05.30
I have learned that when it comes to the opinions of the judiciary, it is what they avoid, neglect and obfuscate (hide) that exposes the deception and corruption of the justice problem.
In the Superior Court of Pennsylvania – Commonwealth v Kathleen Kane Opinion dated May 25, 2018
As such, the Superior Court has failed in their task. The Superior Court BLEW THE OPPORTUNITY to indicate that some rules mandate a person to violate the LAW. WHY? It’s simple. A rule requires the Superior Court to participate in the problem, to exacerbate the injustice and to neglect actions which could lead to resolution.
Obstructing the administration of law, CHECK.
Official oppression, CHECK.
Criminal conspiracy, CHECK.
The Superior Court has committed those crimes as defined by LAW. But, their actions are mandated by RULE.
Their cowardly act sends the issue back to the PA Supreme Court which previously avoided, neglected and obfuscated the issue presented in May 2014.
In January 2018, the judges on the panel had questioned why a definitive answer had not been provided by the Supreme Court on March 31, 2015. z
That answer is confidential?
[PANEL: Lazarus, Ott and Ransom. The Opinion offers no explanation regarding Judge Platt replacing Judge Ransom.]
The May 25, 2018 Opinion reads like a document drafted accurately and sincerely,…
… BUT THEN EDITED TO REMOVE THE THINGS WHICH THEY ARE NOT PERMITTED TO DISCLOSE…
… AND THEN EDITED AGAIN TO REMOVE ANY COLLATERAL REFERENCE WHICH COULD LEAD TO DISCLOSURE…
… THEN, THE COPY FROM WHICH THEY PLAGIARIZED IS ATTACHED IN SUPPORT.
(The edits are clearly visible… along with the addition of unnecessary phrases – misdirection.)
They seem to lack the self respect required to write their own opinion Carelessly indicating a loss of integrity without pretending to be ashamed. Their disdain and disrespect for litigants civil, constitutional and human rights for which they are not held accountable. In an age where people lose their careers after a single thoughtless sentence on Twitter, the court’s integrity (mandated by law) won’t sink much lower. They don’t even try to care or seem interested.
Against all hope for the proper resolution, the Opinion follows the established standard “avoid, neglect and obfuscate” from the Superior Court.
| “The truth and sanctity of testimony under oath” is not a fundamental tenet. They added that phrase. BUT, they never met Josh Morrow.
JURISDICTION is a real tenet. Jurisdiction is a necessity. The 23 page opinion does NOT include the word jurisdiction. Find & Replaced by “determined”, “authority”, “power”, “wielded”, “concluded”… The Superior Court only has jurisdiction for appellate review of decisions of the Trial Court. For the Trial Court to render any decision, the trial court must have jurisdiction in the matter. When the Trial Court lacks jurisdiction to render a decision, the decision is without merit or authority. The result causes the Superior Court to lack jurisdiction to review the Trial Court decision. The Superior Court should set aside or strike the trial court decision. Instead, each pretends to have the authority to act, when they don’t… Judicial integrity takes another hit because of the farce they perform and perpetuate. Should the issue be presented to the PA Supreme Court, the farce will continue the injustice. The reason being that by now the litigant has been deprived of his freedom to live without the unlawful interference of the government. Deprived of a right protected by the US Constitution. THEY WILL NEVER ADMIT THEIR MISTAKE. If you think this thinking is not correct… Over 40 million people were affected by the mortgage foreclosure crisis, over 3000 children and their families were affected by Kids For Cash scandal, for years the Sandusky (Penn State) case was not prosecuted, and there is a moratorium on executions in death penalty cases… THE JUDICIARY DOES NOT SELF CORRECT. NEVER. THE JUDICIARY IGNORES THEIR ERRORS – though judicial immunity is provided based on the concept that decisions can be appealed. A judiciary exempted from any accountability or responsibility for their own corruption has improperly and unconstitutionally enacted laws which serve to deny the rights of the people. They know what they have done is wrong. Perpetuating injustice triumphs. Telling Americans that since 1983 their justice system has been collapsing because of something which occurred once. Once in each state. Rolling slowly from 1983 to 2009 to escape notice. Slipped through federally on an appropriations bill. One organization deliberately has caused a nationwide constitutional crisis. The first president elected who is not a member of that organization is Donald Trump. The entire membership of the organization would rather remove an elected president than be exposed for their overthrow of the government – the federal government AND EACH STATE GOVERNMENT. TRUTH and Sanctity of testimony under oath … is completely unimportant as evidenced by the three-peat of Josh Morrow. He testified to the Grand Jury. Then, Josh Morrow changed his story again WITH IMMUNITY. AND THEN, on the eve before he was to testify at the trial, Josh Morrow changed his story again and refused to testify at the trial unless he was granted immunity AGAIN. I’d say Josh’s testimony (the FINAL VERSION) which followed the DA’s script in form, structure and chronology contained so many lies that he was nervous that the DA would prosecute him should he not recite his lines as written. TRUTH IS EASY TO RECALL. BAD MEMORY AND RECALL MAKES FOR BAD LIARS. Careless liars ought to be removed and have all statements examined and verified. For example, at the end of the trial when Kevin Um Steele lied about Cosby owning a plane; making him a flight risk; and seeking immediate incarceration. Some liars just don’t know when to quit. Shameful behavior. Steele’s neglect for facts never stopped his malicious characterizations of his target. Remember his grandiose righteous indignation when accused of concealing information reports and documents.. …that he eventually produced. Lawyers are not even required to be sworn in. Are they? JURISDICTION is not only fundamental… JURISDICTION IS A NECESSITY… |
Two words missing from the Opinion of the Superior Court… JURISDICTION and CONFIDENTIALITY
Also missing from the Opinion of the Superior Court is any reference to the LAW which applies and substantiates their opinion.
To support their Opinion, they plagiarize and then submit “the trial court’s well reasoned opinion” so you can see their edits. Laughably obvious misdirection. The failure to cite ANY LAW is hidden by a long (and repetitive) litany of opinions issued by other Pennsylvania courts.
The Rule of Law may be a tenet. The outdated and conflicting opinions from completely different types of cases – Surel;y this cannot be a tenet as well?
| LAWS are enacted by the Legislative Branch and signed by the Executive branch. LAWS are reviewed for constitutionality by the Judicial branch. |
| RULES have no review, no oversight, no enforcement, no check for constitutionality outside the Judicial branch. The judicial branch controls every aspect of a lawyers professional life. Disciplinary offices within the Supreme Court handle enforcement issues (confidentially.) |
There should be a LAW which provides for JURISDICTION of Judge Carpenter’s actions appointing a Special Prosecutor. There’s not. There was one years ago, BUT the General Assembly took deliberate and intentional actions to NOT continue that LAW and it lapsed.
There is no LAW which provides the Judiciary any power to ignore the deliberate and intentional actions and decisions of the General Assembly and usurp jurisdiction to take any action. The PA Constitution is very specific in this regard. Article V Section 10(c). The RULES of the Judiciary may not “affect the right of the General Assembly to determine the jurisdiction of any court.”
BTW, SEVERAL RULES ENACTED BY THE JUDICIARY DIRECTLY AFFECT THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS. The Senators and Representatives of the General Assembly provide their standard “We do not get involved in issues involving the judiciary” response to their constituents. The negligence of Senators and Representatives does NOT delegate their constitutional responsibilities to another branch or agency.
The word JURISDICTION was not used in the Superior Court Opinion. NOT EVEN ONCE. This action to “avoid, neglect and obfuscate” prevents any member of the General Assembly from being reminded of their responsibilities which could be triggered by using the word JURISDICTION – a collateral reference. Yes, the Judiciary is informed and aware of their problem. Their statements are deliberate, intentional and precisely formed.
When the court lacks jurisdiction, it has no authority. When the court acts without jurisdiction, the appellate courts deliberately fail to address the lower court’s lack of jurisdiction. This will often be substantiated by a RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE which neglects to address the actions of the lower court. The supporting RULE indicates the lack of jurisdiction of the Appellate Courts.
WHOA! The supporting RULE “affect(s) the right of the General Assembly to determine the jurisdiction of any court.” and violates the Pennsylvania Constitution. The RULE is improperly enacted and unconstitutional.
Where the RULE prevents a prompt and timely end to the litigation in the lower court, the litigants are denied rights provided by the US Constitution. An unconstitutional RULE which requires attendance at judicial proceedings denies the freedom of a litigant to live without unnecessary interference of the government. The US Constitution.
Judiciary RULES must be consistent with the Pennsylvania Constitution. “if such rules are consistent with this Constitution” The RULES ARE IMPROPERLY ENACTED.
Judiciary RULES may “neither abridge, enlarge nor modify the substantive rights of any litigant.” Substantive rights are protected by the PA Constitution AND provided pursuant to the US Constitution. The RULES ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
PROBLEM:
IMPROPERLY ENACTED AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL RULES enacted by Judiciary
NO OPPORTUNITY FOR REVIEW:
Judiciary cannot review the constitutionality of rules that THE JUDICIARY HAS ENACTED.
1. Conflict of Interest
2. No authority for review by Executive or Legislative branches.
3. Another RULE mandates the CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION by all lawyers where disclosure will adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary.
Disclosure that the judiciary has improperly enacted unconstitutional rules which undermine the constitutional rights of litigants WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE JUDICIARY.
THE LAWYERS SILENTLY PARTICIPATE because an improperly enacted and unconstitutional CONFIDENTIALITY LAW prevents disclosure (and resolution) and must be abided until it is declared unconstitutional by the judiciary.
In August 2013, THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE OF RULE 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION was served to Kathleen Kane and the attorneys general of the United States. As lawyers, they silently participated as required by rule. Every state defaulted in the matter. Rule 1.6 was unconstitutional.
Lawyers mandated to non-disclosure obfuscated the matter in the federal courts.
Where Kathleen Kane had the first hand involvement and responsibility as Attorney General along with the information to recognize the improperly enacted and unconstitutional rules affecting a litigant in Montgomery County, the issue was ripe for resolution and all involved had been informed of the situation.
In May 2014, there was a proceeding which occurred before Judge William Carpenter. The transcript had subsequently been provided to the PA Supreme Court within a document from Judge Carpenter. Copies were distributed to those involved including employees of the Office of Attorney General.
Upon learning of the transcript being distributed, anyone who had seen, read, reviewed, or learned of the transcript of that proceeding has been ordered by Judge Carpenter to forget they had any knowledge of the proceeding, the transcript, or the information in the document.
(Bill Cosby, Yes. Judge Carpenter issued an order to UNRING A BELL.)
In the next few months, Kathleen Kane additionally received two confidential court orders from unidentified courts ordering her to PERSONALLY neglect the responsibilities of the Office of the Attorney General. Making the order PERSONAL prevented disclosure to the Legislature and the Governor who could be informed where the secret order interfered with the LAW which established the Office of the Attorney General. Appeal was prevented where Kathleen Kane could not seek relief because she was not a party with injuries. The order was mandating her continued non-disclosure of the unconstitutional Confidentiality rule. Where the unconstitutional Rule 1.6 Confidentiality had fallen, it was re-caste as a court order with specificity to continue to deny the rights of Americans.
(President Donald Trump. Yes. Attorney Client Privilege is dead. Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information includes attorney client privilege within its broader confidentiality mandates.)
Two words that the Superior Court failed to use. JURISDICTION and CONFIDENTIALITY.
The silent mandatory participation of lawyers in a system of justice which is BROKEN.
Bill Cosby may not even be aware that he had been contacted through other channels regarding disclosure of a confidentiality which has caused and perpetuated the CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS IN THE USA. Check the timeline. Montgomery County began pursuing Cosby’s destruction before a single meeting had occurred.
Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information has caused this problem. If non-disclosure is mandated by rule, then the issue may not be disclosed. It’s the thing left unaddressed (by all parties) which indicates the problem. THE PROBLEM WITH CONFIDENTIALITY IS THAT IT IS CONFIDENTIAL.
No Comment.
Add Your Comment