Recent Experiences With the Federal Courts
It seems to me our entire news-media has been ignoring some of its responsibilities to respond to the report of crime in our state and federal judiciary systems.
Our judiciary system, from the lower courts to the Supreme Court,is not working correctly. Yet, there is very little effort to report and correct the problems, from the illegal security systems searching strangers for weapons to the common collusion between the courts and the Attorney General's office.
As an example, when I had cause to sue the B.A.T.F in the U.S. District Court (Springfield, Mass.), I immediately discovered a collusion between the Court and the Magistrate.
After filing a series of discovery motions, without objection from the defense attorney, along with a motion for management of discovery, 3 days before a scheduled hearing for discovery I received a motion for summary judgment. There was no time for me to respond to it and, after reading the motion, it was obvious the defense was attempting to use summary judgment as an illegal device to avoid hearing discovery. Every year thousands of cases are treated this way and summarily dismissed. Since I am a pro se litigant there was also a prejudice I was incompetent and would not know any better.
On the following Monday morning, at the scheduled hearing, the Magistrate Neiman listened to the defense attorney very respectfully even though she misrepresented the integrity of her actions (by pretending to be honest). Also, there was a contradiction in the tone of voice of the defense attorney (a female) and the tone of voice in the defense's submissions (aggressive male with a criminal interpretation of law and rules of practice and precedure), suggesting someone with far more experience in law and litigation wrote the submissions.
However, the moment I stood up to speak, the Magistrate interrupted me. He was brutal. I was not allowed to speak more than a few seconds before an abrupt and rude interruption. He started to make clicking sounds with his tongue, while shaking his head, to suggest I was pathetic in my incompetence.
In spite of constant interruptions and brutal treatment, I stood my ground and said everything I had to say, sometimes twice. I reported the Magistrate did not have the legal authority to use summary judgment in this way. I accused him of collusion with the defense.
He exploded! He said I was "paranoid" and intimated I ought to see a psychiatrist. But I am getting too old with far too much experience not to recognize a criminal conspiracy when I see one.
Magistrate Neiman stomped out of the courtroom like an angry spoiled child unable to get his own way.
When I walked out of the courtroom into the elevator, a security guard approached me to apologize for the Magistrate's behavior. He said, "They always treat people like you in this way ..." (among some other unprintable things). I thanked him for his concerns and sensitivity and then walked into the elevator.
As I drove home from the Court I began to rehash the ugly exchanges between us. It occurred to me, I thought, there was a law which specifically prohibits a magistrate from examining summary judgment.
When I got home I immediately went to my library to research the subject and -- behold! found it under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)A, which says "a judge may designate a magistrate to hear and determine any pretrial matter pending before the court, except a motion for injunctive relief, for judgment on the pleadings, for summary judgment ..." As we can see, the Magistrate did not have the authority to even preside over summary judgment. Yet, my case was summarily dismissed without a hearing under that procedure without my participation. I filed a motion for review with the argument the Magistrate did not have the legal authority to preside over summary judgment. Surprisingly, both the Magistrate and the defense had agreed with me. Then they argued that, when I had signed a document to allow the Magistrate to preside over my case, it gave him the legal authority to preside over summary judgment. It does not say such a thing and, if it did, it would immediately contradict a whole array of rules, regulations, procedures and statutory provisions.
How do I get out of this situation? If I were to appeal to the court of appeals, the collusion at the lower court will accompany my appeal. If I go to the Supreme Court, they will wait a few months before dismissing my case without a hearing, effectively terminating the controversy. Those justices are just a bunch of thugs! I don't think some of them even read most of the petitions the Court dismisses each year!
If I were to complain before the Circuit Council, I will run into the "good O'boys network", who will dismiss my complaint without a hearing . If I were to appeal before the Judicial Council, I will run into the same problem but this time it terminates the controversy, again without a hearing.
Our entire news-media ignores the problem and, with the exception of my state Senator Michael Knapik, every state and federal political representative will do nothing. I want an investigation.
Nor will my local newspaper -- The Republican (Mass.) -- publish anything critical about the judiciary system in the Letter-to-the-Editor column. In fact, I just received a letter from the CEO & Publisher, Larry McDermott, saying, "We do not wish to publish your letter." In some instances, my letters to this Column have simply "disappeared." To this day, though I have some suspicion and some circumstantial evidence, I really do not understand their behavior even when I offer to provide proof of my allegations. When I make this offer they do not respond. I think they are afraid of me.
Our judiciary system, from the lower courts to the Supreme Court,is not working correctly. Yet, there is very little effort to report and correct the problems, from the illegal security systems searching strangers for weapons to the common collusion between the courts and the Attorney General's office.
As an example, when I had cause to sue the B.A.T.F in the U.S. District Court (Springfield, Mass.), I immediately discovered a collusion between the Court and the Magistrate.
After filing a series of discovery motions, without objection from the defense attorney, along with a motion for management of discovery, 3 days before a scheduled hearing for discovery I received a motion for summary judgment. There was no time for me to respond to it and, after reading the motion, it was obvious the defense was attempting to use summary judgment as an illegal device to avoid hearing discovery. Every year thousands of cases are treated this way and summarily dismissed. Since I am a pro se litigant there was also a prejudice I was incompetent and would not know any better.
On the following Monday morning, at the scheduled hearing, the Magistrate Neiman listened to the defense attorney very respectfully even though she misrepresented the integrity of her actions (by pretending to be honest). Also, there was a contradiction in the tone of voice of the defense attorney (a female) and the tone of voice in the defense's submissions (aggressive male with a criminal interpretation of law and rules of practice and precedure), suggesting someone with far more experience in law and litigation wrote the submissions.
However, the moment I stood up to speak, the Magistrate interrupted me. He was brutal. I was not allowed to speak more than a few seconds before an abrupt and rude interruption. He started to make clicking sounds with his tongue, while shaking his head, to suggest I was pathetic in my incompetence.
In spite of constant interruptions and brutal treatment, I stood my ground and said everything I had to say, sometimes twice. I reported the Magistrate did not have the legal authority to use summary judgment in this way. I accused him of collusion with the defense.
He exploded! He said I was "paranoid" and intimated I ought to see a psychiatrist. But I am getting too old with far too much experience not to recognize a criminal conspiracy when I see one.
Magistrate Neiman stomped out of the courtroom like an angry spoiled child unable to get his own way.
When I walked out of the courtroom into the elevator, a security guard approached me to apologize for the Magistrate's behavior. He said, "They always treat people like you in this way ..." (among some other unprintable things). I thanked him for his concerns and sensitivity and then walked into the elevator.
As I drove home from the Court I began to rehash the ugly exchanges between us. It occurred to me, I thought, there was a law which specifically prohibits a magistrate from examining summary judgment.
When I got home I immediately went to my library to research the subject and -- behold! found it under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)A, which says "a judge may designate a magistrate to hear and determine any pretrial matter pending before the court, except a motion for injunctive relief, for judgment on the pleadings, for summary judgment ..." As we can see, the Magistrate did not have the authority to even preside over summary judgment. Yet, my case was summarily dismissed without a hearing under that procedure without my participation. I filed a motion for review with the argument the Magistrate did not have the legal authority to preside over summary judgment. Surprisingly, both the Magistrate and the defense had agreed with me. Then they argued that, when I had signed a document to allow the Magistrate to preside over my case, it gave him the legal authority to preside over summary judgment. It does not say such a thing and, if it did, it would immediately contradict a whole array of rules, regulations, procedures and statutory provisions.
How do I get out of this situation? If I were to appeal to the court of appeals, the collusion at the lower court will accompany my appeal. If I go to the Supreme Court, they will wait a few months before dismissing my case without a hearing, effectively terminating the controversy. Those justices are just a bunch of thugs! I don't think some of them even read most of the petitions the Court dismisses each year!
If I were to complain before the Circuit Council, I will run into the "good O'boys network", who will dismiss my complaint without a hearing . If I were to appeal before the Judicial Council, I will run into the same problem but this time it terminates the controversy, again without a hearing.
Our entire news-media ignores the problem and, with the exception of my state Senator Michael Knapik, every state and federal political representative will do nothing. I want an investigation.
Nor will my local newspaper -- The Republican (Mass.) -- publish anything critical about the judiciary system in the Letter-to-the-Editor column. In fact, I just received a letter from the CEO & Publisher, Larry McDermott, saying, "We do not wish to publish your letter." In some instances, my letters to this Column have simply "disappeared." To this day, though I have some suspicion and some circumstantial evidence, I really do not understand their behavior even when I offer to provide proof of my allegations. When I make this offer they do not respond. I think they are afraid of me.
posted by Alvah Buckmore, Jr., at 6:14 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home