Could a “NO” Vote for ALL California Justices Save the Judicial Branch? Seems it could!

Posted on September 25, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
by Sharon Noonan Kramer
           On November 4, 2014, California voters will have the opportunity to tell the state’s judges, justices, legislators, attorney general and governor; that elitist, unconstitutional and illegal acts in the state’s judicial branch will no longer be tolerated by California’s citizens.
          Toward that end, the bi-partisan group Campaign For Judicial Integrity (CFJI) is urging all California voters to vote “NO” retention of all supreme and court of appeal justices who are on the November ballot.
          California state justices are originally appointed to office by the governor. Opportunity for voters to retain or remove justices from office arises only every four years. This is because each supreme and appellate court justice must run for voter re-election at the end of their twelve-year term after first being appointed. Newly appointed justices must also run in the first four-year election cycle after their initial appointment.
Voters decide the justices’ employment futures in the nation’s largest state court system, California’s, by simply checking “Yes” or “NO” in the box next to their names on the ballot.
         According the CFJI Chairman, Dr. Richard Fine
“November 4, is crucial as so many justices seeking re-election may never occur again. ….we can change California’s corrupt judiciary by voting out 3 of the 6 current California Supreme Court justices and 42 of the 105 Court of Appeal justices…The November 4 election is a “Yes” or “No” vote on each justice. A majority of votes cast determines whether each justice is re-elected or voted out.
On November 4, we vote ‘no’ to California Supreme Court Justices Werdegar, Liu, and Mariano-Florentino Cuellar, who was recently appointed by Governor Brown to replace retiring Justice Baxter. On November 4, we vote ‘no’ to [ ] California Court of Appeal justices in the six Court of Appeal Districts. 
          In 2009, Dr. Fine, a California licensed attorney and former federal prosecutor, was ordered by a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge to spend 18 months in a county jail cell without ever being charged with a crime — let alone found guilty of one. While Dr. Fine was incarcerated, the State Bar of California revoked his law license. 
          What he had done that so angered the compromised powers that be, is expose a double-dipping judicial salary scheme which causes conflicts of interest in court rulings favorable to California county governments.  The judge who ordered the incarceration, Judge Jaffey, has since retired with full pension and no punishment for his abuse of judicial office.
          According to the national non-profit, Judicial Watch, which has filed another lawsuit over the matter in April of 2014, the double-dipping scheme continues in California’s superior courts to this very day, much to the detriment of the citizens of California. For a greater understanding of the illegal compensation that the California judges are receiving and what the judicial branch leadership has done to assure it continues; visit the Emmy award winning Full Disclosure Network and watch their mini-documentaries on the subject.
SOUND LOGIC BEHIND THE BLANKET “NO” VOTE
          The sound logic behind the blanket “NO” vote as encouraged by CJFI, is that if all 45 of the state’s 111 justices, who are currently subject to re-election for twelve more years, are ousted by the voters; then the governor will have to appoint nearly half of all the state’s justices in his upcoming term.
          As newly appointed justices, voters will then have the ability to vote to retain or oust the 45 new appointees in the next election cycle of 2018, along with the additional justices whose twelve-year terms expire in 2018.  
          This means that California’s judicial branch would have a substantial turnover and its leaders would have four years to clean up their act — or an even greater ousting will occur by will of the voters in 2018.  The governor’s office and its committees which recommend the judicial appointments, would have a second chance to better vet new judicial appointees with the goal being the restoration of fair and impartial courts in the state of California. 
           If the urgently needed branch reform does not occur within the next four years after the 2014 blanket judicial ousting, the voting public will again be able to vote to remove any and all appointed politicians masquerading as fair and impartial judicial officers of the California courts.  Peer motivation to turn blind eyes to the criminal and unlawful elements among the state’s judiciary will be eliminated by the elimination of  jurists from branch leadership and vetting processes, who are too deeply embedded in the systemic dysfunction, to address the rampant ethics problems themselves. 
          In other words, removing half of the worn-out large cogs from the dysfunctional judicial machinery and replacing them with brand-new functioning parts, would go a long way toward overhauling the entire system for the good of the people of California.  The blanket “NO” vote is similar to rebuilding an engine.
          Like CJFI, Judicial Watch, and Full Disclosure Network; Center for Judicial Excellence (CJE), is another organization which works to stop the mass cronyism and corruption in California’s judicial branch.  CJE has been diligently working to force someone (anyone!) in California government to clarify who is the ultimate responsible party when jurists and their clerks are caught abusing the judicial process by falsifying court documents.  So far, the run-around that CJE has received from various government bodies has proven to be an astounding collaborative feat of willful blindness and deliberate indifference. 
          According the CJE,
“Members of the judicial branch are supposed to be guardians of the law, but who is guarding the guards?…For decades the California Judicial Council has been the recipient of ongoing reports of misconduct and waste within the Judicial Branch. Yet, misconduct and waste continue unabated. Governor Brown and Attorney General Harris have denied they have the authority to act on complaints of misconduct within the branch, and have referred complainants to the Judicial Council. Complaints have been made to the Judicial Council, but have gone unanswered…
Our own concerns include but are not limited to judges, court administrators, and court experts who refuse to follow the law, with impunity and immunity; abuse of the CCP section 170 et seq. disqualification statutes; the elimination of court reporters who provide an official record of substantive court proceedings, notwithstanding Commission on Judicial Performance concerns and recommendations about the need for an official record; ongoing branch waste while court fees and penalties are operating to deny the public access to the courts; rampant document destruction by branch members with Judicial Council approval; improper record-keeping within the branch; the withholding of court records by court personnel; the thwarting of legislative investigative and oversight efforts; record tampering and backdating by members of the Judicial Branch; abuse of the assigned judges program; the lack of adequate data collection and management by the Judicial branch, notwithstanding the expenditure of millions on court computer systems; the abuse of ex parte procedures such that judges are having secret non-emergency hearings with one side of the case, and issuing secret non-emergency orders withheld from the other side of the case, thereby repeatedly denying basic due process rights to notice and an opportunity to be heard by an impartial decision maker, and equal protection of the laws; the denial of affordable legal resources and adequate fee orders for financially disadvantaged litigants; cronyism within the branch; the lack of diversity of viewpoints and public representation on the Judicial Council; the practice of judges picking judges, via the assigned judges program, and the selection of Court Commissioners who exercise full judicial powers and are then often converted to judges; the improper delegation of judicial power; and the lack of adequate oversight of the Judicial Branch as a whole.
          According to yet another bi-partisan organization formed to combat the systemic corruption in California’s courts,  the California Coalition for Families and Children (CCFC),  
The rank and file judges [of California’s family courts] are plagued with horrific personality defects of their own far more serious than any parent in their courtroom–personal and professional misconduct, multiple divorcees, serious domestic violence perpetrators, addicts, some near perversions, financial misdealing, abundant disregard for the rule of law–and disdain for anyone who disagrees.  Good old-fashioned thuggery by a rogue gallery of unethical lawyers, judges, and psychologists in what has become a free-for-all crime ring.
COURT & OTHER CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES BEG FOR OVERSIGHT
          The website of Judicial Council Watcher (JCW) is followed and contributed to, primarily by California judicial branch employees and former employees. The site is backed by Michael Paul, a former administrative office court employee who was fired in 2010 for exposing that there was $500,000,000.00 missing from the court’s construction fund. The website focuses on egregious ethics problems at the helm of the California courts — namely the Judicial Council and its staff (formerly known as the Administrative Offices of the Courts (AOC)).  Many court employees frequently share tales on JCW which would cause one to think they are discussing Mafia dons, rather than the leadership of the largest state court in the United States, California’s.
          This past week, the employees of California’s Public Utilities Commission (PUC) held a meeting. The turn-out was massive.  It was regarding their outrage of the recent scandal of Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) successfully judge-shopping within the PUC for appointment of an administrative law judge who would rule favorably to their case. There is a proposed $1.4 billion penalty against PG&E for the deadly San Bruno explosion. The 2010 blast killed eight people and leveled 38 homes. The case will decide how the cost of post-San Bruno pipeline improvements will be divided between customers and shareholders. PG&E is seeking to have its customers pick up nearly $1.3 billion in costs.
             At the recent meeting, an informed PUC employee eloquently stated the problem and that a band-aid approach will not solve it.  The PUC employee is quoted as saying:
“Are we just going to throw a couple of people under the bus, or are we going to look at the real causes in our culture that create this kind of corruptness and basically sleazy environment? I want to be proud to work for the state of California….Who is giving us our marching orders to behave this way?”
          In response to the PUC scandal, Nick Pacilio, a spokesman for California’s Attorney General Kamala Harris, stated, 
        “The attorney general takes allegations of improper behavior by public officials very seriously”
          This appears to be a misstatement of fact.  As many California citizens and state employees will attest, over the years since Harris first became California’s attorney general in 2011, she has received uncountable complaints accompanied by mountains of evidence from many different sources, of criminal acts occurring by numerous public officials within in the California courts. Rarely, does her office even bother respond. And when they do, it is typically a response which deflects responsibility to another department of government — while sending the complainant on a wild goose chase, as the frauds upon the court[1] play on.
          The fact of the matter is, if Attorney General Harris really took “allegations of improper behavior by public official very seriously“; at the very least,  she would have long ago prosecuted several California judges, justices and clerks for the felonious acts of falsifying court documents[2], sometimes while knowing their courts have no subject matter jurisdiction[3]. 

___________

[1] “Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself..It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function — thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.” Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985)
[2]  California Penal Code 134 states, “Every person guilty of preparing any false or ante-dated book, paper, record, instrument in writing, or other matter or thing, with intent to produce it, or allow it to be produced for any fraudulent or deceitful purpose, as genuine or true, upon any trial, proceeding, or inquiry whatever, authorized by law, is guilty of felony.”
[3]  “in a jurisdictional vacuum (that is, absence of all jurisdiction) the second prong necessary to absolute judicial immunity is missing.”  Stump v. Sparkman, id., 435 U.S. 349
___________
          Had Harris and branch leaders done their jobs in the past, and judicial appointees were better vetted by the governor’s appointment committees; there would be no need now for voters to remove ALL California justices in an effort to save the decaying branch from the spoilers of the bunch.
 We agree with the Campaign for Judicial Excellence.  VOTE “NO” on ALL California Justices  
On November 4th, your “NO” vote for each of the following California supreme and court of appeal justices, is a “YES” vote for future justice in all of California.
California Supreme Court
 Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar                        NO
Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar                            NO
Justice Goodwin Liu                                                      NO
 
First District Court of Appeal
Justice Stuart Pollak                                                     NO
Justice Terence L. Bruiniers                                       NO
Justice Mark Simons                                                     NO
Justice Kathleen M. Banke                                          NO
Justice Ignazio Ruvolo                                                  NO
Justice James M. Humes                                             NO
Justice Anthony Kline                                                  NO
Justice Martin J. Jenkins                                            NO
Justice Therese M. Stewart                                         NO
 
Second District Court of Appeal
Justice Laurence Rubin                                               NO
Justice Nora Manella                                                   NO
Justice Kenneth Yegan                                                NO
Justice Jeffrey W. Johnson                                        NO
Justice Frances Rothschild                                        NO
Justice Madeleine Flier                                               NO
Justice Dennis Perluss                                                 NO
Justice Audrey Collins                                                NO
Justice Brian M. Hoffstadt                                         NO
Justice Lee Smalley Edmon                                       NO

 

Third District Court of Appeal
Justice Elena J. Duarte                                              NO
Justice Vance Raye                                                      NO
Justice Andrea L. Hoch                                              NO
Justice William J. Murray, Jr.                               NO
Justice Ronald Robie                                                   NO
Justice Louis R. Mauro                                               NO
Justice Jonathan Renner                                          NO
 
Fourth District Court of Appeal
Justice Richard Aronson                                           NO
Justice William Rylaarsdam                                   NO
Justice David A. Thompson                                     NO
Justice Richard Fybel                                                NO
Justice Kathleen O’Leary                                          NO
Justice Thomas Hollenhorst                                    NO
Justice Terry O’Rourke                                             NO
Justice Alex McDonald                                              NO
Justice Gilbert Nares                                                 NO
Justice James McIntyre                                            NO
 
Fifth District Court of Appeal
Justice Rosendo Peña, Jr.                                         NO
Justice Donald R. Franson, Jr.                               NO
Justice Dennis Cornell                                              NO
Justice Gene Gomes                                                   NO
Justice Stephen Kane                                                NO
 
Sixth District Court of Appeal
Justice Patricia Bamattre-Manoukian                NO
Justice Adrienne M. Grover                                    NO
Justice Franklin Elia                                                 NO
Justice Eugene Premo                                               NO
Justice Miguel Márquez                                            NO
Posted in Civil Justice, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Health - Medical - Science, Politics | Tagged | 1 Comment

Public Invited to Speak @ 10/27-28 Cal Judicial Council Meeting Re: Statewide Court Corruption

Posted on September 21, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
StopCrtCrimes-copy“Members of the judicial branch are supposed to be guardians of the law, but who is guarding the guards? It is time for the public’s concerns about this to be heard and addressed by the Judicial Council, via a public hearing. Very Truly Yours, Kathleen Russell, Executive Director Connie Valentine, California Protective Parents Assn. Barbara Kauffman, Family Law Attorney
 
September 19, 2014
The Honorable Tani Cantil-Sakauye
Chair, Judicial Council, and
Judicial Council Members
455 Golden Gate Ave.
San Francisco, CA 94102
Re: Request for Meeting with the Chair of the Judicial Council
Request for Public Hearing Re Public Concerns About the Judicial Branch
Dear Judicial Council Chair and Members:
For decades the California Judicial Council has been the recipient of ongoing reports of misconduct and waste within the Judicial Branch. Yet, misconduct and waste continue unabated. Governor Brown and Attorney General Harris have denied they have the authority to act on complaints of misconduct within the branch, and have referred complainants to the Judicial Council. Complaints have been made to the Judicial Council, but have gone unanswered. This happened most recently in connection with a June 9, 2014 letter complaint about the involvement of former Judicial Councilmember Kim Turner and Marin Judge Beverly Wood in the backdating of a register of actions and minute order. The Governor, Attorney General, and Marin County Counsel have all referred the complainant to the Judicial Council. Yet, although Judicial Council Chair Tani Cantil Sakauye has been in receipt of that complaint since June 12, 2014, and follow- up calls have been made seeking a response, as of last week, the Judicial Council still had not responded.
Accordingly, today we are requesting that an appointment be scheduled for an audience with the Chair of the Judicial Council, to discuss the situation and to set a date for a public hearing before the Judicial Council similar to that held by the Judicial Council’s Elkins Task Force in April of 2009. We are requesting that the hearing be open to everyone in the State of California who wishes to voice concerns and opinions about the California judicial branch, and that the press be allowed to attend and record the hearing.
Our own concerns include but are not limited to judges, court administrators, and court experts who refuse to follow the law, with impunity and immunity; abuse of the CCP section 170 et seq. disqualification statutes; the elimination of court reporters who provide an official record of substantive court proceedings, notwithstanding Commission on Judicial Performance concerns and recommendations about the need for an official record; ongoing branch waste while court fees and penalties are operating to deny the public access to the courts; rampant document destruction by branch members with Judicial Council approval; improper record-keeping within the branch; the withholding of court records by court personnel; the thwarting of legislative investigative and oversight efforts; record tampering and backdating by members of the Judicial Branch; abuse of the assigned judges program; the lack of adequate data collection and management by the Judicial branch, notwithstanding the expenditure of millions on court computer systems; the abuse of ex parte procedures such that judges are having secret non-emergency hearings with one side of the case, and issuing secret non-emergency orders withheld from the other side of the case, thereby repeatedly denying basic due process rights to notice and an opportunity to be heard by an impartial decision maker, and equal protection of the laws; the denial of affordable legal resources and adequate fee orders for financially disadvantaged litigants; cronyism within the branch; the lack of diversity of viewpoints and public representation on the Judicial Council; the practice of judges picking judges, via the assigned judges program, and the selection of Court Commissioners who exercise full judicial powers and are then often converted to judges; the improper delegation of judicial power; and the lack of adequate oversight of the Judicial Branch as a whole.
Members of the judicial branch are supposed to be guardians of the law, but who is guarding the guards? It is time for the public’s concerns about this to be heard and addressed by the Judicial Council, via a public hearing.
Very Truly Yours,
Kathleen Russell, Executive Director
Connie Valentine, California Protective Parents Assn.
Barbara Kauffman, Family Law Attorney
Plus dozens of manual signatures from Californians who live in 16 different counties
Also on September 19th, a peaceful protest was held in San Francisco regarding the need for California’s court leaders to address the severe and systemic ethics problems within the judicial branch.   The following is a report of what occurred at the rally.  Apparently, the public is now invited to attend and speak at the next Judicial Council meetings which takes place in San Francisco on October 27th and 28th. (We’ll keep you posted on the details as soon as we have them)  Begin forwarded messages:
Message #1 as posted on Judicial Council Watcher California’s 9.1 billion dollar reality check, “Protest Rally today at ‘Dysfunction Junction’ – Judicial Council Staff Offices – 350 McAllister Street, San Francisco“
JCW, thank you for this post.
Hello everyone. The dust has settled after Friday’s rally/protest which was very productive.
Security was careful to tell us what we could and could not do, and what would get us arrested. We went from the outside speaking event to the cafeteria, where some of us convened with the intention of taking the elevators to the Judicial Council. (Some rally participants remained outside, fearful of retaliation. Indeed, several of the lawyers who spoke described the personal retaliation they had suffered for speaking out, and various other protest participants also described retaliation they had suffered. Geez, what country do we live in?) Anyway, Security told us if all of us in the cafeteria went up to the Judicial Council, people would be arrested, so they took 8 or 10 of us up to Floor 3 (where they hold the JC meetings), telling us that the Judicial Council had someone waiting to speak with us. The person they had waiting to speak with us was the Director of Reception. LOL. We said we wanted a meeting with the Chair of the Judicial Council and he said we had to request that in writing. We told him a June 9, 2014 letter had been written to the Chair of the Judicial Council along with various others governmental officials, and that we had been directed by the Governor and Attorney General to take our concerns to the Judicial Council, but three months later the only person/entity we had not heard back from was the Judicial Council. We told them that the Judicial Council had received the letter on June 12th, and the chief’s personal secretary had reported it was sent to the Office of General Counsel, and that she would call and tell them we were waiting for a response. We told them follow up calls had been made to OGC, but we got no response at all, so here we all were, in person, people from 16 California counties, taking our issues to the Judicial Council as directed by the Governor and Attorney General, and we wanted to set a meeting with the Chair of the Judicial Council to discuss our concerns. We asked the Director of Reception to get someone from OGC. After a time Robert Buckley, managing attorney of the OGC arrived, and told us we could not set a meeting with the Chair (Tani) but we were at the right place (the Judicial Council) and that we should go to the October Judicial Council meeting and she would be there.
Yes indeed.
We asked Mr. Buckley to go downstairs to speak with the people waiting in the cafeteria who had traveled from 16 counties, which he did. In response to a direct question about who had oversight authority of the judicial branch, if not the Governor or the Attorney General, he said the Chief Justice. He reiterated, over and over, that we were in the right place and that we needed to go to the October Judicial Council meeting. We asked if the concerns set forth in the June 9, 2014 letter were only going to be addressed at the meeting, and not in writing earlier, and he said he had not even seen that letter (notwithstanding Tani’s secretary stating it had been sent to OGC, and that she would make a call to let them know we were awaiting a response). He was provided a copy of that letter, and a Center for Judicial Excellence letter stating its very broad concerns about the branch, and asking for a meeting with the Chair of the JC and a public hearing open to the press, at which people from around the state could come and testify to the JC about their issues with the branch. He kept saying we had to go to the October JC meeting.
We will be there. And that, my friends, is when everyone should show up en masse. We got the invitation to the party, and we should all show up.
Message #2
” https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10152672568611508&set=vb.368122691507&type=2&theater
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10152672522756508&set=vb.368122691507&type=2&theater
‘It’s Official! We’ve been personally invited to the next Judicial Council meeting by Bob! We tried to arrange a time to talk quietly with the Chair of the JC yesterday (see video), but heck, if they want us to air all of this filthy laundry in public, with the media in the room, then by God, we can certainly do that. The gloves are off, folks. It’s our Year to Demand Justice for all Californians. Won’t you please join us in SF again on Oct. 27 and 28? Get your red t-shirt to show our strength in numbers at the CJE [Center for Judicial Excellence] website today. We CAN DO THIS!’ Kathleen Russell, on Center for Judicial Excellence Facebook page.”
 
Posted in Civil Justice, Environmental Health Threats, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Health - Medical - Science, Politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ex-Congressional Staffer Speaks of Unbridled Fraud in U.S. Public Health Policies

Posted on September 18, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
Dear All,
Please read the below statement of former Congressional staffer, Beth Clay, regarding the CDC autism-vaccine debacle. This is quite similar to what was done over the mold issue when professing scientific proof that mycotoxins in an indoor environment could never reach a level to harm, and selling the scientific fraud as a matter of public policy to mislead U.S. courts. In both matters, the frauds began to be mass marketed circa 2000 by employees of the CDC.
When abusing the judicial process while trying to shut me up of how they mass marketed the scientific fraud over the mold issue; corrupted officers of the California courts and their clerks authored and mailed fraudulent court documents which concealed that a retired CDC Deputy Director, Bryan D. Hardin, was an undisclosed party to the Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPP) suit of Bruce J. Kelman and GlobalTox, Inc. vs. Sharon Kramer. Case No. GIN044539 Superior Court of the County of San Diego. (2005-2013)
All totaled the Appellate Court justices and their clerks falsified three Remittiturs that were used to conceal that CDC’s Hardin was a known improperly undisclosed party to the fixed SLAPP. One in 2006, one in 2010 and one in 2013. This is the SLAPP suit in which they framed me for libel with actual malice for the 100% correct sentence:
“Upon viewing documents presented by the Hayne’s attorney of Kelman’s prior testimony from a case in Arizona, Dr. Kelman altered his under oath statements on the witness stand.”
The fraud upon the court in the SLAPP was to make my exposing who was involved in the mass marketing of scientific fraud in 2005, appear to be false and unfounded. (See accurate March 2005 Press Release by Sharon Noonan Kramer)
The California jurist with the publicly known “least favorable ethics record” in the entire state and her clerk, falsified the judgment document from the SLAPP suit in 2008, rendering it void to be used for any purpose. The Appellate justices concealed it was void in their 2010 opinion and fraudulent remittitur.
Bruce Kelman, president of GlobalTox, Inc., ( now known as Veritox, Inc.); and his California attorney, Keith Scheuer, then submitted the void judgment as the sole foundational document to the second case — to try to shut me up of the collusive corruption in the first case, the fixed SLAPP suit, aiding the public fleecing to continue.
Contrary to the direct evidence of the collusion to defraud in both cases, this is their Version of what happened of why I can continue to write of the public fleecing via fraud upon the court in SLAPP and coram non judice litigations; without fear of another SLAPP suit — for telling and providing evidence of the God’s honest truth of corruption in the Cal courts aiding frauds in the federal gov’t.
Plainly stated without an ounce of fear of reprisal:
The owners of Veritox, Inc., are major league criminals and professional liars for the federal government, who equally compromised and criminal officers of the San Diego Superior and Appellate Courts fixed a SLAPP suit to aid them to continue to fleece the public with scientific fraud. Short of having me killed, they’ve collusively done everything in their power from 2005 to present, to try to shut me up and discredit me — even recording thousands of dollars of fraudulent liens against my property and causing me bodily harm to try to scare me into silence.
Fat chance that I’m shutting up when so many U.S. citizens are still suffering and I’m falsely deemed a malicious liar for life for exposing it!  Direct evidence of fraud upon the court by well connected fraudsters, does not lie.
In the second suit which began in November of 2010, Bruce J. Kelman vs Sharon Kramer Case No 37-2010-00061530-CU-DF-NC, also in the San Diego County Superior and Appellate Courts, they had me jailed in March of 2012 for refusing to sign a false confession of being guilty of libel.— by a judge who knew that his court had no subject matter jurisdiction.  Then, with the aid of the San Diego County Sheriff, Bill Gore, they gave me a false criminal FBI record for alleged civil contempt of court — which is not a crime.  Its a civil matter.
While civil contempt is not criminal, court officers falsifying court documents to fleece the public with ex CDC employees and federal contractors — when their courts have no subject matter jurisdiction — IS a crime.  Under California Penal Code 134, its a felony punishable by up to four years in prison for each offense, with the involved jurists having no judicial immunity from prosecution for the malicious frauds upon the court. All totaled I have direct evidence of no less than 30 counts of court doc falsifications and U.S. postal service mailings of the frauds, in my possession.
While the Cal courts were fixing litigations to try to shut me up and discredit me, I was simultaneously spending time in DC trying to stop the scientific fraud over the mold issue, ultimately, to no avail.  At my insist urging, Democrat Senate HELP which was then headed by the late Senator Edward Kennedy, ordered a federal Government Accountability Office audit of the matter in 2006. Then in 2007, HELP deleted from the audit looking into who had the conflicts of interest–when they knew the answer and the devastation being caused. At the time, Dr. David Noll was my liason to Senate HELP.  Upon his departure from the Hill shortly thereafter, he went to work for the CDC.
The Congressional Gov’t Oversight and Reform Committee, headed at the time by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-Ca), repeatedly refused to hold hearings of the matter.  They, too, knew of the rampant fraud over the mold issue involving the CDC and its private sector partners, harming thousands of U.S. citizens.
The selling never vetted science when establishing flawed public health policies on behalf of special interests, needs to be made to stop.  This former Congressional staffer, Beth Clay, is the second federal employee to come forward with a public statement within the past couple of weeks.  The first was Dr. William Thompson of the CDC.
In her public statement, Ms. Clay has nailed it of how severely compromised the US gov’t and its private sector contractors have become when selling garbage science in environmental public health policies on behalf of special interests.  The only aspect she is missing, is how severely compromised the courts have also become when covering up the frauds of the federal gov’t and its private sector partners.
In Ms. Clay’s words as shared by HealthImpactNews.com:
“I had always held the National Academy of Science and the Institute of Medicine in fairly high regard. They are touted to be an independent scientific body. I would learn in truth they are an elite members club of the scientific community that contracts with the government and industry to conduct reviews. With the vaccine injury inquiry, we watched them take direction from the CDC and shortchange the independent review process. They proved unable to separate their desire to protect vaccine policies from the process and conduct a truly independent and rigorous review of the evidence of possible vaccine injury.
At every stage were obvious irregularities in process, from the manipulation of the thimerosal data to wash out links to autism; to changing the instructions to the IOM; to data from Denmark from studies that were fatally flawed from the outset being touted as reasons to end the debate. I heard scientists quoted in the media say that it was ‘settled science’ and that no other funds should be devoted to asking the question. Science is never ‘settled’. And yet, this notion was put forward and adopted because it was convenient for those who wanted this uncomfortable topic to fade out.
Maybe most egregious of all was Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sibelius’ bragging in a Reader’s Digest interview that she had instructed her press office to get the media to stop covering the parent led organizations that were questioning HHS on these issues. She the Secretary, like every federal official raised her hand and swore and oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, and yet she admits to suppressing free speech and controlling the media!
Keep in mind, all of the irregularities and substandard research occurred before we knew about Poul Thorsen’s criminal activity. All of our concerns occurred before the latest news this month that the CDC had covered up data showing African American boys at an increased risk of autism if given the MMR vaccine before 36 months.”
Read more of the CDC intentionally skewed autism-vaccine public health policy and of the covering up of it by mainstream media, at our prior post on Katy’s Exposure — exposing environmental health threats and those responsible.
Know that this is not an isolated incident.  It appears to be a matter of common practice at the CDC and its private sector partners, when selling garbage science to the masses to the benefit of gov’t employees’ second careers for the interested industry de jour.
For a greater understanding of how the rampant conflicts of interest work, please read the various links in this post on the Health Impact News article “CDC Whistleblower Dr. Thompson, I’ve stopped lying and am willing to testify on vaccine fraud”.
Readers of this blog should also be aware that the North San Diego County Superior Court where the majority of the fraud upon the court in the Kelman/Veritox SLAPP over the mold issue has taken place,  is located in Vista, CA.  This is U.S. Congressman Darrell Issa’s (R-Ca) district.
Congressman Issa is the current Chair of the U.S. Congressional Oversight and Gov’t Reform Committee.  Like Henry Waxman (D-Ca) before him,  Issa is well aware of fraud upon the court in California causing the continuance of scientific fraud by criminal means in federally established environmental public health policies.  So are United States Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca) and Barbara Boxer (D-Ca).
Sharon Noonan Kramer
Posted in Civil Justice, Environmental Health Threats, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Health - Medical - Science, Mold and Politics, Toxic Mold | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CDC Autism Researcher Informs Congress of Scientific Fraud in 2004 Medical Journal Publication

Posted on September 2, 2014 by Sharon Kramer

Questions of the day: Are U.S. parents justified in their concerns that the United States Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) overstates the proven safety of current U.S. vaccination schedules; and if they are justified, what can and should Congress do to alleviate the growing concerns?

In the words of CDC Senior Scientist and Autism Epidemiologist, William W. Thompson, PhD.

“I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African-American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.

 My concern has been the decision to omit relevant findings in a particular study for a particular sub­ group for a particular vaccine. There have always been recognized risks for vaccination and I believe it is the responsibility of the CDC to properly convey the risks associated with receipt of those vaccines.

I am providing information to Congressman William Posey, and of course will continue to cooperate with Congress.  I have also offered to assist with reanalysis of the study data or development of further studies….I will do everything I can to assist any unbiased and objective scientists inside or outside the CDC to analyze data collected by the CDC or other public organizations for the purpose of understanding whether  vaccines are associated with an increased  risk of autism.”

According to the August 27th press release issued by Dr. Thompson; he and fellow CDC researchers omitted pertinent data from a 2004 vaccine/autism causation study. It appears that they skewed the data to force a finding of vaccination safety for a larger segment of the population than is reality.

The press release was issued via Dr. Thompson’s legal counsel at Morgan Vercamp LLP. It is titled, “STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. THOMPSON, Ph.D., REGARDING THE 2004 ARTICLE EXAMINING THE POSSIBILITY OF A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN  MMR VACCINE AND AUTISM”[1]

Dr. Thompson claims that the manipulated conclusion based upon unjustifiably omitted data was submitted for a 2004 publication in the medical journal, Pediatrics. The 2004 paper by the CDC co-authors is titled, “Age at First Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccination in Children With Autism and School-matched Control Subjects: A Population-Based Study in Metropolitan Atlanta”[2]

[1] August 27, 2014 Press Release of William W. Thompson http://www.morganverkamp.com/august-27-2014-press-release-statement-of-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-the-2004-article-examining-the-possibility-of-a-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/
[2] DeStefano F1, Bhasin TK, Thompson WW, Yeargin-Allsopp M, Boyle C ‘Age at first measles-mumps-rubella vaccination in children with autism and school-matched control subjects: a population-based study in metropolitan Atlanta.’ Pediatrics. 2004 Feb;113(2):259-66. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14754936

*******

The CDC has a link on their website to the decade old Pediatrics publication with the reported findings being presented and justified as,

“We do not want to lose any opportunity to protect all [emphasis added] of our children when we have the means to do so.”[3]

On the same webpage, the CDC acknowledges that data for children without Georgia birth certificates was omitted from the study.  Not stated, the omitted data also appears to have represented nearly exclusively black males, many of whom had been vaccinated before 36 months of age and had autism. Had these children not been deleted, the statistical conclusion of the study would have warned of the potential for greater risk of vaccine induced cognitive impairment among African-American males.

[3] CDC website tooting Dr. Thompson’s 2004 study. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/Autism/cdc2004pediatrics.html

******

According to a new study published on August 8, 2014, in the scientific journal Translational Neurodegeneration, the data omitted from the 2004 Pediatrics/CDC study indicates that African-American males receiving their first measles, mumps & rubella (MMR) vaccine before the age of 36 months may be 3.4 times more likely to develop autism vs. those vaccinated after 36 months. Percentage wise, this number could be interpreted as a 340% hidden increased risk of causation of vaccine induced autism in black males, by vaccinating them for MMR too early in life.

The 2014 Translational Neurodegeneration study of the 2004 Pediatrics/CDC study is titled, “Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination timing and autism among young african american boys: a reanalysis of CDC data.”[4] It was authored by Brian Hooker, PhD, who is a biochemical engineer and reportedly a parent of a child who became autistic after vaccination.

On August 29th, two days after the CDC’s Dr. Thompson publicly voiced concerns via legal counsel of the validity of his own 2004 study on behalf of the CDC; BioMed Central, who are the publishers of Translational Neurodegeneration, issued an “expression of concern” of Dr. Hooker’s study that had echoed Dr. Thompson’s concerns. BioMed Central claims “the editors have expressed concern about this [Dr. Hooker’s] article” because of alleged undisclosed conflicts of interest of the author and peer reviewers.[5]

[4] Brian Hooker “Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination timing and autism among young african american boys: a reanalysis of CDC data” Transl Neurodegener. 2014 Aug 29; 3: 18.
[5] BioMed Central “expression of concern” of Dr. Hooker’s study. Aug 29, 2014 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4150057/

*******

Conversely, this auithor is not aware of the journal of Pediatrics editors and/or publishers issuing any public statement or retracting the 2004 CDC study even after the paper’s own co-author, Dr. Thompson, has publicly stated the findings and resultant public health advisory are flawed by exclusion of pertinent data.

According to Change.Org, over seven thousand people have petitioned Pediatric’s Editor in Chief, Dr. Lewis First, to promptly retract the 2004 CDC study pending further investigation of the alleged manipulated data.[6]

[6] Change.org petition to Pediatric’s Dr. First https://www.change.org/p/lewis-r-first-editor-in-chief-publicly-issue-a-retraction-of-the-fraudulent-2004-mmr-autism-study

*******

Pediatrics is the journal of the private-sector medical association, the American Academy of Pediatric (AAP).[7] AAP is composed of thousands of physicians who diagnose and treat children primarily throughout the United States. The non-profit organization claims an annual income of approximately $84 million and receives federal funds to disseminate accurate public health and policy advisories to physicians, medical schools, other non-profit medical associations and the general populations.

AAP is reported to have received over $3 million in federal funding since 2000, largely from contracts with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the federal department which oversees the CDC.[8]

AAP play a key role in assisting the DHHS and CDC to establish types of recommended vaccinations and schedules for their administration to United States children, as a matter of public health policy.[9] According to a 2008 CBS news report titled, “How Independent Are Vaccine Defenders”, AAP also receives substantial funding from pharmaceutical manufacturers of the vaccines that AAP, DHHS and the CDC endorse via recommended policies and mandates.[10]

[7] Pediatrics & AAP http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/collection/#aap_policy_collections
[8] Fedspending.Org http://www.fedspending.org/fpds/fpds.php?fiscal_year=ALL&company_name=american+academy+of+pediatrics&sortp=r&datype=T&reptype=r&database=fpds&detail=-1&submit=GO&sum_expand=S
[9] CDC and AAP vaccine schedule recommendations http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/index.html & http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/child/0-18yrs-schedule.pdf
[10] 2008 CBS News “How independent are vaccine defenders?” http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-independent-are-vaccine-defenders/

******

In California as of 2012, parents are mandated to have the AAP/CDC recommended vaccines administered to their children before entering public schools. Under California Assembly Bill 2108, in order to be able to opt out of vaccinating, parents must obtain written permission from a physician – who in many instances would be a pediatrician affiliated with AAP.[11] No longer able to opt out based solely on their own concern of conflicted interests driving flawed vaccination public health policy harmful to many children, or their concern that a particular vaccine(s) may harm their own child(ren); parents must provide the state with a physician’s stated reason for exclusion from the mandated vaccinations.[12]

[11] California AB2106 mandates physicians must give permission for parent to opt out of vaccinations for their children. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120AB2109
[12] Aug 22, 2014 email to CA Governor Jerry Brown’s legislative assistant from Actor Rob Schneider “CDC Autism Whistleblower Admits Vaccine Study Fraud – CNN iReport” http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/rob-schneider-says-he-has-smoking-gun-on-cdc-vaccine-autism-fraud/

*****

The matter of a “CDC Whistleblower of vaccine-autim fraud” first reached mainstream media attention on August 22nd of this year. It was reported by a citizen-journalist on the website CNN IReport.[13]  From there, it spread like wildfire on blogs and websites of both vaccine defenders and those who question vaccines’ and vaccine schedules’ safety. The IReport article and its linked video “CDC Whistleblower revealed” as produced by Autism Media Channel, were quickly removed by CNN who pledged further investigation.

Contradictory to the August 27th press release of CDC’s Dr. Thompson stating,

“I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics”;

CNN has concluded as of August 27th that,

“CDC researchers are standing by their original findings: that there is no link between autism and vaccination schedules.”[14]

Of worthy note, it should also be mentioned that a decade ago when the Pediatrics article in question was first published, Dr. Thompson voiced his concerns to then head of the CDC, Dr. Julie Gerberding. He stated his concerns in writing of the ethical problems of presenting the skewed findings in the MMR vaccine/autism study to the National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine (IOM). In February of 2004, Dr. Thompson wrote to Dr. Gerberding:[15]

I’m sure you are aware of the Institute of Medicine Meeting regarding vaccines and autism that will take place on February 9th. I will be presenting the summary of our results from the Metropolitan Atlanta Case-Control Study and I will have to present several problematic results relating to statistical associations between the receipt of MMR vaccines and autism…..In addition, I have repeatedly told individuals of the NIP OD [National Immunization Program, Office of Directors] over the last several years that they’re doing a very poor job representing immunization safety issues and that we’re losing the public relations war….you are putting one of your own scientists in harm’s way. This is not the time for our leadership to act politically. It is time for the leadership to stand by their scientists and do the right thing…

[13] CNN IReport Aug 22nd http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1164046
[14] CNN website Aug 27th, http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/27/health/irpt-cdc-autism-vaccine-study/index.html
[15] February 2, 2004, Thompson email to Gerberding http://www.naturalnews.com/images/CDC-Gerberding-warning-vaccines-autism.JPG

*********

It is self-evident that problems and suspicions caused by the CDC study authors’ omission of data have been known by CDC leaders for many years. Within those same years; parents, scientists and researchers have been sounding alarms that CDC public health advisories and mandates regarding the safety of vaccines and schedules may be based more on politics than on proven science based medicine and proper research procedures. A quick AOL search of the words “vaccine autism” renders approximately 8,910,000 results on the subject and illuminates the public’s current skepticism of CDC backed public health policies.

As a result of lack of U.S. government oversight either confirming or alleviating the parents’ concerns; parents of U.S. children are caught in the quandary of fearing increased risk for the safety of their own children should they adhere to the questionable CDC vaccination recommendations; or of facing the hardship of no public education for their children and societal accusations of being at fault for the spread of disease via their non-vaccinated offspring.

*****

Vaccine defenders sometimes refer to the distraught parents and their scientific/medical proponents as “hilarious” science denialists.[16] [17] [18] [19] [20] Any parent struggling with the decision to vaccinate their child or not; knows there is nothing even remotely “hilarious” about the vaccine-autism debate and the mixed information fueling it.

“Abe Lincoln” on the Internet[16] I Fucking Love Science Blog (IFLScience) referring to United States concerned parents, physicians and scientists as “hilarious” science denialists, http://www.iflscience.com/tags/vaccines
[17] September 1, 2014 ScienceBlogs stating Dr. Thompson’s attorney contacted the blog and offered the (quickly dismissed) explanation that Dr. Thompson spoke because his conscience was bothering him. http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/09/01/the-cdc-whistleblower-william-w-thompson-one-last-word/
[18] Slate Magazine website referring to the parents as “anti-vaxers” in the article, “No, there is still no connection between vaccines and autism” http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/08/27/anti_vax_cdc_conspiracy_theory_sweeping_the_social_media.html
[20] Snopes.com as of September 1st, “False” to the claim of “The CDC has intentionally suppressed proof of vaccine-related cases of autism in African-American boys from reaching the public.” http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cdcwhistleblower.asp

*****

Adding greatly to parental concerns, it is reported that between the years of 1992 and 2002, the rate of children diagnosed with autism in the United States skyrocketed an alarming 634%.[21] In keeping with the upward statistical trend, today one in fifty U.S. male children and adolescents is diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).[22] During those same years, the number of vaccination shots given to U.S. children before the age of six has increased from merely a handful to well over thirty shots.

[21] http://sfari.org/news-and-opinion/in-brief/2012/clinical-research-rates-of-autism-rise-based-on-birth-year
[22] March 2014 CNN “Autism rates now 1 in 68 U.S. children: CDC” http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/27/health/cdc-autism/

******

To this author’s knowledge, there is little to no scientific research which substantiates that an acceptable number of developing brains can tolerate the combined toxic dosage of the growing number of vaccines being administered within a short window of time and at early ages. Scientifically speaking, it is unscientific (and unethical) to perform monotoxicity risk assessments of one or two dosages, and promote to the public as a matter of policy, that this myopic research establishes general population safety from the potentially devastating synergistic effects of mixtoxicological dosages.

In light of lack of proof establishing otherwise, a growing number of parents, researchers and physicians are concerned that there is a direct correlation between too many/too much vaccinations and subsequent onset ASD contributing to the significant rise in the number of America’s autistic children. For good cause as reported by Dr. Thompson and others, they are concerned that the CDC has lost sight of proper methodology to establish sound public health policy; and are concerned that the CDC is intentionally concealing relevant data under the misguided guise of “for the greater public good”.

As a result of the growing public suspicion of too much politics and monied interests influencing medical associations’, CDC’s, and other governmental entities’ downplaying of reasonably suspected causes of ASD; thousands of parents are choosing not to have their children vaccinated.

For the greater public good, health risk assessments should always consider statistics reflective of the true percentage of the public potentially being harmed by acts meant to protect the public. Needless to say, if statistical errors are to be made, they should be made on the side of caution to prevent future potentially harmful acts.

One in fifty U.S. male youths, or 2%, are now being diagnosed with ASD. This is not an acceptable loss for “the greater public good”; or a point in time for the CDC to be playing fast and loose with statistical data in the promotion of vaccinating all children. Two percent of all male children having ASD qualifies as an epidemic of cognitive impairment in the United States youngest generation.[24]

When scientifically flawed medical journal publications, like the 2004 Pediatrics/CDC MMR/Autism study, are authored by government employees; and private sector “non-profit” physician organizations are involved with federal leaders in propagating the skewed data — public trust may be irreparably shattered until those responsible for flawed public health policy are held accountable.[23]

[23] 2009, Institute of Medicine, “Conflicts of Interest in Medical Research, Education and Practice http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12598
[24] Definition of epidemic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemic

*********

Regardless of who is right or who is wrong as to the need and safety of vaccinating America’s children for the greater good; all agree that impeccable ethics when establishing public health policies is of the utmost importance to protect us all.

In his August 27th press release, Dr. Thompson states, “

I am providing information to Congressman William Posey, and of course will continue to cooperate with Congress.  I have also offered to assist with reanalysis of the study data or development of further  studies….”

Given all of the above, Congressional investigations of the CDC’s and their private-sector medical partners’ methodologies, ethics, and risk analyses when establishing public health policies, logically seems more than warranted.  To this author, prompt Congressional investigations of Dr. Thompson’s claims seem imperative for the future health and safety of the United States and it’s people’s future confidence in the integrity of the CDC.

To view the data to which Dr. Thompson refers that was deleted from the 2004 CDC study and to hear the explanation in Dr. Thompson’s own words of his concern of how fraudulent health marketing [25] [26] was then used to the detriment of the public, please watch the Autism Media Channel’s “CDC Whistleblower revealed”.

[25] CDC Department of Health Marketing http://www.cdc.gov/healthcommunication/toolstemplates/whatishm.html
[26] The Guardian, “Scientific fraud is rife. Its time to stand up for good science” http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2012/nov/02/scientific-fraud-good-science

******

If you agree that this matter deserves prompt Congressional oversight, please contact the Honorable Congressman Bill Posey (R-Fl) and your legislative representatives to tell them so.

For a greater understanding of how industries, medical associations, and universities systematically influence the CDC’s environmental public health policies with the use of public tax dollars, please read “Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics (AOEC): Pediatric Environmental Health Specialty Units by Sharon N. Kramer and (former CDC contractor) JoEllen Perez.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter,

Mrs. Sharon Noonan Kramer

Posted in Health - Medical - Science | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Why does San Diego DA Dumanis have an atypically high 94.7% conviction rate?

Posted on August 13, 2014 by Sharon Kramer

 

Is the oddly high success rate a result of frightening innocent people into pleading guilty to crimes they did not commit?

“Did you know of the more than 16,000 felony charges filed San Diego County in 2011 – there were only 33 which resulted in ‘NOT GUILTY’ verdicts?”

A few days ago, we blogged of an Enicinitas family in need of help from what appears to be continuing malicious prosecution by DA Bonnie Dumanis’s office. She is intending to take a case, the People v. Burleson, to trial for a second time on October 2nd of this year.

To reiterate:

A March 18, 2014 appellate opinion found that in the prior December 2011 trial, the father of the Burleson family, Jeff Burleson, had been wrongfully found guilty of the misdemeanor of brandishing a weapon in a threatening manner.

The misdemeanor conviction was over-turned by the March 2014 appellate opinion.  The trial itself was a result of DA Dumanis attempting to intimidate and coerce Mr. Burleson into perjuring himself and pleading guilty to the felony of assault with a deadly weapon — with an unloaded shotgun.
 
Mr. Burleson is North County real estate broker, husband, and father of three young children.  He refused to make the false plea under threat by Dumanis’ office that if found guilty of the felony in trial, he could have been sentenced to fourteen plus years in prison.
 
According to a 2013 San Diego Reader article, it came to light in the 2011 trial that the Complainant, a process server for the Burleson’s homeowner association, most likely embellished his complaint against Mr. Burleson. This is a fact that remains in evidence to which Dumanis’ office has had access for nearly three years. Yet, she continues to prosecute.
 
The Reader article states,
 
…defense attorney Gerald Smith’s retrospective on the trial. “The reason why we went to trial in the first place,” he says, “was that the DA had not offered a whole lot of negotiation. They wanted Jeff to plead to a charge that would have had a serious impact on his life.”
What did Smith think most convinced the jury not to convict his client of assault with a deadly weapon? Since there were no third-party eyewitnesses to the alleged crime, the verdict had to be based largely on which version of events came off as most credible.
 
“Here was the major credibility issue,” Smith says. “Gruytch [the process server] had already said he was very familiar with shotguns, that in fact he owned one. So I asked him, ‘What happened when, as you allege, Jeff pointed the shotgun at you?’ His reply was that he’d stepped forward. So I asked, ‘You’ve got a shotgun pointing at you and you step forward?’ When I was giving the closing argument and brought that up, that’s when most of the jury nodded their heads and rolled their eyes. It was a telltale sign.
 
After we blogged of the matter on Katy’s Exposure, Encinitas family needs help. DA Dumanis practicing politics for cronies again!,  Mr. Burleson added this comment to the blog on August 11th:
 
Thank you very much for your encouraging words of support Mrs. Sharon Noonan Kramer.
‘We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose ANY foe in order to ensure the survival and success of liberty.’ – John F. Kennedy, January 20, 1961
 
On March 29, 2011, I was falsely accused of committing a violent felony simply because I protected the lady in this photograph (my beautiful wife and three young children). Facing 14.5 years in prison, I would not plead to a crime I didn’t commit. I took the matter to trial and was acquitted of the felony accusation but was convicted of a misdemeanor due to a minor technical mistake.
 
Multiple jurors told my attorney I’d done nothing wrong, that I was simply protecting my family but because they weren’t given an opportunity to consider ‘self-defense’ or ‘defense of others’ they simply had no choice but to convict.
 
As a professional with three licenses which could be subject to revocation and/or denial as a result of a misdemeanor conviction, this case affected me greatly BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, it was a great miscarriage of justice; I didn’t commit any crime to begin with.
 
To appeal, I hired a former deputy District Attorney [Richard Huffman Jr., son of Appellate Justice and former chair of the Executive Committee of the California Judicial Council, Richard Huffman Sr.] who told me I had an excellent case for self-defense and that he himself was even better positioned to make it because he knew the District Attorney personally.
 
That should have been a warning to tread carefully. Unbeknownst to me he had been fired from the San Diego DA’s Office AFTER his THIRD DUI.
 
He’d LITERALLY been prosecuting DUI’s in the San Diego County District Attorney’s Office WHILE collecting them himself on his motorcycle (replete with James Bond themed license plates.)
 
This former deputy DA did nothing whatsoever to protect my legal rights and as a result was later humiliated by the California State Bar Association when he was castigated for leaving me alone to fend for myself – serving nearly three months in custody simply because he failed to file a simple one page ‘Notice of Appeal’ form.
 
Fearing the worst and facing a trial in California State Bar Court, He ADMITTED abandoning me in custody AND failing to communicate that he’d dropped me as a client before it was too late. He also admitted failing to return my file.
 
Why didn’t he file the form? (He blamed a number of personal ‘issues’ INCLUDING the stress and anxiety he suffered from organizing his James Bond themed wedding in Rancho Santa Fe.)
 
After nearly three years (including nearly three months in custody) and incurring more than $340,000 in expenses, the California Fourth District Court of Appeal o March 18, 2014 REVERSED my misdemeanor criminal conviction, noting in fact I had independent, corroborating evidence proving my self-defense claims and that I should have been able to make my case to the jury.
 
The fact I was denied the chance to do so was a fundamental denial of my right to due process of law.
 
Because I was VINDICATED by the California Fourth District Court of Appeal, the deputy District Attorney I hired now faces an even greater potential sanction (including possible disbarment) AS WELL AS a massive legal malpractice suit for his failure to perform, once this case is resolved in my favor. Furthermore, the San Diego District Attorney’s Office faces even greater scrutiny and embarrassment for how my case was mismanaged from the beginning.
What would you do if you were in their position? Would you admit you were wrong? Or would you go for broke?
 
Twice vindicated by verdict (first on the felony by the trial court, the second time by the Fourth District Court of Appeal), instead of simply acknowledging the mistakes that were made graciously and magnanimously, the San Diego District Attorney’s Office is instead pulling out all the stops to convict me – AGAIN.
 
Why? Because doing so enables the San Diego District Attorney’s office to save face BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY shields their former colleague from further scrutiny and embarrassment AS WELL AS CIVIL LIABILITY.
 
This isn’t about public safety, its about politics, plain and simple. Its also a message to those who dared to speak up against the status quo in San Diego politics – the four term district attorney is paying VERY CLOSE ATTENTION to who her friends are – AND who they are NOT.
 
And because I openly supported her challenger, Bob Brewer in the last election I am most certainly not going to be getting a holiday greeting card from the San Diego District Attorneys The Official Grumpy Cate, that’s for sure.
 
My family and I appreciate ALL of the support we have received thus-far and continue to receive both publicly from private citizens, public officials and those who hold elected office across our country and around the world.
 
For a public official to capriciously use her prosecutorial power again and again against a husband and father who was simply standing fast in defense of his family is wrong.
For that public official to do so as a transparent act of political retribution is beyond the pale of decency in American life; it is highly unethical, illegal and actionable at law.
 
Did you know of the more than 16,000 felony charges filed San Diego County in 2011 – there were only 33 which resulted in ‘NOT GUILTY’ verdicts?
 
My next trial starts on October 2, 2014; nearly three years AFTER my first trial resulted in my acquittal on the felony accusation.
 
My public defender last week told me ‘I can’t imagine you being sentenced to more jail time after you’ve already served the original sentence but after what you’ve been through, you never know!’
 
Let’s just say THAT was far from reassuring.
Please like, share and help by visiting our blog at: http://www.gofundme.com/theburlesonfamily
 
Katy’s Exposure Blog is about exposing environmental health threats and those responsible.  What the Burleson matter has to do with that subject is this:
 
Much evidence indicates that Bonnie Dumanis serves as a “political prostitute” and guard dog for those who abuse their government positions in San Diego county. She appears to have a propensity to use the DA’s office as a means of CYA of their blunders.
 
In merely the latest example of this, she has wasted the taxpayers dollars by relentlessly harassing the Burleson family for a crime that obviously was not committed — while covering up for crimes that obviously were committed. (complainant perjury of lying to a jury to attempt to obtain a false conviction consistent with the conviction Dumanis wanted, is a crime).

 

Simultaneously, Dumanis has repeatedlyy refused to prosecute local jurists, including Richard Huffman Sr., who falsified numerous court documents in a SLAPP suit (2005 to 2013) over a matter impacting public health, nationwide. As Dumanis knows, some of the documents were falsified while knowing their courts had no subject matter jurisdiction. Under the law, court officers who falsify court documents without subject matter jurisdiction have no immunity from prosecution for the felonies.

 

Dumanis has also repeatedly refused to prosecute the local sheriff (also involved in the Burleson case), who falsified FBI records in the SLAPP matter while covering up for the jurists’ collusively criminal acts of falsifying court documents. This, while knowingly aiding a scientific fraud of epic proportion to remain viable in courtrooms all across the United States to the detriment of the American public.
 
VIDEO interview I gave with Walter Davis in 2013.
VIDEO before the San Diego County Board of Supervisors, January 2014.
 
Mr. Burleson is not the first person in this county who DA Dumanis has attempted (sometimes successfully) to bully into falsely pleading guilty to a felony to the benefit of her friends in the local legal system. In the same vein of corruption, she refuses to prosecute her friends who are proven to have committed felony document falsifications, which harms people all across the U.S.
 
I have no intention of being silent until San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis is held accountable for abusing the District Attorney’s office to practice politics, not law, on behalf of her cronies and her own political career.  Too many lives remain at stake to allow her to play fast and loose with the district attorney’s office, under the color of law.
 
The Burleson family needs your help, now, to take a bite out of the perverse problem in the San Diego County “legal system”. 
 
Please CONTACT your county, state and federal legislators to voice your outrage of this continuing harassment of the Burlesons by District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis.
 
Mrs. Sharon Noonan Kramer
Posted in Civil Justice, Environmental Health Threats, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Toxic Mold | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment