TEN ALLEGED FRAUDS ON FLORIDA'S FEDERAL COURT by injured Plaintiffs
This is an unprecedented Federal case 3:06cv95 entailing Real Property lost causing severe injury in damages and collateral damages to Pro Se plaintiffs. The case has been butchered beyond recognition and metamorphosed to another style unrecognized by plaintiffs. The judicial system has been vitiated by these proceedings against African American plaintiffs, husband and wife for more than thirty years. This particular property was so appealing in its castle-style that the Donald Trump financing division wanted to finance the whole project except that the Stop Work Orders nullified the property and the national project anticipated by plaintiffs, while plaintiffs were in talks with Morgan Stanley Dean Witter in the State of Georgia for a possible IPO upon completion of the project and the two years required.
Plaintiffs begin with one of the integral quote cited repeatedly during these proceedings from the current Historic President of the United States: . “. . . [t]he empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges. . ." As David Beito and I discussed in this article “African-Americans, the poor, and the politically weak tend to be the biggest victims of government violations of property rights. Since World War II, hundreds of thousands of people - most of them poor minorities - have been forcibly displaced by "blight" and "economic development" condemnations. The United States President, the Honorable Barack Obama. This article was released by the CATO Institute.
On or about September 21, 2011, the African American plaintiffs filed their alleged TEN FRAUDS UPON THE COURT in Florida for what plaintiffs viewed as a Judicial System vitiated by inconsistencies and irregularities that are crippling the system and hindering it from finding justice as exhibited below after nearly seven years of exemplary patience by plaintiffs. Pro Se plaintiffs in desperate need of relief, respectfully request that the Scholars and Justices of the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT enforce the POWERS of the high court to halt the excruciating and torturous pain, hardship, damage and demise of an African American family facing the absence of justice and its appearance while standing with the undaunted courage of truths. Plaintiffs were damaged and injured as recognized by the lower court in bankruptcy proceedings and about five foreclosures. This case is even more interesting, for the lower court applied the test of Constitutional Standing and the case passed that test, yet the lower court apparently and for some unknown reasons which plaintiffs categorized as FRAUD UPON THE COURT, refused to obey the rules of the SUPREME COURT as laid down for the public in plaintiffs' view and despite plaintiffs' injuries, the lower court in 2011 called the case frivolous as understood. So plaintiffs are stuck in a legal maze and technical complexity while missing their jobs, livelihood, property, property rights along with their fundamental rights.
What is FRAUD UPON THE COURT? This question can only be answered by the United States Supreme Court not by any other individuals regardless of their competence or legal knowledge. FRAUD UPON THE COURT as understood by Pro Se plaintiffs, 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." Plaintiffs further understand that FRAUD UPON THE COURT is "when an officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the court, he/she is engaged in FRAUD UPON THE COURT in Bulloch v. United States 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985). More over, FRAUD UPON THE COURT has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery cannot perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication." Kenner v. C.I.R. , 387 F.3d 689 (1968). Who is an officer of the Court? Lawyers are officers of the court as understood by plaintiffs. Federal judges are Judicial Officers of the Court. Fraud upon the court can be committed only by lawyers or/and judges not by civilians even in the case of one acting under the power of attorney, as understood by plaintiffs.
Now, without further due, here are the alleged frauds upon the Federal Court in Florida:
Plaintiffs begin with one of the integral quote cited repeatedly during these proceedings from the current Historic President of the United States: . “. . . [t]he empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges. . ." As David Beito and I discussed in this article “African-Americans, the poor, and the politically weak tend to be the biggest victims of government violations of property rights. Since World War II, hundreds of thousands of people - most of them poor minorities - have been forcibly displaced by "blight" and "economic development" condemnations. The United States President, the Honorable Barack Obama. This article was released by the CATO Institute.
"The three great rights are so bound together as to be essentially one right. To give a man his life, but deny him his liberty, is to take from him all that makes his life worth living. To give him his liberty, but take from him the property which is the fruit and badge of his liberty, is to still leave him a slave." - George Sutherland, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, 1921.
On or about September 21, 2011, the African American plaintiffs filed their alleged TEN FRAUDS UPON THE COURT in Florida for what plaintiffs viewed as a Judicial System vitiated by inconsistencies and irregularities that are crippling the system and hindering it from finding justice as exhibited below after nearly seven years of exemplary patience by plaintiffs. Pro Se plaintiffs in desperate need of relief, respectfully request that the Scholars and Justices of the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT enforce the POWERS of the high court to halt the excruciating and torturous pain, hardship, damage and demise of an African American family facing the absence of justice and its appearance while standing with the undaunted courage of truths. Plaintiffs were damaged and injured as recognized by the lower court in bankruptcy proceedings and about five foreclosures. This case is even more interesting, for the lower court applied the test of Constitutional Standing and the case passed that test, yet the lower court apparently and for some unknown reasons which plaintiffs categorized as FRAUD UPON THE COURT, refused to obey the rules of the SUPREME COURT as laid down for the public in plaintiffs' view and despite plaintiffs' injuries, the lower court in 2011 called the case frivolous as understood. So plaintiffs are stuck in a legal maze and technical complexity while missing their jobs, livelihood, property, property rights along with their fundamental rights.
What is FRAUD UPON THE COURT? This question can only be answered by the United States Supreme Court not by any other individuals regardless of their competence or legal knowledge. FRAUD UPON THE COURT as understood by Pro Se plaintiffs, 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." Plaintiffs further understand that FRAUD UPON THE COURT is "when an officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the court, he/she is engaged in FRAUD UPON THE COURT in Bulloch v. United States 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985). More over, FRAUD UPON THE COURT has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery cannot perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication." Kenner v. C.I.R. , 387 F.3d 689 (1968). Who is an officer of the Court? Lawyers are officers of the court as understood by plaintiffs. Federal judges are Judicial Officers of the Court. Fraud upon the court can be committed only by lawyers or/and judges not by civilians even in the case of one acting under the power of attorney, as understood by plaintiffs.
Now, without further due, here are the alleged frauds upon the Federal Court in Florida:
ALLEGED FRAUD #2 of 10) FAMILIAR DELAY WHILE RULE 60 WAS PENDING WITH NEW EVIDENCES:
First of all the first delay was an oversight plaintiffs filed their Federal case on or about March 2006. After several calls to their attorney during the month subsequent to the filing, their attorney kept on saying, "the delay is normal." It was quiet distressing to plaintiffs who thought that something was wrong but, could not put their finger on what it was. September 2006, the attorney stated "it's normal, October 2006, the attorney stated the same thing "it's normal," November 2006, the attorney sung the same song in the ears of the impoverished plaintiffs. Then, came the turn of event in December 2006, plaintiffs' real estate broker suddenly died in her own airplane crash, and that was more distress to the plaintiffs because, plaintiffs lost a real friend and a professional agent that was to be a key witness in this case. Upon finding out, plaintiffs quickly contacted their attorney and requested vigourously that he contact the Court dure to the passing of their agent, which was prejudicial against them. Upon contacting the court through a motion, the court replied with a written apology that appeared very noble and courageous. However, some damages have been done that were never repaired. There was a prejudice against plaintiffs at the start. If the case were properly attended, there would be sufficient time for injunctif relief as it was requested by the attorney at the time of the contract. Plaintiffs asked the attorney, "please, let me know the statutes of limitations regarding this matter."
First of all the first delay was an oversight plaintiffs filed their Federal case on or about March 2006. After several calls to their attorney during the month subsequent to the filing, their attorney kept on saying, "the delay is normal." It was quiet distressing to plaintiffs who thought that something was wrong but, could not put their finger on what it was. September 2006, the attorney stated "it's normal, October 2006, the attorney stated the same thing "it's normal," November 2006, the attorney sung the same song in the ears of the impoverished plaintiffs. Then, came the turn of event in December 2006, plaintiffs' real estate broker suddenly died in her own airplane crash, and that was more distress to the plaintiffs because, plaintiffs lost a real friend and a professional agent that was to be a key witness in this case. Upon finding out, plaintiffs quickly contacted their attorney and requested vigourously that he contact the Court dure to the passing of their agent, which was prejudicial against them. Upon contacting the court through a motion, the court replied with a written apology that appeared very noble and courageous. However, some damages have been done that were never repaired. There was a prejudice against plaintiffs at the start. If the case were properly attended, there would be sufficient time for injunctif relief as it was requested by the attorney at the time of the contract. Plaintiffs asked the attorney, "please, let me know the statutes of limitations regarding this matter."
An All-too-familiar delay while facing Rule 60 with new evidences and proof. This sort of delay is well-acquainted with by plaintiffs, and they never yielded justice nor the appearance of justice for nearly six years in this case. As it was at the start of this case it seems to be the same in the end and, after injuries and damages that led to the plaintiffs demise. Indeed, plaintiffs think of this as a mockery from the defendants who call plaintiffs injury as described by the lower court, "FRIVOLOUS." Please, please, give me liberty or give me death said Patrick Henry and reechoed by Pro Se African American plaintiffs.
