A Terroristic Divorce

Rule 1.6 trumps everything, ethics, morality, law, common sense, constitutional rights. The mandate for non-disclosure controls ALL LEGAL PROFESSIONALS while preventing justice and undermining the authority of the courts and government officials.

In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, ONLY the Legislature has authority to suspend a law. While Rule 1.6 was improperly enacted by the state Supreme Court and is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is not permitted to expose or undo their actions pursuant to Rule 1.6.

In this interview with CNN, Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane can ONLY be not-talking about Rule 1.6.

Are you investigating this right now?

We are not investigating. I cannot investigate.

And we are being stopped even from telling why.

So I am hearing you say that your hands are tied. Why are your hands tied?

My hands are tied and this will be frustrating for you because it is just as frustrating for me.

My hands are ties because there are court orders which don’t allow us to say certain things which I believe the public needs to know.

As the state’s top prosecutor, you are saying that there is a court order that’s keeping you from investigating a case that you think and the Chief Justice on the state Supreme court thinks might be illegal.

That is correct.

Do you feel that the system is being abused to protect certain people?

I knew that I was walking into public corruption. Which again is why I ran.

It has been described by the people familiar with what is happening as shameful.

Rule 1.6 conceals corruption, like Cash for Kids and the Nationwide Foreclosure Crisis, fale imprisonment, and judicial corruption and injustice.

Rule 1.6 affects every level of state and federal courts, undermining the independence of the judiciary where they are mandated to conceal corruption and injustice.

Rule 1.6 has undermined the judiciary and usurped their authority. The judiciary is held hostage by bar associations which are positioned to interfere between the people and the judiciary intefering with the administration of the courts, obstructing justice, and numerous other federal crimes and constitutional offenses.

It’s been concealing injustice in the US since 1984.

Legal Professionals know their Model Rules of Professional Conduct lack ethics, morality, and mandate fraud.

It’s not funny where the lack of ethics is real.

As we head into the Holidays, Persevere. Justice is coming. It is slow. Painfully slow.

But like an addict who delays a need for rehab, THE INTERVENTION is an eventuality.

I’ve been through seven long, lonely, isolated, destitute holidays.
Pa rum pa pum pum.

I can’t promise it will ever get better while the cause of their injustice is ignored … while the media remains mysteriously silent … and while the entire Pennsylvania Judiciary, the entire Legislature, and the entire state and federal government ignores.
This last year WE TOLD EVERYONE in government. They know what they are ignoring.

The unconstitutional Rule 1.6 requirement to say and do nothing is the worst kept secret in Pennsylvania.

Rule 1.6 injustice demonstrates how EVIL undermines society. Rule 1.6 cannot conceal a murder.

Pushing for a RULE 1.6 SUICIDE is totally lawful, and let’s them off the hook. The corrupt achieve their reward – their goal.

I understand. Persevere. Please. EVERY PERSON MATTERS.

My list of the suicides is too long already. The sad truth is that people really don’t give a damn if you live or die.

It’s your own personal choice, but you can do more to expose and resolve this UNFATHOMABLE TERROR than you ever imagined.

You don’t belong down here. We don’t belong down here. Not Anymore. NOT EVER.

When Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio wanted to secretly cancel hearings she did so via email.

The Courthouse was stunned to learn that I had the praecipe numbers which indicated that multiple hearings had been cancelled by email. No one would take responsibility or explain.
Court Administration had cancelled the hearings without notice or entry… and without Court Order.

When Judge Carluccio was asked about the cancellations SHE LIED indicating it was an error. At the end of that session, she forgot so I reminded her to reschedule. She did.

THEN, she cancelled those rescheduled hearings by email – without notice AGAIN. So, much for the ‘error’ excuse.

Well, all but one was cancelled. A 15 minute window. If I did not appear for that hearing she could use THAT as the excuse to ignore and dismiss ALL the petitions. BUT, I showed up prepared to address all 15 matters. There was no hearings. Cancelled Without Notice… AGAIN.

Where was the opposing party? Their setup was exposed. They had written indicating they were aware of the hearing, BUT THEY DID NOT SHOW UP. I got their letter 2 days later. BOY, THEIR SETUP WAS EXPOSED. EPIC FAIL:

The judge had indicated to Court Administration on the day before that she would neither confirm or deny the hearing was scheduled. WTF? Cheryl Leslie in Court Admin knew that the corruption was overwhelming in this matter. She could not explain the irrational lack of explanation. She knew, but could not explain. I knew too. They went to great lengths to fool a litigant and failed.

WHERE NO ONE EVER ASKED FOR THE DIVORCE DECREE, WHY WOULD JUDGE CARLUCCIO ISSUE ONE?

Carluccio issued a defective and void Divorce Decree in violation of PA Law and without any jurisdiction. The court was notified of the error. The deliberately defective and void order is being used to continue to ruin my life where everyone is ignoring the volume of information indicating it is void. Pretending the divorce decree is valid prevents any filing to address all those cancelled petitions on financial issues. It keeps the litigation going… an additional 4 years now in the Superior Court.

Fraud to conceal fraud and prevent any resolution of the fraud is what Rule 1.6 does to litigants in all kinds of injustice cases. Foreclosures, false imprisonment, false prosecution,…

Judges issue void orders deliberately because they know how other judges won’t act where the error is exposed… or corrected. The subsequent judges commit fraud and act to further the error.

BUT, RULE 1.6 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL…. and those acts of fraud cannot be excused by an unconstitutional law.

Considering the effort of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania towards silencing the availability of emails – they updated Rule 1.6 about 7-8 times in the last 2 years… the Supreme Court knows there is something in emails that will demonstrate the abuse of power within the courts. Why are they updating an UNCONSTITUTIONAL law?

Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional, it causes a denial of constitutionally protected rights, it permits fraud to conceal fraud, it permits EVERY effort to conceal the fraud, it made fraud ‘legal’ for legal professionals… and MANDATORY, AND THEY CALLED IT ETHICAL.

When the American Bar Association had the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania enact Rule 1.6 into law where they DID NOT HAVE AUTHORITY to enact ANY law which affects substantive rights of a litigant which are guaranteed by the US Constitution.

Rule 1.6 is about concealing corruption and fraud within the judicial branch.
Rule 1.6 is an aggressively enforced MANDATE of Confidentiality.
Rule 1.6 is NOT ethical, yet is referenced throughout the ‘ethical standard for legal professionals’
Rule 1.6 has permitted the American Bar Association to undermine the judiciary.
Rule 1.6 has concealed the ABA infiltration between the people and the courts, where the ABA staff intercepts and interferes with the administration of justice and prevents access to the courts.
Rule 1.6 is not helping the judiciary. The ABA is concealing that they have caused the judiciary to be UNDONE.
Rule 1.6 is holding the judiciary hostage with the threat of exposing that the judicial branch has been usurped and undermined by the American Bar Association.
BUT, Rule 1.6 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. A NULLITY. NO LAW. NEVER REALLY WAS A LAW. NEVER EXISTED.

So when concealing how Rule 1.6 has caused a systemic problem within the judiciary, who better to approach the topic than a Special Prosecutor named CARLUCCIO.

Special Prosecutor Carluccio should know and understand the issues related to emails, Rule 1.6, concealing corruption, excusing fraud, denying constitutional rights as his wife, Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio WAS DOING ALL OF THOSE THINGS IN HER COURTROOM.

In Healy v Healy when Judge Carluccio’s corruption was exposed she improperly issued a defective and void order calling it a divorce decree and using it to destroy a litigant who survived. That order lacked jurisdiction. It will NEVER have jurisdiction. So every subsequent judge involved IGNORES THE FAILURE and continues to attack her victim.

The Central Legal Staff of the Superior Court assumed the mantle of Rule 1.6 fraud, BUT WITHOUT THE PROTECTION of RULE 1.6 because their crimes PROVE the unconstitutional effect. RULE 1.6 is PROVEN to be unconstitutional within the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

NO DECISION OR ORDER HAS BEEN SIGNED BY ANY JUDGE. Rule 1.6 fraud concealing fraud…. but clearly without benefit of the hostage judge’s participation. A VIOLATION OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW, the Rules of Appellate Procedure, the US Constitution, and Federal Crimes.

When Judge Carluccio used emails and void orders to conceal her corruption and injustice, she was also concealing that the American Bar Association had undermined the judiciary at state and federal levels.

At the time, Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio was also the President of the Montgomery County Bar Association.

Special Prosecutor Carluccio knows exactly what he is trying to conceal and his effort to permit continuing corruption is very clearly motivated.

He also knows his wife is dumb as a rock. She didn’t think this up all by herself. She had no concept of her conflict of interest in real estate dealings. She made up laws from the bench with the belief that litigants are fools. She prevented the Barnes Foundation from remaining in Montgomery County by concealing available funds. She worked for the US Attorney for a while so she avoids federal investigation unless they bring someone in from outside the area.

Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio is a judicial terrorist.

UNCONSTITUTIONAL Rule 1.6 is not going to hide her abuse of power under color of law with intent to cause harm and irreparable damage…. and neither will her husband.

SO WHY SPEND SO MUCH TIME TRYING TO CONCEAL ACTIONS BEHIND AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW? It’s been concealed since 1988 while the injustice destroyed people and families who could not turn to any legal professionals for resolution.

It’s never going to be constitutional, lawful, ethical or good to commit, enable or conceal judicial corruption.

So much effort to enable corruption to continue.

CARLUCCIO’s don’t seem to have any grasp of CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

All this effort to mandate Kathleen Kane to be quiet about Rule 1.6 injustice and corruption – the thing she cannot reveal… while it destroys lives, and leads to suicide.

In the meantime, I am available to inform the Grand Jury, and the public, of what it is they won’t allow the Attorney General to discuss.

I AM NOT RESTRICTED BY RULE 1.6 UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONFIDENTIALITY.

STATEMENT BY PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL KATHLEEN KANE
Monday, November 17, 2014
Norristown, Pennsylvania
=========================================
As many of you know, I initiated an independent inquiry into the way the Sandusky investigation was conducted — a central concern raised during my campaign for Attorney General. During that investigation, thousands of emails were discovered sent and received by Pennsylvania public officials that contained pornographic materials. As a result of multiple requests to the Office of Attorney General under Pennsylvania’s broad Right to Know Law, I released most of these emails to the media and the public.

The Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in a recently published opinion, described the attachments to these emails as “clearly pornographic” and possibly criminal. As a result, many senior public officials involved in these emails resigned. But others remain on the public payrolls, as the Chief Justice pointed out.

Today I am due to testify before a Pennsylvania Grand Jury, as has been publicly reported. However, due to continuous, even overlapping court orders since last March, I am not allowed to explain why I am testifying or what my testimony has to do with the release of the pornographic emails under the Right to Know law. These court orders also expose me to legal risk if I do my job as Attorney General that I was elected and trusted by the people of
Pennsylvania to do. I am not allowed at this time to explain why.

The Office of Attorney General has cooperated from the beginning of this process and I will do the same. I will tell the Special Prosecutor the truth and the facts surrounding the disclosure of information to the public that was done in a way that did not violate statutory or case law regarding Grand Jury secrecy.

Despite my present situation that restricts my ability to answer your questions, I remain committed to the central theme of my campaign — transparency in government. The public has a right to know what public officials are doing or not doing with taxpayer dollars and whether they are doing their jobs properly or attempting to investigate or prosecute possible criminal conduct.

I promised I would expose corruption and abuse of the legal system. I understand that there are those on the public payroll who stand to lose their jobs and who may feel threatened by our commitment to expose them. I will not be deterred. The winds of change can only blow through open windows. My administration is being prevented from prying open the windows that corruption has nailed shut. But that change is coming.

The right of the public and media to know what public officials are doing is vital and should be protected by public officials, the media, and the people of Pennsylvania. I am fighting for the right of the Attorney General to do my job without interference.

But more importantly, I am fighting for an end to abuse of the criminal justice system, for transparency, and for better government. That doesn’t come without cost to us. But if this can be done to me as Attorney General, the chief law enforcement officer of the 5th largest state in the country, I am sickened to think what can and may be done to regular, good people who don’t have the resources that I have to challenge it.

In conclusion, I wish I could say more and answer all your questions but I cannot. But I can promise you this: The truth and the law will prevail.

November 15, 2014

Gregory R. Neuhauser
Chief Deputy Attorney General
Litigation Section
15th Floor, Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA 17120

RE: Your File #3600
With regard to the Notice pursuant to Rule 521.

The Superior Court of PA – Central Legal Staff (CLS) are exposed violating PA Law, and Constitutional Rights. There is no authority for the Central Legal Staff to act alone on matters. They have violated Pennsylvania law, obstructed justice, interfered with the administration of the courts, demonstrated their participation in a conspiracy to deny, prevent and obstruct justice, and committed multiple acts of fraud.

Where these actions demonstrate a denial of constitutionally protected rights, there can be no assertion by CLS that their fraudulent actions can be excused and ignored by asserting Rule 1.6 BECAUSE THAT EXPOSES RULE 1.6 PERMITTING THE DENIAL OF MY CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS. Ergo, Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional.

It is unlikely that any member of the Superior Court Judiciary will come to the aid of the Central Legal Staff with signatures because the level of corruption involved in the lower courts has already demonstrated a lack of judicial independence causing the loss of judicial immunity.

Please review the attached documents filed with the Superior Court.

I wish to have the Central Legal Staff of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania criminally prosecuted to the fullest extent of state and federal law. Please advise, as PA Law requires I delay seeking civil damages until criminal prosecution has been addressed.

Terance Healy
871 Mustang Road
Warrington, PA 18976

Attached:
Notice / Complaint of Unconstitutional Actions
Motion for Reconsideration
Notice of Unavailability of Signed Documents
Motion for Reconsideration of Oral Argument
Motion for Proposed course of Action Towards Resolution
Motion for Production of Documents
Motion for Corrections to The Docket
Motion for the Applicable Rule of Law
ANNOTATED VERSION of unsigned Memorandum

PDF version

November 15, 2014

Zane Memeger
U.S. Attorney’s Office
615 Chestnut Street, Suite 1250
Philadelphia, PA 19106

RE: Complaint Hand Delivered on October 30, 2014

The Superior Court of PA – Central Legal Staff (CLS) are exposed violating PA Law, and Constitutional Rights. There is no authority for the Central Legal Staff to act alone on matters. They have violated Pennsylvania law, obstructed justice, interfered with the administration of the courts, demonstrated their participation in a conspiracy to deny, prevent and obstruct justice, and committed multiple acts of fraud.

Where these actions demonstrate a denial of constitutionally protected rights, there can be no assertion by CLS that their fraudulent actions can be excused and ignored by asserting Rule 1.6 BECAUSE THAT EXPOSES RULE 1.6 PERMITTING THE DENIAL OF MY CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS. Ergo, Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional.

It is unlikely that any member of the Superior Court Judiciary will come to the aid of the Central Legal Staff with signatures because the level of corruption involved in the lower courts has already demonstrated a lack of judicial independence causing the loss of judicial immunity.

Please review the attached documents filed with the Superior Court.

I wish to have the Central Legal Staff of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania criminally prosecuted to the fullest extent of state and federal law. Please advise, as PA Law requires I delay seeking civil damages until criminal prosecution has been addressed.

Terance Healy
871 Mustang Road
Warrington, PA 18976

Attached:
Notice / Complaint of Unconstitutional Actions
Motion for Reconsideration
Notice of Unavailability of Signed Documents
Motion for Reconsideration of Oral Argument
Motion for Proposed course of Action Towards Resolution
Motion for Production of Documents
Motion for Corrections to The Docket
Motion for the Applicable Rule of Law
ANNOTATED VERSION of unsigned Memorandum

PDF version

Filed in Superior Court – PDF version

When the Appellant presented one unstapled original and a copy of a NOTICE / COMPLAINT of UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTIONS to the Prothonotary of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on November 7, 2014, with the request that ten (10) original copies presented at the same time be time stamped by the clerk for distribution in this matter.

THE REQUEST WAS DENIED.

The clerk for at the Prothonotary window indicated that only 4 copies could be stamped.

Appellant respectfully requests, the Rule of Law, the Pennsylvania Statute, the Rule of Appellate Procedure or the procedure within the Internal Operating Procedures of the Superior Court which prevents the clerk from the 10 second task of time-stamping original copies for distribution in this matter.

Where the document (NOTICE/COMPLAINT) being filed that day was indicating the fraud in the furtherance of a fraud being committed in violation of the Constitutional rights of the Appellant, Appellant appends this additional action to the list of intentional and deliberate actions by the Prothonotary and Central Legal Staff of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Respectfully,
Terance Healy

Filed in Superior Court – PDF version

ISSUE #1
The Docket in this matter incorrectly indicates that the Appellant Brief was filed on September 3, 2014, where the brief had been filed on September 2, 2014.

Copy of Time Stamped First page attached.

Appellant requests the correction of the Docket.

ISSUE #2
The Docket in this matter incorrectly indicates that on October 7, 2014 “Reproduced Record Filed Late”

Copy of Docket attached.

Where there is no requirement for a Pro Se In Forma Pauperis to file any Reproduced Record indicated within the Rules of Appeallate Procedure, nor is any time requirement indicated, Appellant respectfully requests the correction of the docket to more correctly indicate “Reproduced Record Filed”

Respectfully,
Terance Healy

Filed in Superior Court – PDF Version

The Docket in this matter indicated the entry of a “Consideration Letter”. Copy of Docket attached.

Further, the docket indicated a NEXT EVENT TYPE: RESPONSE TO CONSIDERATION LETTER RECEIVED with a Due Date of September 23, 2014.

Appellant requests a copy of the Consideration Letter.

Appellant requests a copy of the Response provided.

Respectfully,
Terance Healy