Saturday, September 12, 2009

Judge burns 1st Amendment on Constitution Day, reads Miranda rights to Pirate News



Premier broadcast of Pirate News Radio Show on 9-11-09
Music by The Gitmos: Yo Gubmit Is Lyin

UPDATE 9 OCTOBER 2009 - Clifford Clark has now had a "massive stroke" and was in ICU after brain surgery. His other trial dates were cancelled in October 2009 and moved to January 2010, or later. He may have had the potentially fatal side effect of hypertension spike by serotonin syndrome from normal use of prescription meds. Such is the stress of an innocent person framed by crooked Big Brothers who refuse to obey The Law. Why does Judge Liebowitz refuse to dismiss false charges until one week before trial? Because government "cannot dismiss charges against innocent people without risk of being sued" for false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, says Judge Wayne Henry.

New Trial Date Due to Stroke page 1
New Trial Date Due to Stroke page 2

PHOTOS OF ASSAULT ON CLIFF CLARK - Cliff Clark was also stalked and severely beaten on the head by a gang of suspected undercover cops or informants who hitchhiked a ride in his car, who Knox sheriff refuse to arrest and Knox DA refuse to prosecute, as suspected retaliation for Cliff defending himself during home invasion by unidentified undercover deputies in Metallica t-shirts. Did this beating cause 3 massive strokes? Cliff's Medical Records of Assault

"If I’m found floating face down in the river or murdered ('apparent suicide') in a jail cell on some bogus charge, you’ll know it was the sheriff’s department working in concert with the University of Tennessee."
-Clifford Clark, CliffSpeaks.com



Satanic vampire sucks blood of Cliff Clark in Knox County Criminal Court

Order for Sanctions Against Pirate News 17 Sept 09
Page 1 -- Page 2 -- Page 3 -- Page 4
Order written by lawyers for WBIR TV. Note the lack of certificate of service upon John Lee, prima facie proof of perjury and contempt of court by attorneys for WBIR, Knoxville News Sentinel, City of Knoxville law director and court clerk, which is a $125 fine plus court costs for each unserved document, paid to John Lee, per TN Code 22-2-103. This order is a violation of the Tennessee Open Records Act, TN Code Title 10 Chapter VII, TN Code 10-7-505. John Lee first obtained this order on 9 October 2009, after reading the file of State v Clark at the Knox County Criminal Court clerk office, but this order was not in the file. Upon asking the clerk to check the judge's chambers, this order appeared, without cost (no cost is allowed for "served" documents). Entry of judgment cannot take place until the order is served, which is 9 October 2009, not 17 September 2009. On 24 September 2009, Cliff Clark's lawyer Ron Newcomb was notified that Mr. Clark had a stroke, and a motion for continuance of trial date was filed on 30 September 2009. John Lee was first "notified" of Mr. Clark's stroke on 9 October 2009, by reading the court file.

DEFENSE MOTION TO SUPPRESS AND DISMISS PROSECUTION 28 AUG 2009 - Page 1 -- Page 2 -- Page 3 -- Page 4 -- Page 5 -- Page 6 -- Page 7 -- Page 8 -- Page 9 -- Page 10 -- Page 11 -- Page 12 -- Page 13 -- Page 14 -- Page 15 -- Page 16 -- Page 17 -- Page 18 -- Page 19 -- Page 20 -- Page 21 -- Page 22 -- Page 23 -- Page 24 -- Page 25. If Judge Liebowitz had done her job and dismissed this malicious prosecution, and used her power in the judicial branch to protect innocent people from an executive branch police state run amok, Cliff Clark would not have had 3 strokes with massive brain damage on 23 September 2009.

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ROBERT JONATHAN HARRISON - Criminal trials require a civil competency hearing when a defendant is disabled. When a defendant is disabled, no trial can take place. Tennessee Supreme Court, April 1, 2008




By John Lee, executive producer
Pirate News Radio
Pirate News TV
PirateNews.org

It appears that Redflex was hiring cops to shoot redlight cameras, then billing the taxpayers $77,000 per bullet. When they tried to frame an innocent bystander, their conspiracy blew up in their face.

I'm not allowed to post the audio at this time, or I'd be arrested for contempt of court. That sounds like a free democracy, don't it? Only investigative journalists and legal counsel for Pirate News may listen to the audio as allowed per TN Supreme Court Rule 30, no commercial broadcast allowed. Official court audio for the public will soon be available per TN Open Records Act and TN Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Judges get frisky when caught between due process and cops who confess to shooting redlight cameras then framing innocent bystanders, per Operation Northwoods.




Pretrial Hearing on Intervenor John Lee's Motion to Reconsider Motion for Media Access (aka Motion to Intervene), Motion to Intervene and Notice of Appeal

Knox County Criminal Court
State v Clifford Clark
Docket 90821, 91484, 90252, 90618
Knoxville TN
11 September 2001

John Lee, executive producer of Pirate News TV and Pirate News Radio and candidate for appointment as Commissioner of CTV Board of Knox County: "Your Honor, may I argue...?"

Judge Mary Beth Liebowitz: "No Sir! You are not a party at this time. In my opinion you are not an intervenor, you cannot make yourself an intervenor, and you're not arguing!"

John Lee: "May I...?"

Judge Mary Beth Liebowitz: "No Sir! Wait a minute! Let me explain something to you, Sir! You have violated the process of this Court! Now I suggest you sit down, because I can do one of two things today, and if you want to get counsel, and you want to see if you can become an intervenor, if you want to do it legally, that's fine. But what yo uhave done, with respect to our subpoenas, is major problems for you, I can tell you that right now [without reading any of the pleadings nor looking at any of the subpoenas signed by the court clerk]. You have the right to remain silent! If you say anything, whatever you say can and may be used against you! You have the right to the presence of an attorney! If you cannot afford an attorney one can be appointed to represent you, if you should be accused of an offense, I've given you your rights because you might be! Okay? You have the right to remain silent! I would strongly suggest that you do that until you have talked to counsel!"

Pirate News lawfully subpoenaed Knoxville city attorney Debbie Poplin and rebuttal media witnesses regarding city attorney's refusal to allow John Lee to view public records of govt contracts where local news corporations got grants of up to $20-million. Withholding public records is a violation of TN Open Records Act and contempt of court.

"Trust in news media has reached a new low, with record numbers of Americans saying reporting is inaccurate, biased and shaped by special interests, according to a survey set to be released Monday. In this year’s survey, 63 percent of respondents said news articles were often inaccurate and only 29 percent said the media generally “get the facts straight” — the worst marks Pew has recorded — compared with 53 percent and 39 percent in 2007. Seventy-four percent said news organizations favored one side or another in reporting on political and social issues, and the same percentage said the media were often influenced by powerful interests. Those, too, are the worst marks recorded in Pew surveys."
-NY Times, Trust in News Media Falls to New Low in Pew Survey, 13 Sept 2009


Knox County Criminal Court clerk's subpoena form is technically defective for lack of check box for Intervenor.

Local news media are required by FCC Regulations to always report who pays for news broadcasts. Broadcasting VNR Video News Releases paid for or produced by government or public relatiosn contractors is an FCC fine of $30,000 to $300,000 per day.

Four previous judges ordered in this case that Pirate News TV is "legitimate news media", and I've lawfully served subpoenas pro se and for attorneys for over 25 years per Rule 45 TN Rules of Civil Procedure, including served subpoenas on 5 KPD cops and the Knoxville city court administrator Michael Martin who was fired as result of his testimony of keeping an illegal secret docket of 125,000 annual "misdemeanor citations" (now 200,000 per year in a city of 160,000).

Note that every judge I see gets angry at me, but I always win my case. I've a new trial in my Social Security Disability case on Monday, after I won a remand pro se in fed court and got the previous SSA judge fired. Now disability lawyers ask for my court files to learn how to do that.






Judge Mary beth Liebowitz bans WBIR from court, and Herb Moncier filed a civil Motion to Intervene in that same murder trial in Liebowitz' court

Seems Knox County courts like to hold secret hearings for homicidal friends of the D.A. Sound familiar?

09242009_moncier_writ_cert_unconstitutional.pdf
09242009_isaacs_motion_against_cert.pdf
09242009_isaacs_motion_gag_order.pdf
09242009_moncier_response_motion_gag_order.pdf
09242009_moncier_motion_dismiss_response.pdf
Amicus Brief by Tennessee Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers

I wonder if Herb will get threatened with jail, again?

Herb Moncier wins new trial on contempt of federal court - Like all appellate courts, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals and Tennessee Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers report how crooked the lower courts can be. "To all of which there is a simple answer: There is no right of revolution in a United States District Court" [sic -- read the Declaration of Independence]. "Mr. Moncier’s conviction and sentence are vacated, and the case remanded for trial before a different district court judge."

30 appear to contest violations caught on new Oak Ridge traffic cameras - FBI disinfo sheep Don Taylor of Knoxville, nabbed speeding by one of Oak Ridge's new traffic enforcement cameras, came to court Thursday ready to appeal his ticket, then bent over and pled guilty to a frivolous civil lawsuit, whic his impossible in civil lawsuits. Lawyers, judges and politicians agree, the best defense is to throw the camera tickets away and ignore them. DOH!

Herb Moncier wins happy ending for pet lover raided by SWAT Task Force - A Monroe County woman accused of keeping too many dogs and cats at her Sweetwater home has agreed to move the animals to a 160-acre farm outside the city. Sparling and Moncier denied that there were any problems with the animals, and they claimed that city officials went onto Sparling's property and took the animals illegally. Moncier worked out the agreement with the city. Moncier took a mother cat and five kittens with him when he returned to Knoxville. He said he will keep the mother cat and will find good homes for the kittens. Sparling denied abusing her animals. "I buy tall cans of Friskies turkey and giblets for the cats, and they say I'm not taking care of my cats," Sparling said. "I see red. "They made it look like they were on a drug bust when they were at my house, and that's not right. "I've never abused animals. I'd rather kill myself than do that." Sparling said she ran the Monroe County Animal Shelter from July 2002 until this month, when she resigned to take care of her own animals.




Tennessee Open Records Act

TN Code § 10-7-505. Denial of access -- Procedures for obtaining access -- Court orders -- Injunctions -- Appeals -- Liability for nondisclosure

(a) Any citizen of Tennessee who shall request the right of personal inspection of any state, county or municipal record as provided in § 10-7-503, and whose request has been in whole or in part denied by the official and/or designee of the official or through any act or regulation of any official or designee of any official, shall be entitled to petition for access to any such record and to obtain judicial review of the actions taken to deny the access.

(b) Such petition shall be filed in the chancery court for the county in which the county or municipal records sought are situated, or in any other court of that county having equity jurisdiction. In the case of records in the custody and
control of any state department, agency or instrumentality, such petition shall be filed in the chancery court of Davidson County; or in the chancery court for the county in which the state records are situated if different from Davidson County, or in any other court of that county having equity jurisdiction; or in the chancery court in the county of the petitioner's residence, or in any other court of that county having equity jurisdiction. Upon filing of the petition, the court shall, upon request of the petitioning party, issue an order requiring the defendant or respondent party or parties to immediately appear and show cause, if they have any, why the petition should not be granted. A formal written response to the petition shall not be required, and the generally applicable periods of filing such response shall not apply in the interest of expeditious hearings. The court may direct that the records being sought be submitted under seal for review by the court and no other party. The decision of the court on the petition shall constitute a final judgment on the merits.

(c) The burden of proof for justification of nondisclosure of records sought shall be upon the official and/or designee of the official of those records and the justification for the nondisclosure must be shown by a preponderance of the evidence.

(d) The court, in ruling upon the petition of any party proceeding hereunder, shall render written findings of fact and conclusions of law and shall be empowered to exercise full injunctive remedies and relief to secure the purposes and intentions of this section, and this section shall be broadly construed so as to give the fullest possible public access to public records.

(e) Upon a judgment in favor of the petitioner, the court shall order that the records be made available to the petitioner unless:

(1) There is a timely filing of a notice of appeal; and

(2) The court certifies that there exists a substantial legal issue with respect to the disclosure of the documents which ought to be resolved by the appellate courts.

(f) Any public official required to produce records pursuant to this part shall not be found criminally or civilly liable for the release of such records, nor shall a public official required to release records in such public official's custody
or under such public official's control be found responsible for any damages caused, directly or indirectly, by the release of such information.

(g) If the court finds that the governmental entity, or agent thereof, refusing to disclose a record, knew that such record was public and willfully refused to disclose it, such court may, in its discretion, assess all reasonable costs involved in obtaining the record, including reasonable attorneys' fees, against the nondisclosing governmental entity.




Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure TRCP

RULE 24 INTERVENTION

24.01. Intervention as of Right. — Upon timely application anyone shall be permitted to intervene in an action: (1) when a statute confers an unconditional right to intervene; or (2) when the applicant claims an interest relating to the property or transaction which is the subject of the action and the applicant is so situated that the disposition of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the applicant's ability to protect that interest, unless the applicant's interest is adequately represented by existing parties; or (3) by stipulation of all the parties.

24.02. Permissive Intervention. — Upon timely application anyone may be permitted to intervene in an action: (1) when a statute confers a conditional right to intervene; or (2) when an applicant's claim or defense and the main action have a question of law or fact in common. In exercising discretion the court shall consider whether or not the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties.

24.03. Procedure. — A person desiring to intervene shall serve a motion to intervene upon the parties as provided in Rule 5. The motion shall state the grounds therefor and shall be accompanied by a pleading setting forth the claim or defense for which intervention is sought. The same procedure shall be followed when a statute gives a right to intervene.

24.04. Notice to Attorney General When Statute, Rule or Regulation Is Questioned. — When the validity of a statute of this state or an administrative rule or regulation of this state is drawn in question in any action to which the state or an officer or agency is not a party, the court shall require that notice be given the attorney general, specifying the pertinent statute, rule or regulation.

Advisory Commission Comments. 24.01: By statute, persons not made parties to a suit, but who have an interest in the matter at issue, can intervene in the suit as a matter of right in a number of situations (e.g., person interested in property which is subject of a suit to recover property (Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-1-115); person interested in property which is subject of eminent domain proceeding (Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-17-610). Rule 24.01 preserves all statutory rights of intervention, and adds the grounds set out in clauses (2) and (3) of the Rule.

24.02: Rule 24.02 preserves all statutory conditional rights of intervention and adds the right to intervene when the applicant's claim or defense and the main action have a common question of law or fact. Original parties are protected against undue delay or prejudice by empowering the court to deny intervention where necessary to protect these parties.

24.03: Rule 24.03 establishes a uniform procedure for intervention in all cases. If any prior statute specifies a different procedure, the provisions of the Rule will prevail.

24.04: When a declaratory judgment is sought to declare a statute, ordinance, or franchise of statewide effect unconstitutional, it is necessary to serve the Attorney General with a copy of the proceeding and to afford him or her a chance to be heard (Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-14-107(b)). The object of the statute is to protect the public's interest in the result of the suit [Cummins v. Shipp, 156 Tenn. 595, 38 S.W.2d 1062 (1928)].

Rule 24.04 extends this protection to actions of any type. If the Attorney General feels that the State's interest so requires, he or she will be in a position to intervene or take other appropriate action..






"WBIR TV, WATE TV and WVLT TV were first provided copies of the Order of dismissal and the subpoena of the ex-deputy, with explanation of the current deputy’s alleged confession to shooting a red-light camera (which they were very interested in but failed to investigate or report). Without investigative reporting by Pirate News, no 'legitimate news media' would have reported the dismissal of charges against Defendant. 'The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state; but this consists in laying no previous restraints upon publications. Every free man has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he wishes before the public; to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press.' IV Blackstone’s Commentaries, 151, 152. The public right of access to criminal trials is so clearly entrenched in our judicial system that, in 1948, the U.S. Supreme Court said the right was so secure that the court was “unable to find a single instance of a criminal trial conducted in camera in any federal, state, or municipal court during the history of this country.” In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257, 268, 68 S. Ct. 499, 504 92 L. Ed. 682 (1948). 'In its nearly two centuries of existence, the Supreme Court has never upheld a prior restraint on pure speech. A prior restraint upon publication was improper absent proof that the publication will surely result in direct, immediate and irreparable damage to our Nation or its people.' Matter of Providence Journal Co., 820 F.2d 1348 (1st Cir. 1986). 'Where the freedom of the press is concerned, however, the status quo is to publish the news promptly that the editors decide to publish. A restraining order disturbs the status quo and impinges on the exercise of editorial discretion. Rather than having no effect, a prior restraint, by . . . definition, has an immediate and irreversible sanction. In the case of prior restraint on pure speech, the hurdle is substantially higher. publication must threaten an interest more fundamental than the First Amendment itself. Indeed, the Supreme Court has never upheld a prior restraint, even faced with the competing interest of national security or the sixth Amendment right to a fair trial.' Proctor & Gamble Co. v. Bankers Trust Co., 78 F.3d 219-227 (6th Cir. 1996). 'Both the history and language of the First Amendment support the view that the press must be left free to publish news, whatever the source, without censorship, injunctions, or prior restraints. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The government’s power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform people. No one can read history of the adoption of the First Amendment without being convinced beyond any doubt that it was injunctions like those sought here that Madison and his collaborators intended to outlaw in this nation for all time.' New York times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 714, 91 S.Ct. 2140-2144 (1971). 'That the printing presses shall be free to every person to examine the proceedings of the legislature; or of any branch or officer of the government, and no law shall ever be made to restrain the right thereof. The free communication of thoughts and opinions, is one of the invaluable rights of man, and every citizen may freely speak, right, and print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty.' Tenn. CONST., Art. 1, § 19. 'Before a motion for closure can be granted, it must be made in writing, given an expedited hearing by the judge, be on file for a period of at least three days before the hearing, and interested members of the public and media may intervene and be heard in opposition to it.' [not complied with by assistate district attorney Zane Scarlett nor Judge Mary beth Liebowitz] State v. Drake, supra, at 608; see also State v. James, 902 S.W.2d 911 (1995). 'A judge’s personal experience with in-court media coverage, extensive publicity surrounding the case, or a conclusory finding that in-court media coverage might interfere with a defendant’s right to a fair trial, are not sufficient reasons to support a decision to exclude media coverage from the courtroom.' State v. Morrow, 1996 WL 170679 (Tenn. Crim. App.). 'A presiding judge’s decision to deny a motion to preclude or limit media coverage is not error in the absence of proof that media coverage will compromise one of the important interests set forth in Sections (A)(1) and (D)(2) of Rule 30.' State v. Pike. 978 S.W.2d 904, 917 (Tenn. 1998). From the foregoing examination of the development of the law concerning media access pursuant to Rule 30 in Tennessee, it is abundantly clear that conclusory allegations, vague concerns, generalized statements, and blanket derogation of the media generally is not sufficient, as a matter of law, to justify any prior restraint. As the authorities discussed amply demonstrate, there exists no basis in law or fact to justify the sweeping breadth of the Order opined by the Court. To grant the same would result in the Court exceeding all permissible constitutional authority."
—John Lee, executive producer of Pirate News TV and Pirate News Radio and candidate for appointment as Commissioner of CTV Board of Knox County, First Amendment Brief for Media Access, INFORMAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE, MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT, OFFER OF PROOF AND OPPOSITION TO ORDER BANNING MEDIA BROADCAST, Knox County Criminal Court, State v Clark, Docket 90821, 91484, 90252, 90618, August 2009




"It is the Court's opinion, as it stated to Mr. Lee in open court, that anyone can make a business card, with at-home equipment as well as a press badge, and bring a hand-held video camera into a courtroom, and declare themselves media. That does not make 'legitimate media' under Rule 30. Any citizen may use the community television stations in any community to broadcast their personal opinions. The use of euquipment by other than legitimate media who directly or indirectly feeds news to the general public and is in business for the purpose of giving news to the general public and is so chartered, is what the Supreme Court intended to be legitimate media. The state opposes Mr. Lee's as the state has opined that Mr. Lee has a specific agenda and is not a legitimate news organization. Thus the motion of Mr. Lee to present himself as media and to be permitted to use a camera or other recording device under Rule 30 of the Supreme Court Rules, is hereby respectfully denied."
—Judge Mary Beth Liebowitz, Knox County Criminal Court, Order Regarding Media Request, State v Clifford Clark, Docket 90821, 91484, 90252, 90618, 22 July 2001 (four previous judges ordered in this case that Pirate News TV is "legitimate news media")




"I don't know what the definition of the appellate courts or supreme court when they made that Rule mean by 'legitmate media'. It may very well be that they mean this to be legitimate media. I don't know. But at this juncture I'm not prepared to declare you 'legitimate media'. But we need to clarify, Mr. Lee, what we mean. Okay? And you are welcome anytime in this courtroom. You may report all you want on whatever you want to report on. My concern is the video. And it's an open courtroom and you are welcome. But at this point I'm not gonna let you video. But I will tell you that because you have made this request, I would like to do a little further research on it and and make a complete ruling at the time that we start for trial, if you wish to prepare an appeal on what you wish to do and not wish to do. Im not... I think that's fair to you right now. I need to figure out what they meant. It's not just a can of worms for me, but a can of worms for a lot of people. Whatever you do with your media work is not my business, basically. I don't care. If you wish me to put down a written order, so you can go through the process of appeal, then I'll put down a written order denying your right to video. I don't want everybody in town videotaping everything. What happens is they splice and dice the tape."
—Judge Mary Beth Liebowitz, Knox County Criminal Court, Transcript of Motion Hearing on Media Request (aka Motion to Intervene per Rule 30 TN Supreme Court Rules and Rule 24 TN Rules of Civil Procedure), State v Clifford Clark, Docket 90821, 91484, 90252, 90618, 1 July 2001




Leslie Nassios, public defender (now a prosecutor): "John Lee's photograph on WBIR TV made my client go insane! I move to ban him from this courtroom, and ban everyone from the courtroom!"

Judge Mary Beth Liebowitz: "I will not ban John Lee from the courtroom. This is the People's court, not the defendant's court."

—Knox County Criminal Court, How to Catch a Government Hitman, State v Charles Daniel Gray, 1995








WHY do the State, the judge and the "news" corporations want to ban Pirate News TV and Pirate News Radio Show from this one courtroom, after I already broadcast on TV 6 court hearings in this case as allowed by 4 other judges (and videotaped other trials in court like the THP trooper who videotaped himself getting a blowjob from pornstar Barbie Cummings during a traffic stop)?

The Case Of The Redlight Camera Sniper

1. A Knox County deputy sheriff was subpoenaed to testify that another Knox deputy confessed to shooting a redlight camera (case dismissed IMMEDIATELY 1 week before trial)

2. KPD, Redflex and prosecutors destroyed all ballistic evidence in this case, threw away 3 bullets, threw away camera housing with bullet holes (no way to test caliber or gun for a match)

3. KPD and KCSO destroyed all audiotape "confessions" and "consent to search" in this case, no written consent to search car nor house

4. There was no redligth camera ticket, nor any other traffic ticket entered into evidence

5. UTPD used forged affidavit for a home invasion by undercover cops in Metallica t-shirts, as testified by UTPD's star witness who denied saying the allegations in the forged affidavit fo complaint

6. When the homeowner pointed a loaded shotgun at an unidentified man with a gun on the 2nd floor of his home, the Metallica t-shirt guy "ran screaming out of the house having flashbacks to Afghanistan"

7. Deputy in Metallica t-shirt and no badge perjured himself in court that the gun safe in the attic was unlocked, when KCSO photos showed the door locked ($10,000 in guns stolen by KCSO)

8. Knoxville News Sentinel newspaper was given $20-million grant by City of Knoxville taxpayers for propaganda services (city attorney subpoenaed for violation of TN Open Records Act for lying that no contracts exist with media corporations)

9. "News" corporations in Kville lie that Redlex is not Australian, and Lasercraft is not Commie Chinese, that have replaced KPD, City Court and City of KVille Govt (that export 90% of ticket revenue)

10. 4 previous judges in this case ordered that Pirate News TV is "legitimate news media" and allowed me to broadcast this trial on TV

11. Judge, court clerk, city attorney and media lawyers refuse to serve process on me for court orders and motions, which makes those motions and orders invalid under TN Rules of Procedure and constitutional due process


IMO, the prosecutor in this case appears either extremely stupid, incompetent and/or corrupt. He makes almost no motions or arguments, and those he does make get slapped down immediately by me, the defense attorney or the judge, so the judge literally has to take over as prosecutor. He illegally refuses to provide defense lawyers with any evidence in discovery, such as repair records for redlight cameras.

The prosecutor filed a "motion to reconsider" the dismissal of the redlight camera shooting case, then withdrew his motion on Friday, without any argument or evidence. "Motions to reconsider" do not exist by that name in TN (only "motion to alter or amend judgment"). That's the textbook definition of a frivolous motion.

The hearing on Friday to seek sanctions against me (without allowing me any notice, argument, evidence nor cross exam) was predecided in an illegal ex parte meeting before the hearing. Even the bailiff told me what the judge's opinion would be before the hearing started. The defense lawyers also caught the judge in ex parte meetings with prosecutors, which will result in a mistrial if the record of alleged evidence isn't corrected. The judge FREAKED in court Friday because the defendant emailed her ex parte a demand to remove that fake evidence from the order, but it's "normal" for the prosecutor or media lawyers communicate with her ex parte.

The TV "news" corporations, who "covered" most hearings in this case so far (in 15 second soundbites), did NOT videotape that hearing by their lawyers on Friday...

BTW, I won $60,000 today in my Social Security Disability trial, pro se. It only took 12 years of appeals, and winning a remand in fed court for a new trial. The new ALJ judge today was very nice and respectful to me, and I thanked him for it. And I don't even have to pay half of my winnings to a lawyer.

"The process used by ALJ in arriving at his decision that the plaintiff is not disabled is most troubling. The vocational specialist's comments to which the ALJ refers in his decision [are] largely indecipherable. The Court has absolutely no inkling of the qualificiations of the vocational specialist. It is recommended that Plaintiff's motion be granted for remanding the case."
-United States Magistrate Dennis Inmam, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, John Lee v Commissioner of Social Security


That ALJ judge was fired ("transferred") as a result. Now disability lawyers beg me to read my files, since they've never won an appeal in fed court. Most successful lawyers brag they've never even filed an appeal in their entire careers.




Here's some trivia I found in TN Code while researching my self-defense against Liebowitz ordering the attorney general to investigate me for crimes yesterday.

"Abuse of process" is a civil matter in TN, not criminal, so the judge ordered me to pay all court costs and attorney fees for 3 lawyers who charge $10,000 to write a letter without appearing in court. Which means those lawyers wont get paid, ha, I'm "collection proof" and I'll win on appeal.

Criminal contempt of court (in court) is 10 days in jail in TN.




TN Code 29-9-106. Bail.

(a) Upon an attachment to answer for a contempt, except in not performing a decree, the officer executing the process shall take bail from the defendant as in other cases.




Civil contempt of court (outside of court) is a life sentence on death row in every state, no bail nor appeal allowed.




TN Code 29-9-105. Performance of forbidden act.

If the contempt consists in the performance of a forbidden act, the person may be imprisoned until the act is rectified by placing matters and person in status quo, or by the payment of damages.




My little brother the lawyer was jailed for 10 days for civil contempt of divorce court, until he signed a contract with the judge to destroy his legal career, so he ran against the judge in the next election. The judge then got my TV show temporarily banned during the GOP primary, to hide the fact the judge was a convicted deadbeat dad.

Judges can be arrested too for contempt of court in court...

USA TODAY: Penis pump judge gets 4-year jail term




TN Code 29-9-102. Scope of power.

The power of the several courts to issue attachments, and inflict punishments for contempts of court, shall not be construed to extend to any except the following cases:

(1) The willful misbehavior of any person in the presence of the court, or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice;

(2) The willful misbehavior of any of the officers of such courts, in their official transactions;




Judges routinely commit "contempt of citizen", "contempt of pro se litigant", "contempt of The Law", etc.

Note that Liebowitz is now guilty of all these crimes against me, and I have probable cause to swear out a criminal complaint against her ASAP:




TN Code 17-5-302. Judicial offenses.

Offenses of which the court may take cognizance shall include the following:

(1) Willful misconduct relating to the official duties of the office;

(2) Willful or persistent failure to perform the duties of the office;

(3) Violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct as set out in the rules of the supreme court of Tennessee;

(4) The commission of any act constituting a violation of so much of the Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct as set out in the rules of the supreme court of Tennessee as is applicable to judges;

(5) A persistent pattern of intemperate, irresponsible or injudicious conduct;

(6) A persistent pattern of discourtesy to litigants, witnesses, jurors, court personnel or lawyers;

(7) A persistent pattern of delay in disposing of pending litigation; and

(8) Any other conduct calculated to bring the judiciary into public disrepute or to adversely affect the administration of justice.




Judges are jailed almost as much as cops and prosecutors.

My subpoenas of the city law director and media editors was for the illegal denial of open public records by the city attorney, regarding their own reporting of $20-million grant contracts with the "news" corporations. I had every right to subpoena them under TN Code and TN Rules of Court.




TN Code 10-7-505. Denial of access — Procedures for obtaining access — Court orders — Injunctions — Appeals — Liability for nondisclosure.

(a) Any citizen of Tennessee who shall request the right of personal inspection of any state, county or municipal record as provided in § 10-7-503, and whose request has been in whole or in part denied by the official and/or designee of the official or through any act or regulation of any official or designee of any official, shall be entitled to petition for access to any such record and to obtain judicial review of the actions taken to deny the access.

(b) Such petition shall be filed in the chancery court or circuit court for the county in which the county or municipal records sought are situated.... Upon filing of the petition, the court shall, upon request of the petitioning party, issue an order requiring the defendant or respondent party or parties to immediately appear and show cause, if they have any, why the petition should not be granted.

(c) The burden of proof for justification of nondisclosure of records sought shall be upon the official and/or designee of the official of those records and the justification for the nondisclosure must be shown by a preponderance of the evidence.

(d) The court, in ruling upon the petition of any party proceeding hereunder, shall render written findings of fact and conclusions of law.

(e) Upon a judgment in favor of the petitioner, the court shall order that the records be made available to the petitioner.

(g) If the court finds that the governmental entity, or agent thereof, refusing to disclose a record, knew that such record was public and willfully refused to disclose it, such court may, in its discretion, assess all reasonable costs involved in obtaining the record, including reasonable attorneys' fees, against the nondisclosing governmental entity.




Liebowitz failed to hold that hearing per TN Open Records Act, and refused to write findings of fact on conclusions of law. There's really no such animal as "criminal court" in TN, since Circuit Courts hold both civil and criminal jurisdicition, and most smaller counties in TN dont have a separate "criminal division" of circuit court.

I suspect I'm now in a race to file criminal charges against Liebowitz, before the DA can arrest me. I don't psychologically mind going to jail, that's a badge of courage for a journalist. Look at the Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at Bush, he's a hero worldwide, and will be paid royally (literally).

But I gotta get lawyered up with the ACLU ASAP, as Ron Newcomb said yesterday.

As far as I'm concerned, a judge who ignores the Constitutions in court is a worse criminal than a judge who masterbates in court during a murder trial.




Penis pump judge gets 4-year jail term

USA Today
8/18/2006

BRISTOW, Okla. (AP) — A former judge convicted of exposing himself while presiding over jury trials by using a sexual device under his robe was sentenced Friday to four years in prison.
Donald Thompson had spent almost 23 years on the bench and had served as a state legislator before retiring from the court in 2004. He showed no reaction when he was sentenced.

At his trial this summer, his former court reporter, Lisa Foster, testified that she saw Thompson expose himself at least 15 times during trial between 2001 and 2003. Prosecutors said he also used a device known as a penis pump during at least four trials in the same period.

Thompson, 59, was convicted last month of four felony courts of indecent exposure for incidents that took place in his Creek County courtroom.

Thompson, a married father of three grown children, testified that the penis pump was given to him as a joke by a longtime hunting and fishing buddy.

"It wasn't something I was hiding," he said.

He said he may have absentmindedly squeezed the pump's handle during court cases but never used it to masturbate.

Foster told authorities that she saw Thompson use the device almost daily during the August 2003 murder trial of a man accused of shaking a toddler to death. A whooshing sound could be heard on Foster's audiotape of the trial. When jurors asked the judge about the sound, Thompson said he hadn't heard it but would listen for it.

Police built a case against the judge after a police officer testifying in a 2003 murder trial saw a piece of plastic tubing disappear under Thompson's robe. During a lunch break, officers took photographs of the pump under the desk.

Investigators later checked the carpet, Thompson's robes and the chair behind the bench and found semen, according to court records.

Carmelia Brossett, a senior probation officer for the state Department of Corrections, said in a presentencing report that Thompson refused to undergo psychosexual testing.

"Thompson's denial of the offense would likely present difficulty, if not inability for treatment providers to provide meaningful and beneficial sex-offender treatment," she said.

The jury recommended a sentence of one year in prison and a $10,000 fine on each count. The jury foreman has said it was the jury's intent that Thompson serve the full sentence.

Judge C. Allen McCall denied a defense motion asking that Thompson be allowed to remain free pending an appeal. Thompson was also ordered to pay a $40,000 fine.


Intro to premier broadcast of Pirate News Radio on 9/11/2009




Obama: We Need To Bailout Newspapers To Stop New Media Taking Over

President says preserving "mutual understanding" is critical to democracy


Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Sept 21, 2009

President Obama has stated that he is happy to consider bailing out the corporate media, expressing concerns that alternative internet based news outlets will grow in popularity as a result of the downfall of newspapers.

Obama told editors of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and Toledo Blade that preserving the print media is "critical to the health of our democracy".

"I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding," Obama said.

He also indicated that readers should be made to pay for online news content in the near future:

"What I hope is that people start understanding if you're getting your newspaper over the Internet, that's not free and there's got to be a way to find a business model that supports that." he said.

Over the past year, scores of newspapers have gone out of business or shifted to online only output, due to the rise of the alternative media and the resulting loss of ad revenue. Several large newspaper corporations have filed for bankruptcy, including the Tribune Co., owner of the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times.

Obama said he "would be happy to look at" legislation aimed at providing newspapers tax-breaks if they were to restructure as 50 (c) (3) educational corporations. Democratic Senator Ben Cardin has introduced a bill in this vain titled "The Newspaper Revitalization Act."

Critics may point out that, far from being "critical" to democracy, a bailed out government subsidized media is the very antithesis of a "free press".

Government Banking and Government Motors would effectively be joined by the Government Press if bailouts were to be granted.

Bailing out the corporate media would once again constitute rewarding outdated and failing monopolies with more taxpayer dollars, thus punishing innovative forward thinking competition.

Furthermore, there is absolutely no basis for bailing out the newspapers, given that they employ less than one percent of the labor force in the United States.

The dinosaur corporate media is dying because it has proven itself to be almost wholly untrustworthy, acting as an unquestioning mouthpiece for the establishment.

Denouncing all blog based media as unreliable or without context is laughable in the face of the mainstream media's recent track record.






Newspapers Drafted by Police State: Obama open to newspaper bailout bill

Pirate News their worst frakkin nightmare, says Obama Bin Laden


By Michael O'Brien
TheHill.com
09/20/09

The president said he is "happy to look at" bills before Congress that would give struggling news organizations tax breaks if they were to restructure as nonprofit businesses.

"I haven't seen detailed proposals yet, but I'll be happy to look at them," Obama told the editors of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and Toledo Blade in an interview.

Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) has introduced S. 673, the so-called Newspaper Revitalization Act, that would give outlets tax deals if they were to restructure as 501(c)(3) corporations. That bill has so far attracted one cosponsor, Cardin's Maryland colleague Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D).

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs had played down the possibility of government assistance for news organizations, which have been hit by an economic downturn and dwindling ad revenue.

In early May, Gibbs said that while he hadn't asked the president specifically about bailout options for newspapers, "I don't know what, in all honesty, government can do about it."

Obama said that good journalism is "critical to the health of our democracy," but expressed concern toward growing tends in reporting -- especially on political blogs, from which a groundswell of support for his campaign emerged during the presidential election.

"I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding," he said.




SB673: Newspaper Revitalization Act

Title: A bill to allow certain newspapers to be treated as described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code.

Sponsor: Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [MD] (introduced 3/24/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Related Bills: H.R.3602

Latest Major Action: 3/24/2009 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.

To allow certain newspapers to be treated as described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code. (Introduced in Senate)

111th CONGRESS
1st Session

S. 673

To allow certain newspapers to be treated as described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
March 24, 2009

Mr. CARDIN (for himself and Ms. MIKULSKI) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL To allow certain newspapers to be treated as described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN NEWSPAPERS AS EXEMPT FROM TAX UNDER SECTION 501.

(a) In General- Paragraph (3) of section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting `(including a qualified newspaper corporation)' after `educational purposes'.

(b) Qualified Newspaper Corporation- Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--

(1) by redesignating subsection (r) as subsection (s), and

(2) by inserting after subsection (q) the following new subsection:

`(r) Qualified Newspaper Corporation- For purposes of this title, a corporation or organization shall be treated as a qualified newspaper corporation if--

`(1) the trade or business of such corporation or organization consists of publishing on a regular basis a newspaper for general circulation,

`(2) the newspaper published by such corporation or organization contains local, national, and international news stories of interest to the general public and the distribution of such newspaper is necessary or valuable in achieving an educational purpose, and

`(3) the preparation of the material contained in such newspaper follows methods generally accepted as educational in character.'.

(c) Unrelated Business Income of a Qualified Newspaper Corporation- Section 513 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

`(k) Advertising Income of Qualified Newspaper Corporations- The term `unrelated trade or business' does not include the sale by a qualified newspaper corporation (as defined in section 501(r)) of any space for commercial advertisement to be published in a newspaper, to the extent that the space allotted to all such advertisements in such newspaper does not exceed the space allotted to fulfilling the educational purpose of such qualified newspaper corporation.'.

(d) Deduction for Charitable Contributions- Subparagraph (B) of section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting `(including a qualified newspaper corporation as defined in section 501(r))' after `educational purposes'.

(e) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.



Trackback: Judge burns 1st Amendment on Constitution Day, reads Miranda rights to Pirate News

Trial archive

Traffic camera news archive

"See in L.A., people would say, 'why not just shoot them out?' In L.A., a day doesn't go by you don't see a styrofoam cup stuck over the lens of the speed camera."
-Jay Leno, BBC TV Top Gear






Another judge in the Cliff Clark case in the news

"Once a revered Knox County Criminal Court judge, Richard Baumgartner on Tuesday shuffled into a federal courtroom in shackles, accused of covering up the drug-trafficking crimes of the mistress he met via a Drug Court program he helped found. Baumgartner, who sent thousands of people to prison in his nearly two-decade-long tenure as judge, was arrested Tuesday as he drove away from his East Knox County farm and hauled into U.S. District Court with shackles on his feet and a chain wrapped around his belly and connected to handcuffs."
-Jamie Satterfield, Knoxville News Sentinel, Former Judge Richard Baumgartner faces 7 federal counts of failing to report felonious activity, May 16, 2012

No comments: