Townhall.com::Video Player

You need Flash Player 8 or higher to view video content with the ROO Flash Player. Click here to download and install it.

Vote on It:

Average Vote:

Shredding the Constitution

Jillian Bandes exanmines sonia sotomayor's Constitutional history

Your Name:	Your Email:	Email Addresses (separate by commas): Save my list Your email has been sent.
Comments:

View comments in ascending order

Jane writes:	Saturday, September, 12, 2009 12:40 AM
Attorneys lie to the court everyday
Defendant comes to the court defend her property and demands a non biased judge that knows about The Americans With Disabilities ACT of 1990, ‘ADA’ and about Victim’s Rights laws. Also that a Pre-Trial hearing needs held before an unbiased judge in Volusia County to show the evidence, and to show the ‘officers of the court’ seem to have a “pattern” of tricking disadvantaged victim’s of domestic violence in the Middle District of Florida. , (EJF) a disabled citizen litigant, through no fault of her own (who was supposed to have counsel, but no one’s willing to go by Rule of Law, Fla. laws. or ADA/Victims Rights laws so she must defend herself in the following: (under ‘ADA’ reasonable modifications, and accommodations: ) 1. MOTION TO SHOW THE LAST CASE ‘12173 CIDL’ WAS DONE BY USING FRAUD! 1. MOTION TO SHOW LAST CASE ( 2173 ) WAS DONE USING FRAUD, and due to that “fraud upon the court,” and the fact the case was still being appealed when the court used malfeasance, and unlawfully signed an order (due to fraud) that did harm. This court must now address that prior fraud concerning the same property, that was wrongly done by the same judge. a. And, also allow the physically challenged victim of a crime (that clearly left her impaired and handicapped) when in court, and that she needs extra time, and she noticed the court before and, this court needs to actually learn about her certified disabilities- before trying to obstruct justice again. b. There’s a substantial likelihood that it would not be difficult to restore the rightful owner to her property if the court would only admit the Attorney himself admitted there was fraud used in the prior case before this court. 2. Furthermore, it is likely that the substantial harm would not have occurred if the fraud had not been unlawfully used by AMKF and her attorney in 12173 CIDL. 3. In the above MOTION ‘EJF’ is asserting the ADA title II laws give the disabled victim the time she needs to show this court the facts that surround how A M K F used fraud concerning the rights of E J F’s lawful right to the allowable liens placed on property was unlawfully sold in a diabolical incomprehensible CRIMINAL hush-hush secret after former husband died, but before probate was over, and without paying the creditor and, “Before making a ruling because that fraud upon the court makes the last ruling unlawful and “void able.” 4. Critics of pro se citizens ( being able to come to court ) are being obstructed in a sneaky way to get around the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. And it’s done, by enlisting the help of their fellow court officers, - into helping promote their political agenda with their anfractuous ways to deny us our “Constitutional rights” and to make sure only attorneys may address the courts in the future. 5. The darkly suggestive wording the officers use to make sure a citizen’s due process to their right to redress the court, to show there was fraud on the court, causes them to be obstructed from their justice. Their fellow officers, are calling anything a pro se tries to tell the court, that it’s a “frivolous” thing, and the other officers of the court follow their political agenda, by marking the case as frivolous (even if it is not frivolous). Because if the lower court officers include that word any place on their document it is wrongly assumed to be true even without an affidavit or stipulation. 6. And to clear out their work load, the higher court does not even look at a pro se’s words of explanation, or that the laws were broken or fraud was used in the case. The pro se’s documents are simply denied if it says ‘pro se’ especially if the pro se is insolvent, i. e., see exhibits called “Judge Evander” proving documents are never or seldom looked at by judges of the appeals court ! The case was denied by trickery. 7. It’s all deceitful “prestidigitation” (trickery) to a naive observer, such as victim’s of domestic violence, that are left in a trauma, and are unable to understand what is going on- just after an attempted murder—due to “Complex PTDS, and severe panic.” 8. To trick an impaired disadvantage person by failing to make sure the Complaint’s properly done with an affidavit or stipulation is clearly a trick done to the pro se, who finds out later that the altered Orders by the first officer of the court, was also unlawfully done, against Rules / Laws, is ‘immensely relevant’ to victim / ADA /laws. 9. The “constructive trust” is also a very relevant part of this case. And because there is money owed to EJF from AMKF and the property at Deneece Tr. would be part of that money- if only a quitclaim deed was ordered- signed by AMKF timely. 10. F.S. 837.02 (3): a mistaken belief that the attorney’s statement was not material is not a defense. 11. Clearly, when the judge said in the court hearing that AMKF should just sign the quitclaim deed (if it was found out that the liens are allowable) shows “that is what should have happened two months ago in the case. Fraud is a serious issue. 12. Prior case (12173 CIDL) took a severe financial, physical, and emotional toll on the victim of crime, and she still suffers from complex post-traumatic stress disorder with severe panic along with other debilitating disabilities that gives reason for to have extra time to do things when in courtrooms, i. e., due to ‘Legal Abuse Syndrome.’ 13. There is one thing that needs mentioned here, that until the people in charge will prosecute perjury done any where, by anyone, the Nation’s courts will keep on deteriorating, and the corruption in the courts, caused by attorneys, will keep on going unless those in charge will start going by Laws, and stand for justice. 14. Unlawful perjury and Fraud must be stopped, and to do that it requires that if an attorney lies to the court, they must be held accountable for that lie. In other words, perjury and/or fraud, no matter who does it must be prosecuted in a court of law to the full extent of the law. ( no one, who lies in court, deserves to go free if they are treacherously harming other citizens.) 15. Due to her disabilities--- When the prior judges’ failed to listen to EJF’s typed words they violated the victim’s ADA rights, and the judge had ex parte meeting after canceling her hearing to show him evidence attorney had lied to the court, that has kept her at a severe disadvantage and the judge should recuse now. 16. There must be a full and meaningful pre trial and evidentiary hearing where everyone is put under “Oath” in the court room this time, everyone that is going to speak to the court (including the attorney) for I have learned that attorneys do not always tell the judges the gospel truth or affidavit things. Under ADA “MOTION TO SHOW THE LAST CASE WAS DONE BY USING FRAUD” was filed (and in light of the fact ADA laws and Victims Rights laws were deliberately and/ or callously ignored) this court must take the time to look at the good and allowable Victims Rights laws about the liens--- F.S. 960.295, and the Constitution’s 14th Amend. 17. Under the above, and the United States Constitution and Florida’s Constitution as well as the Federal and State ADA laws and ‘Victims Rights ‘laws, was denied equal access to the courts, and is requesting declaratory and equitable relief and for financial compensatory damages to her properties and for physical, emotional and financial compensation left by deliberate delays or indifference to Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) laws— that were passed to protect victims of crime that are disabled. Lifting the lien was unlawful as in it’s a crime to do that. 18. The embezzlement started approximately in the month of June in 1994, to the present date. EJF maintained from the day the altered order came out that Laws were broken and that the judge did not account of anything in the family business and ignored the woman’s right to be in the correct court with the help of counsel (see ADA and Victims Rights Laws.) Specifically, Walter and A M K F knew there were liens on the 910 property for work done on said property from 1984 to 1994, for installing carpet, plant trees, painting, repairs, work done on the appliances and furnace etc. 19. RE: FALSE STATEMENTS MADE ON ‘OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS’ BY AMKF AND her ATTORNEY 20. See Aue v Aue 685 So.2d 1388 (Fla.1st DCA 1997) An analysis of the "issues in the prior case as they should have reasonably appeared at the outset." Id. The former husband's widow and counsel, did not have the authority to sell of assets before probate was finished. Book 5131 / pg 2179 date of Walters death - JUNE 16, 2003 21. If a lawyer is ‘guilty of unduly falsifying official court documents’ in his own self interest, then the court procedures are not truly meaningful, thus, are ‘void able.‘ 22. Further, if the lawyer is guilty of bad faith (as in Diaz, that the failure to take discovery is grounds to warrant fees being assessed for the bad faith used in dealing with the lack of discovery. Fear may well settle some cases- but without disclosure how can a lack of a disabled victim’s “rights” be in the best interest of the public? The officers of the court have clearly fouled up the case. And, citizen’s need to have their justice. Winkelman v Parma City School District, 05-983 US Supreme Court, May 21, 2007 23. Full and fair disclosure is key to a valid and fair trial. What litigant can appropriately make a decision to settle without a truthful financial affidavit? What person can see adequate evidence without a truthful financial affidavit, which would render one subjected to a finding of prima facie malpractice. 24. This court has the inherent authority to assess attorneys' fees against counsel for litigating in bad faith. See Aue v Aue, 685 So. 2d 1388 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) 25. F.S. 837.06 - False official statements. -- Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his or her official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. A normal thing to do before putting fraud on a document would be to check out facts in the clerk of court files’ (takes about 3 minutes on the computer.) 26. Our judicial system is designed to achieve justice.... in order to achieve this goal, courts must ensure that at trial, fact finders will be presented with relevant and trustworthy evidence, but unfortunately, in these cases, relevant evidence was neglected and intentionally destroyed by officers of the court, before the tort trial ever began. And, this kind of spoliation of evidence poses a serious threat to the integrity of our judicial system. 27. This case is about the lack of distribution of the marital assets of ; See Bane v Bane, SC 99-93, where Fla. S. Ct. Justice Pariente explains Fla. R. Civ. P. and how if one person is disadvantaged the court can apply F.S. 61.16 (1). 28. This needed hearing is to show fraud, mistakes and misprisions by the last court going by customs and not following the laws. See Diaz v Diaz, 727 So. 2d 954, April 7, 1999 [97-334] as just one example, because there are consequences for counsel who litigated in bad faith. See art. V, ? 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. 29. As elaborated by the former Wife many times, at the outset of the cases, it should have been obvious to any reasonable man that: …………. (1) the wife ‘ EJF’ had been made to go to court when she was still far too ill; (2) there was no realistic possibility that the wife could stand alone in court and the laws were ignored (61.16) and others, and when this type of domestic violence case happens it is a ‘signal’ to the attorney’s that they can drag things on and on, due to fact it is the husband that wants to punish the wife for calling the police and because that caused him to lose control of her- so he (and his attorney make a plan to do more harm to her ) and, of course, his attorney knows it will bring him more funds…. or more “billable hours” –there’s a ‘pattern’ in all this…. and (3) there was a high probability that the lawyer made the case much worse in litigation, because of domestic violence, attempted murder, and battery--- causes a disabled female to become extremely afraid and unable to know what to do--- so attorneys trick them. 30. In litigation, it was probable that the restitution figure would have been settled but because of the obvious neglect of ‘duty of care’ among the officers of the court, this case was neglected severely. And nothing was ever level in the case; 31. That fifty percent of the marital share of the assets were placed at risk, due to neglect of the attorney’s duty of care, and clearly, the wife’s permanent alimony claim would have succeed due to the certified evidence that the husband was already sentenced to a year in jail for harming Edna Jane, due to the substantial evidence on record there is no excuse for the diabolical things that have taken place in the Middle District Courts of Florida. But when an unethical attorney enters the picture and participates in things it become as if they have taken over the victims life, as it did in this case, too many times. (i) However, due to the past courts intentionally or deliberately ignoring the ADA laws the disabled wife was left to suffer due to the callous and/or deliberate neglect of the ADA laws investigation and due to the attorneys using trickery and perjury on official documents. (ii) This court should conclude that after the evidence is examined fully and the fraud is found that the claim of Anna May is baseless for she still owes Edna Jane her part of the last property that was unlawfully sold without being probated using competent substantial evidence that shows Edna Jane was not paid her part of the assets belonging to her under Florida Statute . (iii) In case 2006 20046 CINS - EJF was tricked by court officers. When a judge closed the probate case under fraud he said EJF could file an independent action. (iv) However, the judge in that case ( 2006 20046 CINS ) refused to let her talk although she had noticed the court it would take her extra time to talk due to her disabilities (saying he had to go – it was lunch time.) And, according to the outcome of his ruling he never heard from EJF ( for he lost her written words) and ruled without and ruled without hearing from both sides. Clearly, the officers took advantage of the disabled woman’s impairments and …………disability, and that’s against their Bar Oath, among other things and the laws. For years the lawyers have over priced their services to the point, only the rich can fully access the courts. However, that’s completely against our Constitution (to conspire to obstruct a citizen’s justice so anything a citizen tries to do--- is called “frivolous” by the powers that be.) Showing there seems to be two sets of rules, one for the Attorneys, and one for the citizens. See Case No: 20046 CINS 06/22/2006 41.000 OBJECTION BY to ruling before all the evidence is presented 32. As to the Constructive Trust RE: EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF MARITAL ASSETS 61.075(1) Edna Jane seeks distribution of her constructive trust under the above statute. The court must reserve the right to consider this on a case by case basis because of those situations where title was taken in the name of one spouse and therefore the property may constitute marital property due to the fact Edna Jane paid the mortgages and managed the property for years and she hereby demands a jury trial concerning failure of the court to disperse those assets to her. 33. The inherent authority of this trial court, like the power of contempt, carries with it the obligation not to hamper due process of a disabled victim of domestic violence that in mentally challenged when away from her home (safe place). See Medical Doctors Notice to the court. 34. Thus, after seeing TFB letter saying attorney Hughes admitted he used incorrect information clearly it is a finding of bad faith conduct and must be addressed --- because the factual findings clearly show fraud upon the court was committed and was incurred as a result of specific ‘bad faith’ conduct of several attorneys. 35. Because throughout the court records it can be seen that the disabled victim’s claims were clearly asserted and supported with many detailed factual findings describing the specific acts of bad faith conduct that resulted in the unnecessary incurrence to have to have more hearing just because the officers refuse to read her typed words ( which is part of her disabilities because she cannot think clearly or make words when in court) 36. There must be a jury trial where the Defendant can present full and meaningful evidence and witnesses. See TFB letter where Attorney Hughes admitted to using incorrect information on the court. see page 14 to see he said he used false info. 37. The fact the opposing attorney has blocked my fax number from his office shows bad faith in his dealings with a pro se victim of abuse and attempted murder that has been tricked in the past by other officers of the court. 38. This is interfering in the administration of justice in the courts for the disabled victim of a crime. This was totally uncalled for and totally unnecessary but, is done everyday to poor pro se citizens with a good case that was filed in good faith. And attorneys who are responsible for carrying it to extreme, must be fully sanctioned, according to statutes, and I am just utterly appalled and very upset at what has happened in this litigation. . 39. See case 12173 CIDL where this judge Canceled Defendants hearing on 06/28/2004 40. An analysis of the "issues in the prior case as they should have reasonably appeared at the outset, has been denied to the disabled victim." Justice Delayed is Justice denied and clearly if you are not part of the solution then you must be part of the problem....
Email It \| Print It \| Flag as Offensive

Sheik writes:	Thursday, June, 04, 2009 11:46 PM
I miss Amanda
At least she was smart, witty, classy and very pretty. Is this the new young face for TH?
Email It \| Print It \| Flag as Offensive

afuel writes:	Tuesday, June, 02, 2009 4:56 AM
The Kool Aid contigent
is out making the rounds per the assignment desk of Daily Cuz. The libtard will never listen or understand facts unless they fit their view of the world as they live in a world of hate and discontent. Soto has to be a far left facist egomaniac because she was appointed by the Messiah. Who or what else would he appoint? The facts prove a known. Being a member of La Raza is icing on the cake (street creds as they say).
Email It \| Print It \| Flag as Offensive

dan writes:	Monday, June, 01, 2009 4:07 AM
filibuster rule can be eliminated
The filibuster can easily be defeated. Some of you may remember when democrats were threatening to filibuster sam alito. Republican senate majority leader, william frist threatbed to change the senate rules to disallow the filbuster, and confirm alito by a smiple majority vote, Frist, as majority leader had the right to do that. The democrats knew it, and they ended their filibuster. But, now the shoe is on the other foot. if the republcians in the senate get crazy, Reid can change the senate rules as frist threatend to do, and confirm sotomayor with 51 votes. This is not a wise fight to pick. There are far more liberal judges than sostmayor waingt inthe wings...use you brains Jill-if you have any- which your video suggests is an open question. To see how simple it would be to remove the filibuster se the following links: (http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/05/25/bush_and_frist_got_what_they_wanted/) See also: http://www.slate.com/id/2117015/ And http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~wjs/NuclearOption.htm"
Email It \| Print It \| Flag as Offensive

richard writes:	Sunday, May, 31, 2009 9:48 PM
Hey Jillian
Did shredding the Constitution make you feel just like Bush?
Email It \| Print It \| Flag as Offensive

12 3

Please take a few seconds to sign up, then you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, create your own blog and more! If you are already registered, click here.

Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.

Salutation:

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Address 1:

Address 2:

City:

State:

Zip:

Townhall Daily Alert

Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.

Townhall.com Spotlight

(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.

Most Recent Most Votes Most Viewed