06.24
How to identify that actions are occurring pursuant to Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information.
1. The law is being ignored.
2. Constitutional Rights are being ignored.
3. Lawyers can see the problem in general, BUT can do nothing. They cannot address the injustice, corruption and lawlessness.
4. Lawyers may not disclose that the problem with Confidentiality is CONFIDENTIAL.
5. Lawyers find that the mandate for Confidentiality is Confidential.
6. Lawyers are required to participate in concealing the truth of what occurred from EVERYONE.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s Blocking of Clergy Sex Abuse Report Devastates Victims
REVIEWING THE ARTICLE….
There are a series of interesting CLUES which ought to be noticed (maybe even addressed/).
Rep Rozzi heard from many victims of clergy abuse. His acceptance was found where the people had been permitted to tell their stories.
– NOT PUBLISHING THEIR STORIES is at least very adjacent to not permitting their stories to be told.
– Mark Rozzi, PA Constitution Article V Section 10(c) is the tool you need. – The Legislature controls jurisdiction of any court. (There are jurisdictional issues. READ ON.)
Anonymous petitioners require permission by the court to not reveal their identity.
GRANTED WITHOUT ASKING? Unsubstantiated? No support in Law.
“It’s disappoinmting” – NOW THAT’s FUNNY. Has anyone noticed that ORDERS issued by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (and the other courts) have less information on them than a grocery store receipt.
Orders without explanation and applicable laws make appeals difficult – you need to know what to assert/challenge. You may not even see a signature, or a date, an address, a Letterhead…. there’s often no information. (There may be a RULE which supports the incompleteness.)
If you appeal, there will very likely be a RULE which will dismiss your appeal by reference and without any review.
THE PROBLEM WITH RULES – THEY COMPLETELY AVOID ANY CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW.
THERE IS NO CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW of RULES enacted by the Judiciary.
The Judiciary has no authority to review the Rule which they enact (and have enacted) to determine if it is constitutional.
A Conflict of interest is obvious.
Marbury v Madison, the Judiciary took on the exclusive mantle of deciding constitutionality.
When the RULES of the judiciary affect the substantive rights of a litigant, the PA Constitutional indicates that there is no authority provided to the Judicial branch to enact that Rule.
But, the Judiciary did it… AND THEY CAN:T UNDO IT.
The Executive branch has no authority.
The Legislative Branch has the exclusive authority to determine the jurisdiction of the courts. This is accomplished by law which indicates and provides JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITY.
IT AFFECTS EVERYONE, EVERY LITIGANT, EVERY FAMILY MEMBER
A previous PA Attorney General attempted to expose the problem with Rule 1.6, she was personally and secretly ordered to neglect; she was falsely & maliciously prosecuted; her appeal just left Superior Court – AFFIRMED.
Problems with the facts in the Opinion are obvious. THEY’RE NOT FACTS.
The Problem with JURISDICTION is so HUGE that the word doesn’t appear in the >80 page document.
The Problem with the RULE OF LAW is demonstrated by the failure to include ANY reference to any law applied, or applicable, to the issues.
Once the Judiciary acts without jurisdiction, and without authority, a litigant has no escape.
The Laws do not apply to the farce being conducted in the courtroom.
The Rules do not apply to the farce being conducted in the courtroom.
Rights are ignored during the farce being conducted in the courtroom.
No Escape – There is no oversight by the Legislature to evaluate or review where jurisdiction is lacking or void.
On appeal to higher courts, the confidentiality mandate will prevent escape where non-disclosure is mandated when the lack of jurisdiction will adversely affect the integrity of the court,.
THE JUDICIARY IS AWARE:
There is no more destructive force in government than what occurs when a court acts without jurisdiction. The litigant is destroyed, denied any protection of the Rule of Law, all constitutional rights are ignored, and confidentiality is mandated preventing any explanation of what has occurred.
Issues affecting Jurisdiction can often be resolved and addressed by raising them to the Court.
When the Court neglects to address the issues which affect jurisdiction, the litigant becomes trapped in a system without Laws, Rights, Rules, EXPLANATIONS, Decorum, …
It was done to me. It was deliberate. It was documented. It was NEGLECTED. The DA and the Judge proceeded under color of law with intent to cause emotional distress and harm.
It was done to Kathleen Kane. (and by the very same people – Carpenter, Carluccio’s, Ferman )
They knew they were wrong. They did it anyway.
The LAW which would have provided jurisdiction to the Court was deliberately and intentionally lapsed out of effect. No jurisdiction to appoint a Special Prosecutor BECAUSE THERE IS NO LAW TO PROVIDE THAT OR ANY JURISDICTION.
The Court CANNOT act in “the interest of justice” to grab jurisdiction for the purpose of conducting malicious prosecution and retaliatory actions against the Attorney General who became involved, informed and targeted upon learning about the prolonged farce being perpetrated by Montgomery County under the guise of a divorce. Their actions have been and continue to be terroristic, evil, corrupt, lawless, an aggregious abuse of power under color of law which sought to destroy every aspect of a man’s family and prevent an y future recovery – personal, professional or financial.
Legislature has exclusive authority to indicate jurisdiction (authority) of the courts. It is done by LAW. Without jurisdiction, without Law, without rights, the judiciary is powerless. PROBLEM IS THAT NO ONE WILL STOP THEM.
Rep Rozzi & non-lawyers in the Legislature need a lesson regarding the RULE 1.6 (not law, not constitutional, not properly enacted) confidentiality mandate of lawyers
No Comment.
Add Your Comment