Latest from ABC 10News ~ Keehn Schall race illustrates moral decay in local courts UPDATED

Posted on May 13, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
by Sharon Noonan Kramer, advocate for integrity in health marketing and U.S. courts. 
Aren’t judges suppose to be people who are of high moral standard with an innate sense of right and wrong?  Apparently, that does not apply in San Diego, California.
In the race for San Diego Superior Court Seat 20, federal prosecutor and candidate Carla Keehn has been sadly privy to view, first hand, what many people in the county have said for a long time: There are systemic ethics problems among the local jurists.  Politics, not law, rules what occurs in their courts.
According to today’s KPBS broadcast, Keehn is quoted as saying,
“It appears that my ability to make political speeches is seriously being interfered with,” “I think it’s now apparent about what happens to people who try to stand up and hold judges accountable — that that’s not something that’s permitted in the San Diego community” “I received phone calls from individuals, from political leaders telling me that if I did not drop out of this race that there would be serious repercussions on my career and also possibly on my family,” The broadcast states that Keehn said she chose to challenge Schall to stand up for what’s right….“I’ve done that my whole life, and I think it’s really important that if one person doesn’t stand up and hold judges to the highest standards and hold judges accountable, that it sends a really sad message,” “I have three kids in school and the big message for 2014 is ‘no bullying.’ And you just have to say no to that.”
KPBS calls to Schall were not returned. Clear Channel hung up when KPBS called to inquire about the billboards. Not only were Keehn’s campaign billboards removed by pressure on the sign company coming from unknown powers that be; now Clear Channel is claiming that Keehn owes them for one week’s advertising and must pay for the ads’ removals.  The billboards, edited for content by Clear Channel before they were erected, were only up two days. They were taken down by directive of someone(s) who apparently wants to see Judge Lisa Schall remain in office by hook or by crook.
See the latest from ABC Channel 10News, May 12th, HERE.
Could it be that Clear Channel is trying to help hamstring Ms. Keehn’s campaign by tying up her needed campaign funds so they cannot be put to good advertising use somewhere else?  This is not the first time attempts have been made to collusively hamstring Ms. Keehn’s campaign. The local judges have been unethically tampering with this election since at least February of this year — with no repercussions.
Again, who would have enough clout to pressure the large corporation of Clear Channel to do this, and for what purpose do these powerful people wish to see Judge Lisa Schall remain in judicial office? 
Clear Channel, who edited the ads prior to placement, provided this response to San Diego Free Press this morning as to why they removed the billboard ads that they had helped to design, including the text content:
“Unfortunately our protocol for political ads was not followed and we took the ad down. We have offered the client a variety of resolutions, including the fullest refund allowable under the laws governing political contributions.”
Their response does not ring as honest nor forthright. Prior to this statement, the Clear Channel rep informed Keehn that they were “pressured” to remove the billboards.  As professional advertisers who accepted $14,000 from Keehn, seems Clear Channel would have thought about their protocols regarding content that they were assisting to write, before they cashed Ms. Keehn’s check.  This would have been a good idea before reducing her campaign coffers to limit her ability to advertise; and while doing more harm than good to Keehn’s already relentlessly politically attacked campaign via the compromised local jurists — or as I sometimes refer to them “the Bench Bullies”.
Add to this, Judge Schall’s campaign website is down for the third day in a row.  One could only hope that this is because her endorser page is once again in downward revision of the number of people who wish to no longer be associated with the embarrassing San Diego jurists, who clearly think they are above the law.
~~~~~~~~~~~
UPDATE: As of May 15th Schall’s website is back up.  It still states she is endorsed by “all 125 San Diego judges” and the “Alliance for California Judges“, which is an organization that professes to be comprised of 500 judges, statewide.  What it should say is that she is endorsed by judges who are advocating that their appointments to the bench be for life, no matter how bad of job they do. 
The appointed judges are not happy that Keehn offers the public an opportunity to vote one of their appointed peers out of office.  It would appear that they are attempting to make an example of Keehn so that no one thinks about challenging any of them when their terms come up for “voter re-election”.   Oddly, the appointed judges picked a race to take their bullying stand which helps to illustrate exactly why the public needs to be protected from bad judges by the ability to vote them out of office.
Keehn is a cum laude graduate of Princeton University and of the University of California, Hastings College of Law. She is an adjunct law professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law with an impressive track record as her legal career.  Conversely, according to the San Diego Union Tribune, Schall has one of the worst judicial track records in the entire State of California and its somewhat of a mystery as to why she is still on the bench; as the UT endorsed Schall over Keehn for Seat 20. (Huh?)

~~~~~~~~~

As a San Diego County resident and relentlessly harassed medical journal published author regarding politics trumping science in the United States; I can tell you from personal experience that San Diego County District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis and her campaign endorser/contributor, Sheriff William Gore, play an inticate role in shielding the local jurists’ unbridled politics and cronyism under the color of law — also involving Judge Lisa Schall.
For a greater understanding of just how systemically compromised the San Diego courts really are, see our March 2nd blog, “What’s the difference between a Governor Brown appointed San Diego judge and a Koch brother?“
“It is no secret that many civil and legal rights have been weakened for America’s middle class in the past fifteen years by the ever-increasing influences of special interests in politics and policy.  That judges, who portray themselves as champions of the law and Constitutional rights would act no better than big industry to curtail voters’ right of choice on behalf of the judges’ personal special interest group — The Sitting Judges Club — is indicative of a two class system of which courts of law have become intricately involved to the personal benefit of elected and appointed government officials.” 
Or take the time to read the California Coalition for Families and Children’s federal COMPLAINT against the local jurists and politicos, including Judge Lisa Schall, for racketeering.  Its a real eye opener of just how far down the rabbit hatch the San Diego “legal” system has been allowed to travel. I have no involvment with this litigation.
Sharon Kramer
 
 
 
Posted in Civil Justice, Environmental Health Threats, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Health - Medical - Science, Politics, Toxic Mold, US Chamber of Commerce | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Union Trib ~ Judge Lisa Schall ~ No jurist in state has a less favorable record

Posted on May 12, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
Huh?  Yesterday, the San Diego Union Tribune endorsed Judge Lisa Schall for re-election over jurist candidate and federal prosecutor, Carla Keehn. 
 
Today the UT writes of Schall, ” Judge has been admonished three times. No jurist in the state has a less favorable record.” Makes one question who is approving the UT election endorsements.
 
See our blog on the subject from earlier today: ABC NEWS ~ Clear Channel pulls local jurist candidate’s ad.
 
“The U-T editorial board believes her overall solid record of 29 years on the bench trumps those controversies. We endorse Judge Schall for re-election.’ Is that a Union Tribune typo?  Did they mean to say, Schall’s ‘overall SOILED record of 29 years on the bench’?”
Posted in Civil Justice, Environmental Health Threats, Health - Medical - Science, Toxic Mold, US Chamber of Commerce | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

ABC 10 News ~ Clear Channel pulls local jurist candidate’s ad.

Posted on May 12, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
On Friday, May 9th, ABC Channel 10 News ran a story regarding “pressure” being put on an advertizing company of national stature, Clear Channel, to remove their billboards that were paid for by a candidate to office as a San Diego County Superior Court judge, Carla Keehn.  Clear Channel had approved the ad content prior to the billboards being erected.
One can watch the ABC 10 Newscast HERE regarding the censorship of unknown origin.  
No one seems to be talking about WHO put pressure on WHOM to cause the removal of the campaign billboards, which accurately state that Keehn’s opponent, Judge Lisa Schall, has a criminal conviction in her past.  This is widely known and has been reported over and over again in the San Diego media since 2008. Schall was convicted for drunk driving and has multiple public amonishments from the California Commission on Judicial Performance for ethics violations when serving as a judge. 
So why can everyone else publicly write of this without censorship, except Schall’s challenger for her jurist seat, Carla Keehn? Who is controlling the censorship of Judicial Candidate Keehn?
We’ve been following this race closely and blogging about it a lot. We have a pony in the race.  When serving as a trial judge, Schall falsified materical court documents in 2008.  The local jurists covered up her fraud upon the court and continued to use the void legal documents without jurisdiction, as they falsified more. This includes as the sole foundational document to a second harassing case from 2010 to present.  The second case was meant to scare us into silence of the criminal acts in the first, causing a major public fleecing to continue, nationwide. (didn’t work)
The Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP) won’t admonish any of the colluding judges and justices involved, including their former chairwoman Justice Judith McConnell; and the county DA, Bonnie Dumanis, will not prosecute the local jurists for conspiring to defraud while knowing their courts had no subject matter jurisdiction.  By law, no jurisdiction = no judical immunity from prosecution (except if Dumanis is the county DA).
Schall falsified the 2008 judgment in a fixed SLAPP suit to the benefit of federal contractors, Veritox, Inc.,  and their clients.  A sick joke, Veritox literally means “truth poison”. Veritas for truth. Toxicus for poison. They are expert toxic tort defense witnesses for the U.S. Department of Justice.  The corporation was formerly known as GlobalTox, Inc..  In 2003, two of the corporation’s owners, Bruce Kelman and Bryan Hardin, were bribed by a think-tank to publish false science for the the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. 
Hardin retired as a US Assistant Surgeon General and Deputy Director of CDC NIOSH in 2000.  The two men forged the name of a UCLA physician, Andrew Saxon, on the Chamber paper to make it look like legit science to the courts.  The UC Regents are aware of the UC name being used to mislead courts to the benefit of US Chamber affiliates.  So are both U.S. California Senators and the U.S. Senate members of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pension Committee (HELP) – all of them. So is Governor Brown.
Veritox has been enabled to continue to fleece the public with scientific fraud in courts all over the country — directly because they have been aided to get away with criminal acts as plaintiffs in SLAPP in San Diego county via falsified court documents of Schall and the conspiring jurists. 
If it ever gets to REAL public light that all local jurists used Schall’s falsified court docs since 2008 to conceal fraud upon the court in SLAPP to aid the defrauding of the public nationwide; Congressmen’s, Senators’, public officials’, “non-profit” partners of government, and jurists’ heads would roll from California to Washington DC.  After nine years of SLAPP, its BILLIONS of dollars of fraud that they have either hands on abetted — or just can’t seem to grasp that fraud upon the court in SLAPP is criminal — while their constituents are being fleeced.
In other words, if you are a living, breathing person anywhere in the U.S., you have a pony in this San Diego jurist race, too.  “Pressure” was just used on a huge national billboard company to remove the evidence from the voting public’s view that a little county judge, Lisa Schall, is an unethical person and judge. 
Who has the clout for that kind of pressure on a national advertiser and why would they care about this county judicial race?
We blogged about the billboard debacle yesterday, “Judicial Candidate Rule # 2 ~ Thou Shalt Not Expose A Sitting Judge’s Crime” (I always say “we” because I don’t own this blog. )
The day before, we blogged about San Diego DA Bonnie Dumanis, covering up for the local criminals in the local courts, as she herself runs for re-election,  DA Dumanis and the Soiled White Coats, White Collars & Black Robes“
Today a real journalist, Doug Porter from San Diego Free Press, uncovered much more about the billboard take down scandal.  (We’re not journalists. We’re just damn good and relentless harassed whistleblowers because we won’t shut up about the massive fraud in the San Diego County courts aiding the public fleecing to continue, nationwide.)
In today’s article titled, “Clear Channel Responds to Political Pressure, Quashes Billboard Ads for Judicial Candidate“, Mr. Porter writes:
The candidate [Keehn] says the company [Clear Channel]  “received pressure to take the billboards down and they would not tell me from whom the pressure came.” This action is consistent with earlier assertions made by Keehn about surreptitious efforts by incumbent Judge Lisa Schall and/or her supporters to deny or withdraw endorsements for the challenger.  
That was stated too nicely.  Schall’s fellow judges threatened Keehn’s endorsers of retaliation by local judges if they did not unendorse Keehn.  See March 14th Complaint to Presiding Judge David Danielson – who is endorsing Schall’s re-election as one of the “all 125 San Diego Superior Court judges“.  Continuing on with Mr. Porter’s excellent writing:
The outdoor advertising panels were reserved five months ago by Keehn’s campaign. Payment was made and artwork for the billboards was delivered in April.  The billboards went up at four locations on Wednesday, May 7th. They were removed Friday, May 9th.
Clear Channel account executive Erin Brophy approved the ad copy, even going so far as to suggest a change:
—–Original Message—–
From: Brophy, Erin
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 5:00 PM
To:
Subject: RE: Final Keehn Billboard Art
I think that for the Freeway boards this is too wordy, you are not going to be able to read this when you are driving by at 60 miles an hour. I think that you should maybe just leave it at THE ONLY CANDIDATE NOT CONVICTED OF A CRIME. For the freeway board and drop the rest of the words on the right side of the board.
Ah HA!  The plot thinkens.  Clear Channel actually edited it!  Continuing on with quotes from Mr. Porter’s article:
Clear Channel Feels the Pressure
First thing Friday morning the Keehn campaign received an email from Clear Channel with photos of the board and the message: “Photos for you! These look good :) ”
Just a couple of hours later the “looks good :)” message changed to “We have a problem.”
According to a Keehn campaign volunteer “We got a call saying that the billboards had to come down as Clear Channel was receiving “pressure.”
Initially Clear Channel indicated the boards “would probably stay up for the weekend so you will get the weekend exposure.”
Later in the day the message changed again. “We were told they were coming down ASAP.”
And by 3pm Friday they were down.
Keehn told 10News that the outdoor advertising company refused to tell the her any details about the “pressure.”…
There has been no mention of the Clear Channel billboard takedown anywhere else in the San Diego news media as of this morning.
The story definitely wasn’t covered at UT-San Diego, which endorsed the incumbent [Schall] today.
The only real decision for voters is in Office 20. Incumbent Judge Lisa Schall is a former prosecutor who has been on the bench since her appointment by Gov. George Deukmejian in 1985. She received the Bar’s highest rating of “well qualified,” and she has the endorsement of virtually all other judges on the bench, numerous retired judges, Goldsmith, Coker and a variety of professional organizations. But she has been admonished three times by the state Commission on Judicial Performance, including once for her guilty plea in 2008 to alcohol-related reckless driving. Her opponent is Carla Keehn, a former Army captain and an assistant U.S. attorney for the past 18 years who was rated as “qualified” by the Bar. The admonishments Schall received are a legitimate issue for voters to consider. The U-T editorial board believes her overall solid record of 29 years on the bench trumps those controversies. We endorse Judge Schall for re-election.
Is that a Union Tribune typo?  Did they mean to say, Schall’s “overall SOILED record of 29 years on the bench”? Continuing on:
I have to wonder if her 29 years on the bench trumps any need for their reporters to dig into the efforts of the legal and judicial establishment to protect their own from those pesky voters. If you follow this stuff even semi-closely a pattern emerges.
From District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis (whose endorsement of Schall “disappeared” from her campaign website in March) to City Attorney Jan Goldsmith to the judicial establishment of the Superior Courts here in San Diego, it appears to as though the black robed wall of silence functions most effectively.
I reached out to the Clear Channel national office this morning as I was writing this story and was assured by communications Vice President David Grabert their Southern California team would follow up with a response. If and when that happens I’ll update this story. (The 10News story said Clear Channel failed to respond for their broadcast.)”
Looks to us that the real thing needing to be taken down in San Diego County, is the tightly woven network comprised of compromised politicians and jurists; many of whom are now running for re-election under the guise of  “public servants”.  And we (I) keehnly speak from the voice of experience.
Mrs. Sharon Noonan Kramer, advocate for integrity in health marketing and the courts.

 

 

Posted in Civil Justice, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Health - Medical - Science, Politics, Toxic Mold, US Chamber of Commerce | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Judicial Candidate Rule # 2 ~ Thou Shalt Not Expose A Sitting Judge’s Crime

Posted on May 11, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
 by Sharon Noonan Kramer, advocate for integrity in health marketing and the courts.

Channel 10 News

We’ve been reporting on the race for San Diego County Superior Court Seat 20 for the past ninety days. The race is between incumbent Judge Lisa Schall (formerly known as Lisa Guy-Schall) and federal prosecutor, Carla Keehn. While judicial races are usually real sleepers, this race has gained much media attention throughout the state because of collaborative unethical acts of the local San Diego judges.* 
*March 6, 2014 Cal Court Monitor “Judicial Intimidation On Display in San Diego” 
Lisa Schall has been on the bench for nearly thirty years and has a current annual salary of $181,292. This is the first time that anyone has challenged her government employment as a judge; and thus is the first time that she has not been automatically “re-elected” to public office by default. 
A long and lack-luster career, Schall has two (one & two) public admonishments from the Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP) for Canons of Judicial Ethics violations; a private CJP admonishment to protect the identity of the sexually abused child involved; a prosecution for drunk driving down the wrong way of a main thoroughfare; numerous reversals on appeal for her not understanding (or not caring about) the law; and countless complaints filed against her beginning in 1986 for which she has never been admonished.
 In 1986, one year after she was first appointed to judgeship by Governor Deukmejian, a complaint was lodged against Schall for unethical campaigning. To quote from September 28, 1986 the Los Angeles Times article “Judge’s Credibility Lacking”:
“As a judge of the San Diego Municipal Court, Lisa Guy-Schall from time to time is called upon to consider the credibility of witnesses. We can’t help wondering how she would react to a witness who told the same kind of story she told last week when she was accused of violating the Code of Judicial Conduct….It’s hard to imagine a judge being quite so naive. We suspect–and hope–that were this a case in Municipal Court, Judge Guy-Schall would find witness Guy-Schall lacking credibility.”
Die hard old habits die hard, fast forward to 2014.
January 2014:
Judge Schall is named in an amended complaint, along with several of her jurist peers and San Diego County, State of California government officials, as co-defendants in a federal racketeering suit. The suit was brought by the California Coalition of Families and Children. Rather than admitting error or defending against the accusations of criminal acts on the merits of the case; the co-defendant jurists attempted to intimidate the families into dropping the suit by unsuccessfully attempting to have them sanctioned $10,000.00 for filing it. 
February 2014:
Judge Schall’s jurist peers attempted to intimidate Candidate Keehn to drop from the race against Schall. They threatened Keehn’s endorsers that the San Diego Superior Court judges would retaliate against those who endorsed Keehn. The jurists (a.k.a. those who protect the law and people from bad guys (?)) successfully coerced and intimidated the Tom Homann LGBT Law Association (THLA) to concoct a nonsensical reason to rescind their prior valid endorsement of Keehn. (See Judicial Candidate Rule # 1, Thou Shalt Not Challenge A Sitting Judge for greater detail) To quote from the email that Ms. Keehn received from THLA President, Nicholas Fox, on February 10th:
As you know, both Judge Rubin and Judge Rosenstein have expressed a concern coming from their colleagues on the Superior Court regarding your running against a sitting judge….Our good relationship with the bench is something we have worked hard to establish, and something we cherish and need to protect….Although all judges are individuals and subject to electoral challenge, they also collectively form part of the greater “Superior Court.” There is a great deal of collegiality among judges, and having a Board member of an organization that the judges strongly support directly challenge one of their own colleagues has raised concern…Because of the concerns coming from various sectors in the legal community, we ask that you consider resigning from the Board during the pendency of the election. This will protect THLA by not having a current Board member directly challenge a sitting judge..
 March 2014:
Judge Schall sent an eblast while fundraising. She asked that it be forwarded to others and offered to answer questions. We compiled voter questions and emailed and snail mailed them to her. We are still waiting on the answers or even a courtesy email stating why she will not answer them, after she put into writing that she would. With no response received nearly two months later, we can only assume her offer was a campaign lie while soliciting funds for re-election. Two of the twenty some questions:
21. As a judicial officer of the court, is it your standard practice that when a juror’s
declaration is submitted to you stating that prejudicial [and false] hearsay documents not discussed
in a trial somehow entered your court’s jury room, were read aloud by a juror, and
influenced the verdict; that you refuse to even hear oral arguments for a new trial?
22. As a judicial officer of the court, is it your standard practice that when direct
evidence of a litigant’s material perjury is provided to you, for you to “not be drawn into
that kind of petty behavior” of making the litigant’s attorney explain himself regarding
his client’s perjury and his repeated suborning/benefiting from it in your court?
 Also in March, Judge Schall changed her endorsement page. Originally San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, who is also running for re-election, was named as Schall’s No. 1 Endorser. Around mid-March, Dumanis’ name was mysteriously removed from Schall’s website. (What’s that all about? We think we might to know). 
April 2014:
Schall and the judicial thugs, seemed to have gotten the message that was sent to San Diego Superior Court Presiding Judge David Danielson in March. Danielson is among the “all 125 San Diego Superior Court Judges” who Schall claims on her ballot statement and website endorse her re-election. The message was that his subordinate jurists cannot conspire to defraud the voters by attempting to fix a public election to only have one candidate, Schall. To quote from the March 14th Complaint:
        As I understand it, ROSENSTEIN is scheduled to speak before the San Diego Democratic Party again on March 18, 2014. Her purpose is to dissuade the organization from endorsing a Democrat candidate for election to judicial office, Carla Keehn, who is running against appointed sitting judge, SCHALL. Please tell ROSENSTEIN to cease the unethical campaigning while abusing voters’ rights, candidate’s rights, and the prestigious title bestowed upon her by appointment –“judge”.
Although no receipt of the Complaint was issued from Presiding Judge Danielson in violation of Rules of the Court, Rule 10.703(f)(3)**; the conspiring sitting judges stopped making appearances at semi-public meetings to coerce and intimidate Keehn’s endorsers to not endorse her. THLA excluded, organizations which were on the fence after being bullied and cajoled by the sitting judges, ultimately endorsed Keehn.  
**California Rules of the Court, Rule 10.703(f)(3) “The presiding judge must give written notice of receipt of the complaint to the complainant.”
And then came May:
The local jurists seem unable to contain themselves from violating Candidate Keehn’s and the voters’ rights to a free and informed election. Instead of spending time polishing up on their knowledge of Constitutional law, the local jurists put Judicial Candidate Rule # 2, “Thou Shalt Not Expose A Sitting Judge’s Crime“, into play.
On May 8th, in an effort to inform the voting public that there are some serious and long-term ethics problems for Judge Schall (and obviously other local jurists); Carla Keehn placed four billboards around the city. The billboards accurately stated that Keehn is the only candidate for office 20 who does not have a criminal record — referring to Schall’s drunk driving debacle.

 Keehn billboards

Billboards can only hold so many words. Not on the billboard, but most relevant about Schall’s 2007 DUI, pled down Wet Reckless conviction, is that it is just one of countless ethics breaches and abuses of office; and the voting public has the right to know of them, including the one found to be criminal — so far.
Apparently Schall and the powers that be, do not believe that the voting public has the right to know of Schall’s past indiscretions when voting on whether or not she should be allowed to reap more fraud upon the court. Just two days after Keehn’s billboards went up with the approval of content by the billboard advertiser, Clear Channel, they came back down.
According to Channel 10 News on May 10th, Clear Channel informed Keehn that they, the nation’s largest billboard advertiser, received “pressure” to take the billboards down; and that Judge Schall was unable to be reached for 10 News interview to answer questions on the matter. (Are you seeing a pattern here when Schall has tough questions to answer?)

Channel 10 News

The situation begs the following very serious questions:
1.   What laws and Canon of Judicial Ethics permit the pressuring of advertisers to remove truth from voter view when a public election for a judicial seat is at stake?
2.   It is highly unlikely that one little county judge, Lisa Schall, could by herself, pressure an advertiser of Clear Channel’s stature to remove the little judge’s challenger’s billboards. WHO pressured Clear Channel to remove Keehn’s truthful billboards and in what form did that pressure come? 
We have a suggestion for a new billboard for Judicial Candidate Carla Keehn:

VOTE-page0001

And we have one more question.  Judge Lisa Schall’s campaign motto is:
“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere“. 
Is that suppose to be an inside joke?

 

Posted in Environmental Health Threats, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Health - Medical - Science, US Chamber of Commerce | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

DA Dumanis and the Soiled White Coats, White Collars & Black Robes

Posted on May 8, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
by Sharon Noonan Kramer, advocate for integrity in health marketing and U.S. courts
San Diego County District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis has been catching a lot of justifiable heat lately for her propensity to practice politics over upholding the law. On May 7, 2014, the San Diego Union Tribune published an article titled, “Dumanis accused of unreported meals, DA has prosecuted others for similar alleged omissions” The article states that:
 “The second [complaint] claims Dumanis wrongly failed to report a 2012 trip to Washington D.C. sponsored by the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce. ‘Photographic evidence shows that Bonnie Dumanis was on this trip and dined at various breakfasts, luncheons and dinners,” Walker alleged. ‘There is no public record that Bonnie Dumanis paid for these meals or other aspects of the trip….In terms of the chamber’s Washington trip, Dumanis was not the only local elected official not to report it on state disclosure forms. County Supervisor Ron Roberts, San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer and Councilman Todd Gloria were among those who did not include the event on their filings.”
Also on May 7th, San Diego Free Press published an article titled, “San Diego Goddam! The June 3rd Election And Why You Should Care”  The article discusses Dumanis’s use of the DA office (and your tax dollars) to hold others to a higher legal standard than she holds herself and her local politico friends. To quote from the Free Press article:
 “The Really Serious Stuff is all local this time around. Today I’ll touch on three of those contests: District Attorney, the race for Superior Court Judge, seat 20….What we’re looking at here are fifty or so free meals with a total value of $4583, according to the story. The on-line version of the UT also has a handy-dandy photo gallery of Dumanis at some of these events, including:…September, 2012 (Registration + Dinner) Chamber of Commerce DC Lobbying Trip….Politics, not the law, is what rules the roost in the County District Attorneys office these days….
Voice of San Diego recently examined what’s coming up with the judicial set for the June election and found plenty of reasons why you should care…..Carla Keehn is the former prosecutor who has stepped up to challenge San Diego Superior Court Judge Lisa Schall…Challenging a sitting judge is a big no-no in local politics. They’ve been some serious double dealing backroom type deals made and then (sometimes) unmade as local politicos have attempted to enforce the ‘Thou Shall Not Challenge a Sitting Judge’ rule.”….The incumbent [Judge Lisa Schall] was endorsed by DA Bonnie Dumanis (an endorsement since removed from her website)…
Why did DA Dumanis endorse, then unendorsed Judge Lisa Schall? And what does that have to do with Dumanis not disclosing her Chamber of Commerce affiliated (and funded?) lobbying trip to DC in 2012?
We happen to know first hand that DA Dumanis is covering up one of the biggest frauds ever played on the American public involving Schall and the US Chamber. Dumanis refuses to prosecute Schall and other local jurists for falsifying court documents and concealing plaintiff perjury, in nine years worth of Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPP) on behalf of the financial interests of affiliates of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.  We think that maybe she unendorsed Schall in March, when our little blog started getting a lot more local hits and news outlets started writing of some of the unethical behavior we’ve helped to uncover. (like the Schall/Dumanis endorsement/unendorsement)
We will state it directly:  It would strongly appear to us that DA Dumanis is political prostitute extraordinaire on behalf of soiled white collars, white coats and black robes – and we can PROVE it!  Here’s how:
In 2003, the Manhattan Institute Center for Legal Policy paid toxicologists, Bruce Kelman and Bryan Hardin of Veritox, Inc., no less than $25,000 to author scientific fraud on behalf of the affiliates of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform. “A Scientific View of the Health Effects of Mold” claims it was scientifically proven by Kelman, Hardin, and Correen Robbins of Veritox along with Dr. Andrew Saxon of UCLA that:
“Thus the notion toxic mold is an insidious secret killer…is junk science unsupported by actual scientific study.”
The above is bunk. It is well established microbial toxins can do serious harm to human health and sometimes even kill.  That’s why they weaponize the stuff for biological warfare; and why so many people can’t tolerate moldy buildings.
In addition to being bribed to pen scientific fraud for the Chamber; Kelman and Hardin forged the name of Andrew Saxon, MD UCLA as their co-author of the paid for hire Chamber publication.  Thus Kelman, Hardin, the Manhattan Institute and US Chamber forged the imprimatur of the University of California on the medico-legal policy paper. This was for the purpose of lending undue credibility to their scientific fraud in the eyes of the courts.
The UC Regents are Well Aware  of how the UC name has been misused in US courts on behalf of Chamber affiliates via the UC name being forged on the Kelman and Hardin paid for hire Chamber deceit. It’s an intricately woven cost shifting scheme involving many “non-profit” organizations  to make tax-payers pick up the tab for the cost of environmental injury and death of workers and all citizens.  Its sole purpose is to save money for US Chamber affiliates (aka Bonnie’s traveling buddies) who have caused environmental injuries/deaths. 
But what does the above US Chamber and their cohorts’ forgery, bribery, scientific fraud, and public and court defrauding have to do with DA Dumanis and Judge Lisa Schall? 
What it has to do with it, is that Dumanis knows the major public fleecing is continuing by Schall and other local court officers falsifying court documents in a SLAPP suit (2005 – 2013); and then falsifying more court documents when trying to cover up what they have done. The SLAPP suit is over a 2005 writing (mine) of how the fraud of Veritox – formerly known as GlobalTox — came to be accepted science in policy and courts with the unethical aid of the US Chamber, think-tank money, and the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, ACOEM. 
ACOEM is not a college.  Its a “non-profit” trade association made up of occupational physicians, aka work comp doctors.  See 2007 Wall Street Journal article regarding ACOEM’s role in the debacle with Veritox: “Court of Opinion, Amid Suits Over Mold, Experts Wear Two Hats, Authors of Science Paper Often Cited by Defense Also Help in Litigation“
Schall and other court officers collusively framed me for libel for the accurate words, “altered his under oath statements” in my accurate 2005 writing to make the exposing of the massive fraud,  appear to be a lie. They were trying to stop the cat from getting out of the bag. My writing was published eighteen months before the above WSJ expose’.  And Dumanis knows it.  I am on tape in her office with Deputy DA James Koerber, for three hours in 2010, explaining it to them and providing them the direct evidence of how the greater fraud continues via the fraud upon the local courts in the SLAPP. From my completely accurate 2005 writing, that they NEED to appear as being a lie or many politicos’ and jurists’ heads will roll for covering up the fraud by criminal means in SLAPP:
Dr. Bruce Kelman of GlobalTox, Inc., a Washington based environmental risk management company, testified as an expert witness for the defense, as he does in mold cases throughout the country. 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. He admitted the Manhattan Institute, a national political think-tank, paid GlobalTox $40,000 to write a position paper regarding the potential health risks of toxic mold exposure. Although much medical research finds otherwise, the controversial piece claims that it is not plausible the types of illnesses experienced by the Haynes family and reported by thousands from across the US, could be caused by “toxic mold” exposure in homes, schools or office buildings.
In 2003, with the involvement of the US Chamber of Commerce and ex-developer, US Congressman Gary Miller (R-CA), the GlobalTox paper was disseminated to the real estate, mortgage and building industries’ associations. A version of the Manhattan Institute commissioned piece may also be found as a position statement on the website of a United States medical policy-writing body, the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. [ACOEM, which writes the work comp guidelines for CA]
Dumanis also knows that San Diego county workers, (and thus county taxpayers), have been cheated by the fraud being used in work comp claims in the county to deny and delay restitution and needed medical treatment. She has used Fraud Assessment Commission funds to falsely advertise that she prosecutes for causes of work comp fraud in the county — but she won’t prosecute those who are at the root of aiding a massive one to continue by criminal means via SLAPP, i.e. her friends in the local courts.
A mere sampling of what DA Dumanis has known since 2010 of the local jurists colluding to defraud with Bonnie’s traveling buddies at the Chamber of Commerce.  To quote:
October 25, 2010
District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis
San Diego County District Attorney
Hall of Justice
330 W. Broadway
San Diego, CA 92101
Re: Investigation of ten San Diego judges and justices ignoring evidence of criminal
perjury by an author of policy on behalf of the US Chamber of Commerce, while
strategically litigating against the first person to publicly expose a deceit in US health
policy – adversely impacting injured workers in San Diego county.
District Attorney Dumanis,
This is a formal request for investigation of ten San Diego judges and justices for
aiding and abetting interstate insurer fraud on behalf of the affiliates of the US Chamber
of Commerce, by their failure to stop strategic litigation carried out by criminal means;
and using the courts to retaliate against a whistleblower of the insurer fraud – errors of
their courts. This request for investigation includes Justice Judith McConnell, who is
currently running for Presiding Justice of the San Diego Fourth District Division One
Court of Appeal.
I have already gone on record with the District Attorney’s office over this matter.
While I was sincerely hoping this was just an error of the courts as the case went from
court to court; an unpublished Appellate Opinion in September followed up by a
modification in October, leaves no doubt that this is not an accident. As Mr. Koerber,
Deputy District Attorney suggested, I did file a complaint with the California
Commission on Judicial Performance. However, I am not anticipating any action taken
against these judiciaries from that government entity. Justice McConnell Chairs the
Commission.
As the elected official in San Diego county, who oversees proper behavior and laws
being followed by all elected government officials in San Diego county, please
investigate how it has occurred that ten San Diego judges and justices just cannot seem to
grasp that it is criminal to use perjury while strategically litigating over a matter of public
health…. 
Something is terribly wrong in Justice McConnell’s Fourth District Division One Court of Appeal, when six justices cannot grasp the law, that one cannot use perjury to make up a reason they were supposedly accused of perjury while strategically litigating on behalf of the interests of the insurance industry and the US Chamber of Commerce.
As this litigation has cost my family everything we own to defend the truth of my words for the public good; in the face of unbridled strategic litigating being rewarded in the San Diego county courts; and because of this situation being indicative of the courts having a different set of laws when the interests of the US Chamber of Commerce is involved; please investigate the following ten San Diego judges’ and justices’ roles in aiding and abetting insurer fraud to continue by their failure to stop a strategic litigation carried out by criminal means:
Justice Judith McConnell, Justice Patricia Benke, Justice Cynthia Aaron, Justice Richard Huffman, Justice Alex MacDonald, Justice Joan Irion, Judge Michael P. Orfield, Judge Lisa C. Schall, Judge Joel Pressman, Judge William S. Dato”
Judges Pressman and Dato, who aided to conceal the 2008 void Schall judgment, are among the “all 125 San Diego Superior Court Judges” now endorsing Schall for re-election – just like Dumanis was before we started getting some local traction of our blogging about Dumanis covering up for Schall’s felony court doc falsifications being used to fleece the United States public.
READ MORE of Bonnie covering up for her compromised buddies in the local courts and their role in aiding her Chamber buddies to fleece the public, nationwide. Excerpts:

Dumanis stop harassing

 Dumanis Fraud

 Under the law, Schall’s void judgment cannot be used for her fellow jurists to feign their courts’ subject matter jurisdiction. Yet they have kept on using the fraudulent legal document while knowing it was void.  A court with no subject matter jurisdiction while the officer of that court is committing criminal acts under the color of law, translates into no judicial immunity from prosecution for the court officer conspiring to defraud.  Although the above is the law, it is only law in legal theory in San Diego County as long as Dumanis is the DA. 
Also only theory in the county until Dumanis is removed as DA, its a felony for San Diego jurists to falsify court documents to commit fraud on behalf of the affiliates of the U.S Chamber.  This is a bad joke funded with your tax dollars (not the mustache, the billboard):

 And THAT is how we know that Bonnie Dumanis would not benefit from the Chamber/Schall connections being understood by the voters.  From Dumanis’s bid for re-election — to Schall’s re-election campaign endorsement by Dumanis — to the (comped?) Chamber DC lobbying trip — to the scientific fraud of Dumanis’ Chamber friends — to the aiding of the Chamber/work comp fraud by her friends in the local courts, including Schall, fixing a SLAPP suit over the fraud — who Dumanis no longer endorses once we started blogging of her endorsing one known to her to be a unpunished (by Bonnie) felon — Schall.   
Everyday, it appears that more information is coming to light which establishes that Dumanis only prosecutes compromised government officials when it is politically to her benefit; and finds herself and her compromised friends to be above the law. 
While many have claimed to prove Bonnie is a fraudster over a few thousand dollars here and there; the fraud in government on behalf of the US Chamber and affiliates, that we can prove Dumanis is covering up, is a multi-billion dollar one adversely impacting lives throughout the United States.
Posted in Health - Medical - Science | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment