the documented intent of the law that no one be surprised without the opportunity to petition the court before entry of a divorce decree. The law requires the notice and request. Where the procedure is not followed the court does not have jurisdiction to issue a divorce decree. This is established law with precedental published opinions and decisions.

The expedited, defective and void divorce decree is invalid.

REMEMBER WHERE ANGST AND ANGST FILED TO PREVENT ENTRY OF A DIVORCE DECREE IN 2009. YET, THE COURT ISSUED THE DIVORCE DECREE IN SPITE OF THEIR OBJECTION. So neither party asked for the divorce, the divorce clerk did not provide the paperwork necessary to indicate the court had jurisdiction, why would the judge issue a decree anyway?

If I was wrong, it could be proven by the facts and the proper application of the law, yet they neglect to take that approach. They ignore the issue and suggest that I just do not want to be divorced.

How sad and pathetic for him. How completely wrong for anyone to suggest an end to that marriage was not welcomed.

If not addressed, the loss of any protection of the law and my constitutional rights can never be resolved… can never be restored.

Where the injustice may be leveraged by anyone at anytime, and the only future is to be a victim for the remainder of my days, I’ll persevere.

I’ll file with the courts. The evidence will mount. The judicial corruption will be more and more undeniable and VISIBLE.

I can accept a divorce from a sexless marriage, BUT I will not accept the loss of any protection of the law where every constitutional right is ignored, prevented and obstructed forever and ever and ever…

Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information has a broad affect on victims of an injustice. The affect will deny, prevent and obstruct justice FOREVER. There is no escaping it. There is no method by which you can succeed. NONE. EVER.

A person can lose all protection of the law and all constitutional rights because of a simple injustice, even when that injustice is being concealed. The efforts to conceal that injustice can, and likely will, become far worse than the initial injustice. With no protection of the law and no constitutional rights, the person can only be described as ‘victim’.

The initial injustice in my case, which was documented in 2010, had occurred in August 2007. It was concealed for three years while affecting and undermining every proceeding.

Every document which I filed with the courts was in good faith and not designed to build a massive volume of evidence. I wanted to see my children. I wanted court orders to be enforced. The volume of evidence created by my efforts to survive the concealed injustice is massive.

The case has been before 20 judges of the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, yet has NEVER been before the judge responsible for the initial injustice. Judge Rhonde Lee Daniele, head of the Family Court Division.

Clearly, I believed in justice. I was not aware that the judiciary had been undermined and usurped. It took seven years of constant litigation and lawlessness until it was impossible to deny the single point of failure. The only person in the courtroom who believed in justice was ME. Their victim who could never succeed who repeatedly pointed out the fraud and lawlessness and was IGNORED.

Rule 1.6 – Confidentiality of Information is referred to by lawyers as Attorney Client privilege, but the affect of Rule 1.6 is far broader than a lawyer keeping a secret for his client. Rule 1.6 affects every legal professional, lawyer and law enforcement, and MANDATES their silence, non-exposure, participation in every effort which prevents disclosure or exposure.

Rule 1.6 Confidentiality involves four distinct aspects…
1. Confidentiality
2. Non-Disclosure
3. Fraud, and continued fraud to conceal fraud
4. No action which rectifies the fraud is allowed.

Where fraud is undeniably a crime, the American Bar Association have made fraud not only legal, but mandatory for all lawyers.

Where continued fraud and prevention of any resolution is wrong and unethical, the American Bar Association has mandated unethical activities for all lawyers within their “Ethics Rules”.

Where the American Bar Association has presented their Model Rules of Professional Conduct to the state supreme courts to enact into law, their mandates to commit crime and unethical activity have caused systemic problems which undermine the judicial branch.

RULE 1.6 CAUSES THE LOSS OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE/IMMUNITY

In order to assure the independence of the judiciary to make decisions, judges are granted immunity from prosecution for judicial errors no matter how malicious or grievous their actions.

HOWEVER, Rule 1.6 requires that the “initial injustice’ not be addressed at anytime. Ever.

Rule 1.6 allows any and every action which prevents exposure. This is most often accomplished by the judge IGNORING the issue, even when it is the only issue which the judge is considering.

Where Rule 1.6 MANDATES continued injustice to the victim who cannot succeed where the injustice may be revealed, the judge is not permitted to render an independent decision based on the facts. The lack of an ability to render an independent decision affects the immunity accorded to the judge.

Where the continued injustice defies explanation…
Where errors can not be excused…
Where single issues are ignored within decisions…
Where law is not applied…
Where appearances in court are prevented…
Where facts ON THE RECORD are ignored…
Where there is an overall disregard for the facts…
NON-DISCLOSURE is evident.
FRAUD is evident.
Any action to RECTIFY FRAUD is evident.
Rule 1.6 is evident.

While an evident and proven lack of judicial independence causes the loss of judicial immunity, the judge could be subjected to criminal and civil lawsuits, or disciplinary actions.

NO, you CANNOT win. Rule 1.6 prevents justice FOREVER.

Criminal prosecution does not occur because the District Attorney/state Attorney General are mandated by Rule 1.6. The crime will be ignored.

Federal criminal prosecution does not occur because the Department of Justice/US Attorneys and all government lawyers are mandated by Rule 1.6 under the McDade-Murtha Amendment – the local version of Rule 1.6 applies to them. The violation of constitutional rights will be ignored.

Civil lawsuit within Pennsylvania cannot be successful as the Court is mandated by Rule 1.6. The lawsuit will be avoided by the courts based on disinformation.

Federal lawsuit brought in Federal district court will not be successful as the District Court has indicated within their ‘LOCAL RULES’ that the local Rules of Professional Conduct apply. The lawsuit will be avoided by the courts based on disinformation.

I persist only for the purpose of removing this corrupt and unconstitutional law with the knowledge that every lawyer and court in the United States is prevented from permitting any exposure, resolution or fix to the Rule 1.6 corruption.

I persist with the knowledge that every action with the court will be obstructed, prevented or ignored.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania had enacted the Rule into Law. Rule 1.6 prevents the Supreme Court from removing their own law as it would adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary. A self-defense mechanism within Rule 1.6.

The Pennsylvania Constitution does not permit the Supreme Court to enact a law which affects a persons substantive rights. Rule 1.6 prevents the court from addressing that it lacked the authority to enact Rule 1.6.

No lawyer may take any action to remove the law, pursuant to Rule 1.6.

No judge may take any action to remove the law, pursuant to Rule 1.6.

No Government Attorney may take any action to remove the law, pursuant to Rule 1.6 AND the McDade-Murtha Amendment which requires federal lawyers to follow the rules within the state they are investigating or working.

In accordance with the Pennsylvania Constitution, ONLY THE PENNSYLVANIA LEGISLATURE can set aside a law.
After ten months of attempts to get a meeting with State Representative Kathy Watson, we met.

As a non-lawyer in the Pennsylvania Legislature, Rep. Watson is not obligated under Rule 1.6. Rep. Watson’s recognition and willingness to address this issue within the Pennsylvania Legislature put her in harms way. There is no doubt that the threat she received was real. A local state senator, a lawyer, had relayed the information about a supposed threat to her. I had made no threat. Why would I threaten the ONLY person who could fix the issue?

I persist with the fear and peril heard in the voicemail from State Representative Kathy Watson demonstrating genuine panic and jeopardy from a threat against her.

Where Representative Kathy Watson was preparing to inform the Pennsylvania Legislature of the corruption and systemic problems caused by Rule 1.6, because of a reported unsubstantiated threat, she indicated that she would take no action, no meeting, no discussion of the matter any further. EVER.

I went to the police to explain the reality of the threat which she had received. The police were already certain that I had made no threat. I would not be investigated, prosecuted, etc. The police at the same time would take no action to address the Rule 1.6 problem even where a member of the Pennsylvania Legislature had been threatened.

The systemic problem caused by the American Bar Association whose membership is permitted to do ANYTHING to continue the fraud or to conceal the fraud. The ABA with local, state and affiliated organizations existing at every level of the judiciary are permitted to obstruct, deny and prevent justice in violation of every law, every procedure and every constitutional right pursuant to Rule 1.6.

Rule 1.6, an unconstitutional law, improperly enacted without authority, has trumped the Constitution of the United States.

The American Bar Association did it. Deliberately. Had it not been deliberate and intentional, every opportunity for resolution would not be prevented.

The ABA will do everything without regard for any law to conceal how they have usurped the authority of the judiciary and undermined the judicial branch of the American Government.