If one wants to understand why and how it remains a fraud in US public health policy that it has been proven moldy buildings never cause severe immune dysfunctions, the below MUST be read online at the US Department of Labor, OSHA website as updated Refence No. 15 on page 24 of the OSHA IAQ advisory,
Indoor Air Quality In Commercial and Institution Buildings.
Has little to do with science and much to do with politics. Concerningly, politics over the Constitution in the California courts. The California Courts Have Been Colluding With “Product Defenders“, perveyors of doubt of causation of environmental illness, VeriTox, Inc. To Defraud Public Over Mold Issue. They Have Systematically Worked To Keep It Unknown In US Public Health Policy And California Workers Comp Policy That Moldy Buidings Can Cause Severe Illness And Sometimes Even Death.
The Way The Courts Have Done This By Suppressing Evidence Of A Plaintiff’s (Veritox Owner, Bruce Kelman’s) Perjury Used To Establish Libel Law Required Reason For Malice As They Framed A Whistleblowing US Citizen For Libel In A Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation. It Has Been Going On For Six Years.
Now, The Courts Are Threatening Contempt of Court (hearing on November 14, 2011) And Jail Time If The Defendant (Advocate For Sick, Sharon Kramer) Continues To Write And Evidence What The Courts Have Done To Aid To Defraud The Public. Its Billions In Fraud And Thousands Of Lives.
The courts and VeriTox want Sharon to never republish the phrase, “altered his [Kelman] under oath statements”, the only thing for which she was sued with the sole claim of the case being this was a maliciously false accusation that Kelman committed perjury when testifying as an expert defense witness.
Sharon can write and speak all day long of the fraud mass marketed into US public health and California workers comp’ policy by the US Chamber, ACOEM, Governor Schwarzenegger et. al., without repeating the phrase, “altered his under oath statements”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIGlZT6g50Q&feature=related
But what she cannot do without repeating the phrase, “altered his under oath statements”, is discuss the Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation case and evidence how the courts framed her for libel and suppressed the evidence that Kelman committed perjury to establish libel law needed reason for malice.
For Now, SIX YEARS, the Courts have been suppressing the evidence that Kelman committed criminal perjury to establish libel law needed reason for malice.
From the September 2010 Appellate Opinion by the “case reviewing” court who directly state they are obligated to review to see if clear and convincing proof of malice was established. Also directly stated, they chose not to review.
“We recognize that with respect to malice ‘courts are required to independently examine the record to determine whether it provides clear and convincing proof thereof.’ ( >McCoy v. Hearst Corp. (1991) 227 Cal.App.3d 1657, 1664.) However, in Kelman v. Kramer I [November 2006 anti-SLAPP Appellate Opinion] we expressly rejected Kramer’s argument that such independent review entitled her to judgment. Rather, we found that such review had taken place in the trial court and, following our own detailed analysis of the evidence of Kramer’s hostility towards Kelman, we left the trial court’s determination undisturbed. Given that disposition, we can only conclude that panel which decided Kelman v. Kramer I conducted the required independent review of the record and agreed with the trial court that, as the record stood at that point, there was clear and convincing evidence of malice. Because, as we have indicated the record of malice presented at trial was just as fulsome as the one considered in Kelman v. Kramer I, [meaning there was none in either] we cannot depart from our prior decision without also departing from the doctrine of law of the case.”
From the November 2006 anti-SLAPP Appellate Opinion, where they refused to read Kramer’s briefs and the attached exhibits. But, as noted above, in 2010 the same Appellate court found they had done a thorough review of the case in 2006 for “fulsome malice” over a writing impacting US public health:
“As appellant, Kramer has the burden of showing error. (See Howard v. Thrifty Drugs & Discount Store (1995) 10 Cal.4th, 443.) ‘The reviewing court is not required to make an independant, unassessed study of the record in search of error or grounds to supprt the judgment. It is entitled to the assistance of counsel”.
(Written by an attorney who has been licensed in California for over thirty years, there was nothing improper in the form of briefs or exhibits attached evidencing Kelman’s perjury to establish malice, etc).
“Kramer asked us to take judicial notice of additional documents, inclunding the complaint and an excerpt from Kelman’s depositin in her lawsuit against her insurance company. We decline to do so as it does not appear these items were presented to the trial court.”
“Initially, we note this lawsuit is not about a conspiracy. This lawsuit was filed by Kelman and GlobalTox alleging one statement in a press release was libelous. Thus, conspiracy issues are not relevant.”
Declaration submitted by the attorney on June 29, 2006:
1. The deposition testimony of Bruce Kelman in the Mercury v. Kramer case reveals that he could not testify about health effects of mold exposure regarding..the Defendant’s daughter.
2. The settlement documents in the same case show that there was a substantial settlement which occured on October of 2003, thus impeaching the Plaintiff’s thesis of a bitter sour-grapes litigant, and impeaching Bruce Kelman’s declaration in opposition ot the 425.16 motion.” Some of the Evidence Suppressed By The Courts Of Kelman’s perjury to establish needed reason for Kramer’s malice while strategically litigating over a matter of public health. (huge pdf link. Takes several seconds to open)
Sharon’s statement to the court in writing on April 27, 2011, BEFORE the court issued a “gag order” that she could not republish that sentence on May 2, 2011:
“In oral argument of 4/14/11, Kramer stated, “I am so sorry, Your Honor, but on behalf of the health and safety of the American public, I will not be able to abide by any injunctive relief order you may grant.” This is because this court is relying on prior improvidently entered orders that rewarded a US Chamber author/plaintiff’s use of criminal perjury to establish malice to deem a never impeached United States citizen to be a “malicious liar” over an accurate writing impacting public health in egregious violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution. This order is furthering benefiting a California licensed attorney’s suborning of criminal perjury in a prior litigation and rewarding submission of false documents to this court of judgments that were never entered. This is to gag, vex, harass and financially ruin a never impeached whistle blowing citizen.
This order is making it against the law for the never impeached citizen to write and speak of errors of the courts in Kelman & GlobalTox v. Kramer that have aided with a fraud in US public health policy to continue by the courts’ ignoring the evidence that an author of policy for the Chamber and ACOEM used criminal perjury in a malicious, strategic, libel litigation.
It is a matter of court record that the appellate court was informed and evidenced that “WHEN” they acknowledged the plaintiff’s criminal perjury, “THEN” the fraud in policy would immediately cease by rightfully exposing the conflicts of interests & lack of truthfulness in legal proceedings by the plaintiff, policy author and professional witness, Kelman. Instead, the courts rewarded the criminal behavior. This order is furthering the abuse of the prior courts that aids the US Chamber adverse to public interest.
As such, Kramer respectfully informs this court that she will not stop writing and speaking of the fraud in policy and of the courts rewarding criminal perjury in a malicious, strategic litigation that aids the fraud to continue; regardless of the order this court may issue. She informs this court of this because she will not lie to this court that she will follow an injunctive relief order based on prior improvidently entered orders and false documents submitted to this court.
What this court does with this information is unknown to Kramer. But, public safety and integrity in the courts are more important to Kramer than consequences of refusing to be silenced of fraud in policy aided to continue by the judiciaries to oversee Kelman & GlobalTox v. Kramer.
It is a violation of Kramer’s first amendment rights to reward criminal perjury in a strategic litigation against her and then issue a court order that Kramer be gagged from writing of what the courts have done. The evidence of the appellate court rewarding criminal perjury in a strategic litigation over a matter of public health is a matter of public record in the court files of Kelman & GlobalTox v. Kramer. It is also a matter of public record that they falsely stated in their 2010 opinion that there are judgments entered in the case. As a matter of public record, anyone should be able to write and speak of the documents of the case, including Kramer.”
So..the California courts are going to put a whistleblower of fraud in policy in jail for refusing to be silenced of how the courts colluded with “product defender” plaintiffs, VeriTox, Inc to defraud the public by criminal means.