WORLD DECLARATION UNDER OATH
I, Sony Roy, do solemnly declare that our Honorable U.S. Federal Judges are Highly competent, adequate and responsible. In my view, WHAT went wrong in this court case AT THE GET GO, is a matter of undue influence and coercive pressure that led to a CONTUMACIOUS “MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE” for, no one wants to admit to guilt that is why we have so much obstruction of justice and substantive due process and intrinsic frauds and frauds upon the court. as I LABELED IT “WRONG GUY AT THE GET GO “ as I found out after nearly ten Years of probe just concluded, I found out that the Tip-Giver that triggered this whole mess is a self-proclaimed FUGITIVE harbored by the State a Of Florida and the Walton County from the great State of Mississippi. Such will be revealed by all EX PARTE communications if placed under Subpoenas, should no agreement be reached by SEPT 1 2014. Sony Roy, UNDER OATH
AUTHORITATIVE CITATION: Pleadings in this case are being filed by Plaintiff In Propria Persona, wherein pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicalities. Propria, pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as practicing lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner 92 Sct 594, also See Power 914 F2d 1459 (11th Cir1990), also See Hulsey v. Ownes 63 F3d 354 (5th Cir 1995). also See In Re: HALL v. BELLMON 935 F.2d 1106 (10th Cir. 1991)."
In Puckett v. Cox, it was held that a pro-se pleading requires less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer (456 F2d 233 (1972 Sixth Circuit USCA). Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957) "The Federal Rules rejects the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose of pleading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits." According to Rule 8(f) FRCP and the State Court rule which holds that all pleadings shall be construed to do substantial justice."
Defense against dismissal of complaint under Rule 12-B
There is legal sufficiency to show Sony Roy is entitled to relief under his Complaint at the GET GO and especially now that the facts have unfolded untold truths beyond what was understood then and beyond the terrible fall of Scott Brannon the former Chairman of the County Board of Commissioners who engaged in placing a racial slur in his e-mail “HELP A NIGGA OUT.” A Complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond a doubt that the Plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief. In this case, the defendants had nothing no facts to accuse the plaintiff for the whole case was the Sony Roy, the plaintiff, showing preponderance of unchallenged evidence and a plethora of proofs for which there was no response. See Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957) also Neitzke v. Williams, 109 S. Ct. 1827, 1832 (1989). Rule 12(b)(6) does not countenance dismissals based on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's factual
The purpose of this final motion is to properly distribute the TORTS Which exceed 5,000.00 as a record number in my case. The format I used is simple, it leads to the DUTY the entity had. A) Whoever had the duty to protect my rights and failed to do so, is liable for the injuries that I have suffered. Whether that entity was insured or not, Whether they caused the injury or not. B) Secondly for the purpose of this motion and the law, I have treated the Walton County as an integral part of the State of Florida, which it is by all legal authorities. C) and, finally, For the purpose of this Motion, I will look at the four prongs of active TORTS as follows: 1) DUTY, 2) INSURANCE, 3) INJURIES, 4) CAUSATION, 5) NEGLIGENCE, 6) OVERSIGHT, 7) FAULT LIABILITY and 8) STRICT LIABILITY 9) TOTAL TORTS AND KINDS 10) TOTAL TORTS AND ACTORS
1) DUTY: The entity that had the DUTY insured to cover me at the first place, whether that entity caused the damage or not, is the entity that will bear the responsibility. Why was that entity insured and why did the insurance company seek a premium from that entity for that benefit?
AUTHORITATIVE CITATION: “Title 42 USC 1983 provides in relevant part that: "every person who,
under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage,
of any State....subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of
the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by
the Constitution. . . shall be liable to the party injured...." For the sake of this motion, the State of Florida and the Walton County are one and the same. The Walton County agency relationship with the State does not eliminate the State’s responsibility towards me.
2) INSURANCE: The Insurance companies usually insures the entity that holds the duty to protect, as I understand
3) INJURIES: the damages caused by the TORTS to the plaintiff and complainant
4) CAUSATION: The Party that caused the TORTS. Not necessarily the party insured for the TORTS. The Walton County in Florida may have caused several TORTS for which the County is not insured for as the protector of the plaintiff for these TORTS.
5) NEGLIGENCE: the party that is insured to protect the Plaintiff should not commit Oversight for it would be considered as sheer NEGLIGENCE whiis as punishable by law than thos who commit the act itself, as I understand.
6) Address all issues
7) Declare that the judges are disqualified with UTHORITATIVE CITATION
8)
Pursuant to my personal conversation with the clerk’s office of the District Court on the 4th day of September 2014 who acknowledged seeing the last correspondence in the file dated on or about the Month of January 2014, contrary to my record that shows the last motion dated August 2014, I hastened to forward a new copy of the exact same with the exception of the introduction and minor typos.
WORLD DECLARATION UNDER OATH
I, Sony Roy, do solemnly declare that our Honorable U.S. Federal Judges are Highly competent, adequate and responsible. In my view, WHAT went wrong in this court case AT THE GET GO, is a matter of undue influence and coercive pressure that led to a CONTUMACIOUS “MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE” for, no one wants to admit to guilt that is why we have so much obstruction of justice and substantive due process and intrinsic frauds and frauds upon the court. as I LABELED IT “WRONG GUY AT THE GET GO “ as I found out after nearly ten Years of probe just concluded, I found out that the Tip-Giver that triggered this whole mess is a self-proclaimed FUGITIVE harbored by the State a Of Florida and the Walton County from the great State of Mississippi. Such will be revealed by all EX PARTE communications if placed under Subpoenas, should no agreement be reached by SEPT 1 2014. Sony Roy, UNDER OATH
AUTHORITATIVE CITATION: Pleadings in this case are being filed by Plaintiff In Propria Persona, wherein pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicalities. Propria, pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as practicing lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner 92 Sct 594, also See Power 914 F2d 1459 (11th Cir1990), also See Hulsey v. Ownes 63 F3d 354 (5th Cir 1995). also See In Re: HALL v. BELLMON 935 F.2d 1106 (10th Cir. 1991)."
In Puckett v. Cox, it was held that a pro-se pleading requires less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer (456 F2d 233 (1972 Sixth Circuit USCA). Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957) "The Federal Rules rejects the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose of pleading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits." According to Rule 8(f) FRCP and the State Court rule which holds that all pleadings shall be construed to do substantial justice."
Defense against dismissal of complaint under Rule 12-B
There is legal sufficiency to show Sony Roy is entitled to relief under his Complaint at the GET GO and especially now that the facts have unfolded untold truths beyond what was understood then and beyond the terrible fall of Scott Brannon the former Chairman of the County Board of Commissioners who engaged in placing a racial slur in his e-mail “HELP A NIGGA OUT.” A Complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond a doubt that the Plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief. In this case, the defendants had nothing no facts to accuse the plaintiff for the whole case was the Sony Roy, the plaintiff, showing preponderance of unchallenged evidence and a plethora of proofs for which there was no response. See Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957) also Neitzke v. Williams, 109 S. Ct. 1827, 1832 (1989). Rule 12(b)(6) does not countenance dismissals based on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's factual
The purpose of this final motion is to properly distribute the TORTS Which exceed 5,000.00 as a record number in my case. The format I used is simple, it leads to the DUTY the entity had. A) Whoever had the duty to protect my rights and failed to do so, is liable for the injuries that I have suffered. Whether that entity was insured or not, Whether they caused the injury or not. B) Secondly for the purpose of this motion and the law, I have treated the Walton County as an integral part of the State of Florida, which it is by all legal authorities. C) and, finally, For the purpose of this Motion, I will look at the four prongs of active TORTS as follows: 1) DUTY, 2) INSURANCE, 3) INJURIES, 4) CAUSATION, 5) NEGLIGENCE, 6) OVERSIGHT, 7) FAULT LIABILITY and 8) STRICT LIABILITY 9) TOTAL TORTS AND KINDS 10) TOTAL TORTS AND ACTORS
1) DUTY: The entity that had the DUTY insured to cover me at the first place, whether that entity caused the damage or not, is the entity that will bear the responsibility. Why was that entity insured and why did the insurance company seek a premium from that entity for that benefit?
AUTHORITATIVE CITATION: “Title 42 USC 1983 provides in relevant part that: "every person who,
under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage,
of any State....subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of
the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by
the Constitution. . . shall be liable to the party injured...." For the sake of this motion, the State of Florida and the Walton County are one and the same. The Walton County agency relationship with the State does not eliminate the State’s responsibility towards me.
2) INSURANCE: The Insurance companies usually insures the entity that holds the duty to protect, as I understand
3) INJURIES: the damages caused by the TORTS to the plaintiff and complainant
4) CAUSATION: The Party that caused the TORTS. Not necessarily the party insured for the TORTS. The Walton County in Florida may have caused several TORTS for which the County is not insured for as the protector of the plaintiff for these TORTS.
5) NEGLIGENCE: the party that is insured to protect the Plaintiff should not commit Oversight for it would be considered as sheer NEGLIGENCE whiis as punishable by law than thos who commit the act itself, as I understand.
6) Address all issues
7) Declare that the judges are disqualified with UTHORITATIVE CITATION
8)
Now that the truth is wide open and overt. This lawsuit is directly toward Individual and entities defendants that have caused and /or supported my demise. I have structured this case as follows:
A) This case is DOMINATED by a Legislative, Constitutional, Federal and Civil Rights issue as non-marginally stated by the Fed Judges “The Roy’s own property in an area that Historically has been Racially Segregated.” which jolts, smashes and cracks the Bullet Proof Vest of the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, TITLE SIX ”and other acts of Congress (See the next motion) FLORIDA IS FEDERALLY FUNDED.
B) This case is PERCOLATED by an avalanche of Substantive Due Process(SDPS) and Procedural Due Process (PDPS) and misuse of the Inherent Powers of the Court ( offers of Proof to come)
C) This case is SUPPORTED by a platform of 10 FRAUDS UPON THE COURT unchallenged since 2010 without any statutes of limitations and a DENIAL OF JURY TRIAL since 2007, 2008 which is Inviolate and the violation of the 1995 Property rights act of the State of Florida .
This case, lethal as it is, apparently seemed to be glued shot with the strongest legal Epoxy glue since March 31, 2009. That is why I labeled it a “CONTUMACIOUS MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE” or WRONG GUY AT THE GET GO. Yet, it is simply apparent but not true, for RULE 60 B dispels this myth and was never out of time. I filed RULE 60 B with my Ten Frauds Upon The Court. since October 2011. This case was closed by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on or about March 2011 which offers less than One Year and is within the Constitutional Limitation to file suit. Yet, when we combine the following together we can easily set aside this inadvisable judgment entered and reopen the case for expedited and proper service of justice in my humble view. The name chosen by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeal to summarize this case was, “UNFORTUNATE CONFUSION” by the Walton County, and the Appeal Court found no discrimination at all as expressed in writing. Well, GOD WAS AT PLAY. For, such was a piece of cake to unravel, and find with the fallout of the Chairman of the Board of Commissioners Mr. Scott Brannon. Albeit, after being warned by Federal authorities as a sign of stubborness and heinous intent. This case will take a combination to reopen it, it is true, know. And, I offer such here voluntarily to the Fed Judges and my President for the Honor of America, by combining
a) The MASTER KEY TO REOPEN AND SET ASIDE INADVISABLE JUDGMENTS. RULE 60 B which in my account was never out of time since I went to appeal court in 2009, the Appeal Court concluded their work on or around March 2011, then I filed rule 60 B on or around October 2011 within the constitutional limitation of one year, to my understanding.
b) Then we also have 10 Frauds Upon The Court (which are crimes without statutes of Limitation, left unchallenged by the federal Judges) that is why the judgment of March 2009 should be set aside and the case reopened for expeditious finality.
c) THEN, we have the violation of the JURY TRIAL ACTS of CONGRESS 1991 and Jury Trials are IN VIOLATE, meaning they are sacred and should not be touched. Yet, twice after, the Jury Trial was requested, promised, scheduled on final orders and aborted without notice to me, in sheer violation of the United States Constitution. Another reason why the judgment should be set aside and the case reopened for quick finality.
d) THEN, we have the Violation of the 1995 Property Rights acts of Florida CONGRESS in sheer NEGLIGENCE of its own act and contrary to the communication that Mr. Rick Scott’s office sent me concerning why the Governor does not get involved and exhibiting irresponsibility for the ills that took place. It should be noted that regardless of the policy or system set in the State, the ACT OF CONGRESS must be obeyed and followed. That is the law to my understanding. DURA LEX SED LEX here.
e) THEN we have the MISUSE OF THE COURT’S INHERENT POWERS TOWARD INJUSTICE not for JUSTICE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW While waiving my Constitutional Rights as involuntary Waivers. That is also why I believe this judgment should be set aside and the case reopened for rapid finality.
e) THEN, ANOTHER KEY TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT: “CONTUMACIOUS MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE” or WRONG GUY AT THE GET GO. THIS IS NOT WRONG GUY AT THE END, SO THIS WHOLE THING WAS INTENTIONALLY CONCOCTED AND, I VEHEMENTLY MAINTAIN SUCH VIEW.
f) THEREFORE I CONCLUDED THAT THERE WAS GROSS NEGLIGENCE FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA since the 1995 PROPERTY RIGHTS ACTS WAS NEGATED COMPLETELY while it should have reminded all authorities or perhaps, the State was not notified timely by the County that such major disparity and deficiency existed.
g) THEN, we have a plethora of SDPS and PDP percolating all over the case
FROM ITEMS A THROUGH G, we form an unbeatable combination in law that can penetrate the most surreptitious and fortified legal wall or bullet proof defense anyone can provide in my view. The purpose of the motion to come is not to rehash ugly stuffs that took place or make anyone look bad. Instead, it will be to quantitatively allocate or distribute the TORTS and/or the violations involved. (NEWLY ADDED) Please rest assured that all TORTS will be against Duties violated or FAULT LIABILITIES not causes that may be STRICT LIABILITIES sometimes.
That is exactly what is called MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE and the source for the title of my case WRONG GUY AT THE GET GO. A wrongful conviction maintained stubbornly. And, since it is stubborn and refuses to go away, which is unfair to our Fed. Judges, I entitled my case a CONTUMACIOUS MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. Now, this is a loaded title and on the last motion, I will take great care not to be abundant but, to detail the title. In American justice, a man is innocent until proven guilty. Nobody can make a man guilty without the DUE PROCESS of law and facts on hand. Therefore expect to see a plethora of SDPs and PDPs percolating this case, I promise and the source of my demise as follows:
1) I lost affection with my wife of 33 years in the fight for my life because of the actions of the Walton County in Florida highly promoted by Ken Goldberg who was extremely active in this case during the 2005 fiscal year,
2) I lost all my property rights, my properties in the State of Florida and my Vested Property rights caused by the Walton County in State Florida the county was negligently mismanaged and the TORTS are directly a result of their actions without COMMITTING ANY VIOALATIONS AT THE GET GO OR DURING THE PROCEEDINGS OF THIS CASE.
3) . I lost My personal residence or my domicile In the State of Georgia. That was my main domicile also, an appraised piece of property at $1,650,000.00 or One Million six hundred and fifty thousand dollars.
4) I have been under INTENTIONAL MENTAL ANGUISH and duress non-stop for more than Nine Years as a result of what the Walton County did to me.
5) A Flagrant attempt of MURDER took place here since my high blood pressure was documented for all to see from which I had been hospitalized now nine times since the case began, despite the professional WARNING given by my attending Physician.
6) I watched all my assets depleted before my face due to the Walton County's actions in Florida.
7) I lost Four cars estimated at about $300,000.00 including a S-600 Benz valued at $147,000 are all gone, Regardless of what I said and did, the Judges could not understand the truth and they sought to hurt me more based on what the Walton County stated which was an outrageous lie. Now, I bow to kindness in people of all races, color, tongues, and nations. Yet, two ladies misguided by the Walton County decided to play me a turn that was fatal. I was entangled in a muck and mire of senseless accusations and my race, my complexion, and my nationality played a major role in the case as the Walton County in Florida was licensed to crack the Bulletproof Vest of the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF CONGRESS (OFFER OF PROOF) which is clearly expressed in the Non-Marginal Statement of the Fed Judges” The Roys own property in an area that Historically has been Racially Segregated.” Therefore, I authoritatively cite: The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The Fourteenth Amendment, particularly its first section, is one of the most litigated parts of the Constitution, forming the basis for landmark decisions such as Roe v. Wade (1973), regarding abortion, and Bush v. Gore(2000), regarding the 2000 presidential election. This is the very section that was disparaged beyond recognition by the defendants. The amendment limits the actions of all state and local officials, including those acting on behalf of such an official. NOW WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MY INJURIES? Three major entities Two Political Parents and a political child. (Pardon my figure of speech.) The State of Florida is the first parent who acted by NEGLIGENCE and failed to properly instruct the County or the CHILD. And the Northern District of Florida Fed. Judges that supported the County in their downhill spiral. Therefore, the collapse and the fall were inevitable. They had coerced the Fed. Judges to believe that they were right despite the avalanche of TORTS and violations I found in this case. Who are responsible? all The defendants not exonerated in this case are responsible.
AUTHORITATIVE CITATION AGAINST RACIAL AND NATIONAL SEGREGATION
“Title 42 USC 1983 provides in relevant part that: "every person who,
under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage,
of any State....subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of
the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by
the Constitution. ..shall be liable to the party injured...."
This motion is, as the Court requested, in forma pauperis, and does not create waivers of my CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS for which I would never agree after suffering for so long which waivers occurred here before. The motion is to petition this court to grant me leave to file the final motion in Forma Pauperis simply because I am impoverished by the Walton County’s actions in the State of Florida.
AUTHORITATIVE CITATION FORMA PAUPERIS: Lat. 'in the form of a pauper.' Someone who is without the funds to pursue the normal costs of a lawsuit or criminal defense. Upon the court's granting of this status the person is entitled to waiver of normal costs and/or appointment of counsel (but seldom in other than a criminal case). That is exactly what the Walton County in the State of Florida has done to me. From a networth of 17 Million dollars I have been reduced to below Zero, like a pauper with Offer of Proof. The President should be made aware of what has happened here in America before anything goes any further in our Country ipso facto, should mandatory relief be not granted and an agreement be not reached by September 1, 2014. Also, I file this Motion and the next in PROPRIA PERSONA
AUTHORITATIVE CITATION: IN PROPRIA PERSONA: in support of my non-attorney status, I cite the in propria persona clause of the United States Supreme Court which reads thus: The Supreme Court noted that "[in the federal courts, the right of self-representation has been protected by statute since the beginnings of our Nation. Section 35 of the Judiciary Act of 1789, 1 Stat. 73, 92, enacted by the First Congress and signed by President Washington one day before the Sixth Amendment was proposed, provided that 'in all the courts of the United States, the parties may plead and manage their own causes personally or by the assistance of counsel.'"[5]
2) Furthermore, AUTHORITATIVE CITATION: The Supreme Court of the United States states “wherein pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicalities. Propria, pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as practicing by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner 92 Sct 594, also See Power 914 F2d 1459 (11th Cir1990), also See Hulsey v. Ownes 63 F3d 354 (5th Cir 1995). also See In Re: HALL v. BELLMON 935 F.2d 1106 (10th Cir. 1991). Therefore, while I am requesting that the judgment be set aside and the case be reopened for an equitable finality, I hasten to I decry such prejudice against me, which has been the case. I STATE A CLAIM ON SUCH INJUSTICE and on those who have attempted such and have committed this violation also and I wish to respectfully move the court to reopen my case # 03-06cv95- ECM as the court sets aside the apparently contumacious judgment dated March 31, 2009.
This is by no means accepting to waive my rights past present or future or a request to change laws pertaining to the functions of Judges nor to sue the federal Government. But, this is a simple request
a) I, Sony Roy, in accordance with the court’s request, seek leave to file my final motions, this one and the one that follows, where I wish to display more than Five thousands TORTS against all the defendants in Forma pauperis and IN PROPRIA PERSONA to explain the depth of deprivation I suffered and allow for legal allocation or distribution of the TORTS I Found.
b) Another purpose for the upcoming motion is to seek further protection for my property rights that have been deprived and removed
Authoritative Citation: By the Current President of the United States
I. Judicial Protection for Property Rights and Obama's Legal Philosophy. Now I quote .
“This is a fairly strong statement. Added (President) Obama doesn't merely say that the Constitution offers some small degree of protection for property rights. He writes that it "places the ownership of private property at the very heart of our system of liberty." That implies that property rights should get more protection than the distinctly second-class status they have been relegated to under the Supreme Court's current jurisprudence.”
Stronger protection for constitutional property rights would also be consistent with Obama's more famous statement calling for the appointment of judges who have "[t]he empathy to understand what it's like to be 1) poor, or 2) African-American, or 3) gay, or 4) disabled, or 5) old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges." As David Beito and I discussed in this article, African-Americans, the poor, and the politically weak tend to be the biggest victims of government violations of property rights. Since World War II, hundreds of thousands of people - most of them poor minorities - have been forcibly displaced by "blight" and "economic development" condemnations.
b) Another purpose of this motion is to seek the undue or coercive influence that misled the Fed Judges to FRAUDS UPON THE COURT WHICH ARE CONSIDERED CRIMES Without time limitation or time barred, to waive my rights to JURY TRIAL even if such undue influence and coercive force is lodged in EX PARTE communications if no arrangement is made satisfactorily by September 1, 2014 or sooner.
c) Furthermore, another question of rights will be displayed pertaining to Why were the Court's Inherent Powers used to waive my Constitutional rights without my agreeing in advance? I found out that this is called Involuntary WAIVERS and Is also a violation of laws on March 31, 2009.
MY ANSWER TO CHALLENGE #1 : RESISTANCE TO COURT: I never resisted any court and their demand, I may be short-handed because of the depth of deprivation the Walton County did to me but yes, I responded promptly and I in compliance to what the Court wanted (OFFER OF PROOF AVAILABLE) At times, I may not be adequately prepared to know what professional lawyers and judges know, but I always complied upon any request of the court. Nevertheless if the Judges take a second look. they will see that I complied to what the court requested in their entirety and respectfully so. Twice, to my recollection, the Court pointed out how to fill their forms and I complied, needless to point any violations here and there were no sanctions were promised nor imposed.
THIS citation BELOW IS TO OPPOSE THE INSINUATION ABOUT ME RESISTING THE COURT Or not using the forms sent by THE JUDGES who are not the court should THE JUDGES LOOK AGAIN AT MY RECORDS TO REASSESS SUCH, FOR I ALWAYS COMPLIED TO ALL REQUIREMENTS. AUTHORITATIVE CITATION: Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973) MOREOVER, “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights." Furthermore, in response to that attempt at accusing me of defying or contempting the court, WHICH WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO DO, I hasten to quote the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure › TITLE XI. GENERAL PROVISIONS › Rule 83.
(1) In General. . . . A local rule must be consistent with—but not duplicate—federal statutes and rules adopted under 28 U.S.C. §§2072 and 2075, and must conform to any uniform numbering system prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States. A local rule takes effect on the date specified by the district court and remains in effect unless amended by the court or abrogated by the judicial council of the circuit. Copies of rules and amendments must, on their adoption, be furnished to the judicial council and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts and be made available to the public.
(2) Requirement of Form. “A local rule imposing a requirement of form must not be enforced in a way that causes a party to lose any Constitutional (added) right because of a non willful failure to comply.”
Therefore, it is my understanding that the Fed. Judges failed to apply the law here and began a process of blaming me for something I have not done. I wish to remind the Judges, NOT THE COURT, that it was my constitutional rights the WALTON COUNTY messed with and whatever it takes to restore those, by law, I must do it and Now is the time. To me the judges were simply misguided but they have performed to the best of their abilities. My final word, if any here, is a request of this court to set aside the Judgment entered with the keys provided starting with RULE 60 to HONOR THE CONSTITUTION OF AMERICA AS PROMISED , BEFORE THE WORLD.
MY ANSWER TO CHALLENGE #2 RESPONSIBLE FOR THE JUDGES failure to arrive at the finality of this case sooner or something to that effect. I answer here that I was not, I am not, and I will never be responsible for what the Judges do. It was not an action that I took on March 31, 2009, the reason the judges gave on that date was that my attorney was wasting scarce judicial resource. That was totally different than what is being given today. My constitutional rights were waived by abusing the Court’s Inherent Powers and without my approval and that is one of the issues that dominates and will continue to dominate if no agreement is reached by September 15, 2014. In this case, my civil and fundamental rights were deprived, a huge amount of SUBSTANTIVE (SDPS) AND PROCEDURAL (PDPS) DUE PROCESS by the Walton County a minor government, FRAUDS UPON THE COURT FOUND, the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT TITLE SIX BULLET PROOF VEST CRACKED, NO JURY TRIALS among the plethora of injustices.
There will be an unforgettable display of more than five thousand Legislative, Constitutional, criminal, intentional, Political, Statutory and Federal TORTS and VIOLATIONS that will explain why I call this case A CONTUMACIOUS MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE© or WRONG GUY AT THE GET GO.© I will work vehemently toward finality with my Country and Should any busy hands from other Countries including members of the U.N. find this case other than the Judicial Officers, the DOJ Attorney General, or members of Congress or the President of the United States, My Country of naturalization, I do not wish to be contacted for any deals or agreement against my Country or my President the Honorable Barack Obama of the United States of America. This STATEMENT IS UNDER OATH. I believe that dirty linens are washed at home. May the Honorable President of the United States be Notified as soon as possible as this is perhaps my fifth request of the same. Furthermore, I am of that opinion that if the coercive force or the undue influence is found even in midst of EX PARTE Communications, such finality would be more expedited by September 15, 2014. (NEW DATE)
Finally, may it please this court that I Sony Roy humbly present this final motion under the Forma Pauperis and In PROPRIA PERSONA, with all new evidences to bring this matter to finality as Admissions of wrong, Liberties deprived, compelling constitutional conflicts, and Omission of facts to obstruct, attempt and committed violations take the center stage while recognizing the Jurisdiction of this court limited to the finality of this case not for litigation of the case, seeing the disqualification factor under Frauds Upon The Court exists by law. Pardon this long sentence: My next and final motion will not have much of literary works except the CITATIONS for a matter of Brevity.
Respectfully Re-submitted this 4th day of September 2014 by Sony Roy pursuant to my personal conversation with the clerk who acknowledged seeing the last correspondence dated on or about the Month of January 2014,
Sony Roy, Plaintiff
Address: P.O. Box 1031
Lanham, MD 20703
Email contact: besttocome7@gmail.com
Request copies of the entire record of the District Court This is your rights
I want to see the letter from the trump COMPANY
THE COPY OF ALL MY CONTRACTS
1) Request the letter of withdrawal from Mead’s office dated April 24, 2009 nearly one month after the issuance of the inadvisable order that derailed the whole case dated March 31, 2009. Did you not say that such letter never existed?
2) If such existed, did you not withdraw on that date?
3) How did I come to miss that letter in my files?
4) If you withdrew on that date what happened to RULE 10 of the Northern District court local rules stating that it is your duty to inform the court within ten days or better something to that effect?
5) If you say you do not know, how come the Judge who is your business acquaintance from way far back state that she was aware that I chose to no longer be represented by my attorney? Where did she get that information from? Did she follow her intuition, her gut feelings or the fact?
6) Mr. Mead, do you realize that the answer you give are UNDER OATH here? Is it your pleasure to still give the same answer?
7) Dear Honorable Judge, is it your desire to keep the same answer you gave
What is the difference between indictment by a grand jury or indiuctment by a plaintiff?
Now that the truth is wide open and overt. This lawsuit is directly toward Individual and entities defendants that have caused and /or supported my demise. I have structured this case as follows:
A) This case is DOMINATED by a Legislative, Constitutional, Federal and Civil Rights issue as non-marginally stated by the Fed Judges “The Roy’s own property in an area that Historically has been Racially Segregated.” which jolts, smashes and cracks the Bullet Proof Vest of the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, TITLE SIX ”and other acts of Congress (See the next motion) FLORIDA IS FEDERALLY FUNDED.
B) This case is PERCOLATED by an avalanche of Substantive Due Process(SDPS) and Procedural Due Process (PDPS) and misuse of the Inherent Powers of the Court ( offers of Proof to come)
C) This case is SUPPORTED by a platform of 10 FRAUDS UPON THE COURT unchallenged since 2010 without any statutes of limitations and a DENIAL OF JURY TRIAL since 2007, 2008 which is Inviolate and the violation of the 1995 Property rights act of the State of Florida .
This case, lethal as it is, apparently seemed to be glued shot with the strongest legal Epoxy glue since March 31, 2009. That is why I labeled it a “CONTUMACIOUS MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE” or WRONG GUY AT THE GET GO. Yet, it is simply apparent but not true, for RULE 60 B dispels this myth and was never out of time. I filed RULE 60 B with my Ten Frauds Upon The Court. since October 2011. This case was closed by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on or about March 2011 which offers less than One Year and is within the Constitutional Limitation to file suit. Yet, when we combine the following together we can easily set aside this inadvisable judgment entered and reopen the case for expedited and proper service of justice in my humble view. The name chosen by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeal to summarize this case was, “UNFORTUNATE CONFUSION” by the Walton County, and the Appeal Court found no discrimination at all as expressed in writing. Well, GOD WAS AT PLAY. For, such was a piece of cake to unravel, and find with the fallout of the Chairman of the Board of Commissioners Mr. Scott Brannon. Albeit, after being warned by Federal authorities as a sign of stubborness and heinous intent. This case will take a combination to reopen it, it is true, know. And, I offer such here voluntarily to the Fed Judges and my President for the Honor of America, by combining
a) The MASTER KEY TO REOPEN AND SET ASIDE INADVISABLE JUDGMENTS. RULE 60 B which in my account was never out of time since I went to appeal court in 2009, the Appeal Court concluded their work on or around March 2011, then I filed rule 60 B on or around October 2011 within the constitutional limitation of one year, to my understanding.
b) Then we also have 10 Frauds Upon The Court (which are crimes without statutes of Limitation, left unchallenged by the federal Judges) that is why the judgment of March 2009 should be set aside and the case reopened for expeditious finality.
c) THEN, we have the violation of the JURY TRIAL ACTS of CONGRESS 1991 and Jury Trials are IN VIOLATE, meaning they are sacred and should not be touched. Yet, twice after, the Jury Trial was requested, promised, scheduled on final orders and aborted without notice to me, in sheer violation of the United States Constitution. Another reason why the judgment should be set aside and the case reopened for quick finality.
d) THEN, we have the Violation of the 1995 Property Rights acts of Florida CONGRESS in sheer NEGLIGENCE of its own act and contrary to the communication that Mr. Rick Scott’s office sent me concerning why the Governor does not get involved and exhibiting irresponsibility for the ills that took place. It should be noted that regardless of the policy or system set in the State, the ACT OF CONGRESS must be obeyed and followed. That is the law to my understanding. DURA LEX SED LEX here.
e) THEN we have the MISUSE OF THE COURT’S INHERENT POWERS TOWARD INJUSTICE not for JUSTICE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW While waiving my Constitutional Rights as involuntary Waivers. That is also why I believe this judgment should be set aside and the case reopened for rapid finality.
e) THEN, ANOTHER KEY TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT: “CONTUMACIOUS MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE” or WRONG GUY AT THE GET GO. THIS IS NOT WRONG GUY AT THE END, SO THIS WHOLE THING WAS INTENTIONALLY CONCOCTED AND, I VEHEMENTLY MAINTAIN SUCH VIEW.
f) THEREFORE I CONCLUDED THAT THERE WAS GROSS NEGLIGENCE FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA since the 1995 PROPERTY RIGHTS ACTS WAS NEGATED COMPLETELY while it should have reminded all authorities or perhaps, the State was not notified timely by the County that such major disparity and deficiency existed.
g) THEN, we have a plethora of SDPS and PDP percolating all over the case
FROM ITEMS A THROUGH G, we form an unbeatable combination in law that can penetrate the most surreptitious and fortified legal wall or bullet proof defense anyone can provide in my view. The purpose of the motion to come is not to rehash ugly stuffs that took place or make anyone look bad. Instead, it will be to quantitatively allocate or distribute the TORTS and/or the violations involved. (NEWLY ADDED) Please rest assured that all TORTS will be against Duties violated or FAULT LIABILITIES not causes that may be STRICT LIABILITIES sometimes.
That is exactly what is called MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE and the source for the title of my case WRONG GUY AT THE GET GO. A wrongful conviction maintained stubbornly. And, since it is stubborn and refuses to go away, which is unfair to our Fed. Judges, I entitled my case a CONTUMACIOUS MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. Now, this is a loaded title and on the last motion, I will take great care not to be abundant but, to detail the title. In American justice, a man is innocent until proven guilty. Nobody can make a man guilty without the DUE PROCESS of law and facts on hand. Therefore expect to see a plethora of SDPs and PDPs percolating this case, I promise and the source of my demise as follows:
1) I lost affection with my wife of 33 years in the fight for my life because of the actions of the Walton County in Florida highly promoted by Ken Goldberg who was extremely active in this case during the 2005 fiscal year,
2) I lost all my property rights, my properties in the State of Florida and my Vested Property rights caused by the Walton County in State Florida the county was negligently mismanaged and the TORTS are directly a result of their actions without COMMITTING ANY VIOALATIONS AT THE GET GO OR DURING THE PROCEEDINGS OF THIS CASE.
3) . I lost My personal residence or my domicile In the State of Georgia. That was my main domicile also, an appraised piece of property at $1,650,000.00 or One Million six hundred and fifty thousand dollars.
4) I have been under INTENTIONAL MENTAL ANGUISH and duress non-stop for more than Nine Years as a result of what the Walton County did to me.
5) A Flagrant attempt of MURDER took place here since my high blood pressure was documented for all to see from which I had been hospitalized now nine times since the case began, despite the professional WARNING given by my attending Physician.
6) I watched all my assets depleted before my face due to the Walton County's actions in Florida.
7) I lost Four cars estimated at about $300,000.00 including a S-600 Benz valued at $147,000 are all gone, Regardless of what I said and did, the Judges could not understand the truth and they sought to hurt me more based on what the Walton County stated which was an outrageous lie. Now, I bow to kindness in people of all races, color, tongues, and nations. Yet, two ladies misguided by the Walton County decided to play me a turn that was fatal. I was entangled in a muck and mire of senseless accusations and my race, my complexion, and my nationality played a major role in the case as the Walton County in Florida was licensed to crack the Bulletproof Vest of the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF CONGRESS (OFFER OF PROOF) which is clearly expressed in the Non-Marginal Statement of the Fed Judges” The Roys own property in an area that Historically has been Racially Segregated.” Therefore, I authoritatively cite: The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The Fourteenth Amendment, particularly its first section, is one of the most litigated parts of the Constitution, forming the basis for landmark decisions such as Roe v. Wade (1973), regarding abortion, and Bush v. Gore(2000), regarding the 2000 presidential election. This is the very section that was disparaged beyond recognition by the defendants. The amendment limits the actions of all state and local officials, including those acting on behalf of such an official. NOW WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MY INJURIES? Three major entities Two Political Parents and a political child. (Pardon my figure of speech.) The State of Florida is the first parent who acted by NEGLIGENCE and failed to properly instruct the County or the CHILD. And the Northern District of Florida Fed. Judges that supported the County in their downhill spiral. Therefore, the collapse and the fall were inevitable. They had coerced the Fed. Judges to believe that they were right despite the avalanche of TORTS and violations I found in this case. Who are responsible? all The defendants not exonerated in this case are responsible.
AUTHORITATIVE CITATION AGAINST RACIAL AND NATIONAL SEGREGATION
“Title 42 USC 1983 provides in relevant part that: "every person who,
under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage,
of any State....subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of
the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by
the Constitution. ..shall be liable to the party injured...."
This motion is, as the Court requested, in forma pauperis, and does not create waivers of my CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS for which I would never agree after suffering for so long which waivers occurred here before. The motion is to petition this court to grant me leave to file the final motion in Forma Pauperis simply because I am impoverished by the Walton County’s actions in the State of Florida.
AUTHORITATIVE CITATION FORMA PAUPERIS: Lat. 'in the form of a pauper.' Someone who is without the funds to pursue the normal costs of a lawsuit or criminal defense. Upon the court's granting of this status the person is entitled to waiver of normal costs and/or appointment of counsel (but seldom in other than a criminal case). That is exactly what the Walton County in the State of Florida has done to me. From a networth of 17 Million dollars I have been reduced to below Zero, like a pauper with Offer of Proof. The President should be made aware of what has happened here in America before anything goes any further in our Country ipso facto, should mandatory relief be not granted and an agreement be not reached by September 1, 2014. Also, I file this Motion and the next in PROPRIA PERSONA
AUTHORITATIVE CITATION: IN PROPRIA PERSONA: in support of my non-attorney status, I cite the in propria persona clause of the United States Supreme Court which reads thus: The Supreme Court noted that "[in the federal courts, the right of self-representation has been protected by statute since the beginnings of our Nation. Section 35 of the Judiciary Act of 1789, 1 Stat. 73, 92, enacted by the First Congress and signed by President Washington one day before the Sixth Amendment was proposed, provided that 'in all the courts of the United States, the parties may plead and manage their own causes personally or by the assistance of counsel.'"[5]
2) Furthermore, AUTHORITATIVE CITATION: The Supreme Court of the United States states “wherein pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicalities. Propria, pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as practicing by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner 92 Sct 594, also See Power 914 F2d 1459 (11th Cir1990), also See Hulsey v. Ownes 63 F3d 354 (5th Cir 1995). also See In Re: HALL v. BELLMON 935 F.2d 1106 (10th Cir. 1991). Therefore, while I am requesting that the judgment be set aside and the case be reopened for an equitable finality, I hasten to I decry such prejudice against me, which has been the case. I STATE A CLAIM ON SUCH INJUSTICE and on those who have attempted such and have committed this violation also and I wish to respectfully move the court to reopen my case # 03-06cv95- ECM as the court sets aside the apparently contumacious judgment dated March 31, 2009.
This is by no means accepting to waive my rights past present or future or a request to change laws pertaining to the functions of Judges nor to sue the federal Government. But, this is a simple request
a) I, Sony Roy, in accordance with the court’s request, seek leave to file my final motions, this one and the one that follows, where I wish to display more than Five thousands TORTS against all the defendants in Forma pauperis and IN PROPRIA PERSONA to explain the depth of deprivation I suffered and allow for legal allocation or distribution of the TORTS I Found.
b) Another purpose for the upcoming motion is to seek further protection for my property rights that have been deprived and removed
Authoritative Citation: By the Current President of the United States
I. Judicial Protection for Property Rights and Obama's Legal Philosophy. Now I quote .
“This is a fairly strong statement. Added (President) Obama doesn't merely say that the Constitution offers some small degree of protection for property rights. He writes that it "places the ownership of private property at the very heart of our system of liberty." That implies that property rights should get more protection than the distinctly second-class status they have been relegated to under the Supreme Court's current jurisprudence.”
Stronger protection for constitutional property rights would also be consistent with Obama's more famous statement calling for the appointment of judges who have "[t]he empathy to understand what it's like to be 1) poor, or 2) African-American, or 3) gay, or 4) disabled, or 5) old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges." As David Beito and I discussed in this article, African-Americans, the poor, and the politically weak tend to be the biggest victims of government violations of property rights. Since World War II, hundreds of thousands of people - most of them poor minorities - have been forcibly displaced by "blight" and "economic development" condemnations.
b) Another purpose of this motion is to seek the undue or coercive influence that misled the Fed Judges to FRAUDS UPON THE COURT WHICH ARE CONSIDERED CRIMES Without time limitation or time barred, to waive my rights to JURY TRIAL even if such undue influence and coercive force is lodged in EX PARTE communications if no arrangement is made satisfactorily by September 1, 2014 or sooner.
c) Furthermore, another question of rights will be displayed pertaining to Why were the Court's Inherent Powers used to waive my Constitutional rights without my agreeing in advance? I found out that this is called Involuntary WAIVERS and Is also a violation of laws on March 31, 2009.
MY ANSWER TO CHALLENGE #1 : RESISTANCE TO COURT: I never resisted any court and their demand, I may be short-handed because of the depth of deprivation the Walton County did to me but yes, I responded promptly and I in compliance to what the Court wanted (OFFER OF PROOF AVAILABLE) At times, I may not be adequately prepared to know what professional lawyers and judges know, but I always complied upon any request of the court. Nevertheless if the Judges take a second look. they will see that I complied to what the court requested in their entirety and respectfully so. Twice, to my recollection, the Court pointed out how to fill their forms and I complied, needless to point any violations here and there were no sanctions were promised nor imposed.
THIS citation BELOW IS TO OPPOSE THE INSINUATION ABOUT ME RESISTING THE COURT Or not using the forms sent by THE JUDGES who are not the court should THE JUDGES LOOK AGAIN AT MY RECORDS TO REASSESS SUCH, FOR I ALWAYS COMPLIED TO ALL REQUIREMENTS. AUTHORITATIVE CITATION: Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973) MOREOVER, “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights." Furthermore, in response to that attempt at accusing me of defying or contempting the court, WHICH WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO DO, I hasten to quote the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure › TITLE XI. GENERAL PROVISIONS › Rule 83.
(1) In General. . . . A local rule must be consistent with—but not duplicate—federal statutes and rules adopted under 28 U.S.C. §§2072 and 2075, and must conform to any uniform numbering system prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States. A local rule takes effect on the date specified by the district court and remains in effect unless amended by the court or abrogated by the judicial council of the circuit. Copies of rules and amendments must, on their adoption, be furnished to the judicial council and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts and be made available to the public.
(2) Requirement of Form. “A local rule imposing a requirement of form must not be enforced in a way that causes a party to lose any Constitutional (added) right because of a non willful failure to comply.”
Therefore, it is my understanding that the Fed. Judges failed to apply the law here and began a process of blaming me for something I have not done. I wish to remind the Judges, NOT THE COURT, that it was my constitutional rights the WALTON COUNTY messed with and whatever it takes to restore those, by law, I must do it and Now is the time. To me the judges were simply misguided but they have performed to the best of their abilities. My final word, if any here, is a request of this court to set aside the Judgment entered with the keys provided starting with RULE 60 to HONOR THE CONSTITUTION OF AMERICA AS PROMISED , BEFORE THE WORLD.
MY ANSWER TO CHALLENGE #2 RESPONSIBLE FOR THE JUDGES failure to arrive at the finality of this case sooner or something to that effect. I answer here that I was not, I am not, and I will never be responsible for what the Judges do. It was not an action that I took on March 31, 2009, the reason the judges gave on that date was that my attorney was wasting scarce judicial resource. That was totally different than what is being given today. My constitutional rights were waived by abusing the Court’s Inherent Powers and without my approval and that is one of the issues that dominates and will continue to dominate if no agreement is reached by September 15, 2014. In this case, my civil and fundamental rights were deprived, a huge amount of SUBSTANTIVE (SDPS) AND PROCEDURAL (PDPS) DUE PROCESS by the Walton County a minor government, FRAUDS UPON THE COURT FOUND, the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT TITLE SIX BULLET PROOF VEST CRACKED, NO JURY TRIALS among the plethora of injustices.
There will be an unforgettable display of more than five thousand Legislative, Constitutional, criminal, intentional, Political, Statutory and Federal TORTS and VIOLATIONS that will explain why I call this case A CONTUMACIOUS MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE© or WRONG GUY AT THE GET GO.© I will work vehemently toward finality with my Country and Should any busy hands from other Countries including members of the U.N. find this case other than the Judicial Officers, the DOJ Attorney General, or members of Congress or the President of the United States, My Country of naturalization, I do not wish to be contacted for any deals or agreement against my Country or my President the Honorable Barack Obama of the United States of America. This STATEMENT IS UNDER OATH. I believe that dirty linens are washed at home. May the Honorable President of the United States be Notified as soon as possible as this is perhaps my fifth request of the same. Furthermore, I am of that opinion that if the coercive force or the undue influence is found even in midst of EX PARTE Communications, such finality would be more expedited by September 15, 2014. (NEW DATE)
Finally, may it please this court that I Sony Roy humbly present this final motion under the Forma Pauperis and In PROPRIA PERSONA, with all new evidences to bring this matter to finality as Admissions of wrong, Liberties deprived, compelling constitutional conflicts, and Omission of facts to obstruct, attempt and committed violations take the center stage while recognizing the Jurisdiction of this court limited to the finality of this case not for litigation of the case, seeing the disqualification factor under Frauds Upon The Court exists by law. Pardon this long sentence: My next and final motion will not have much of literary works except the CITATIONS for a matter of Brevity.
Respectfully Re-submitted this 4th day of September 2014 by Sony Roy pursuant to my personal conversation with the clerk who acknowledged seeing the last correspondence dated on or about the Month of January 2014,
Sony Roy, Plaintiff
Address: P.O. Box 1031
Lanham, MD 20703
Email contact: besttocome7@gmail.com
Request copies of the entire record of the District Court This is your rights
I want to see the letter from the trump COMPANY
THE COPY OF ALL MY CONTRACTS
1) Request the letter of withdrawal from Mead’s office dated April 24, 2009 nearly one month after the issuance of the inadvisable order that derailed the whole case dated March 31, 2009. Did you not say that such letter never existed?
2) If such existed, did you not withdraw on that date?
3) How did I come to miss that letter in my files?
4) If you withdrew on that date what happened to RULE 10 of the Northern District court local rules stating that it is your duty to inform the court within ten days or better something to that effect?
5) If you say you do not know, how come the Judge who is your business acquaintance from way far back state that she was aware that I chose to no longer be represented by my attorney? Where did she get that information from? Did she follow her intuition, her gut feelings or the fact?
6) Mr. Mead, do you realize that the answer you give are UNDER OATH here? Is it your pleasure to still give the same answer?
7) Dear Honorable Judge, is it your desire to keep the same answer you gave
What is the difference between indictment by a grand jury or indiuctment by a plaintiff?
No comments:
Post a Comment