In this battle to be heard at the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, November is a significant month. And so, it seems apropos that before the month is out, I supply a November update. Arriving October 19, 2021, I have appealed to the Judicial Conference for action on, just for starters, the document fraud and forgery being covered up as actual crimes.
ORIGINAL COMPLAINTS OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT
The Original Complaints arrived to the Sixth Circuit on November 3, 2018. Acknowledgement of receipt and Complaint Numbers were assigned on: 12/06/2018.
It then took the Circuit Executive twenty-nine (29-months) before I received the automatic turn-down dismissing the complaints without addressing the content. Doing so on: 04/26/2021 a year after my self-published book: Illegal Foreclosure, Title Theft, and its Chain of Corruption first appeared on Amazon. More telling still, in the same month and just after my first blog appeared, aptly called: Catch and Kill: A Civil Rights Violation.
In searching for answers as to how it could be that not a single one of my appeal questions had been answered by any Order coming out of the Sixth Circuit, I learned of the separate and unequal delegation practices that fueled the corruption I was subjected to. In overwhelming disparity pro se prisoner and non-prisoner appeals or… any arbitrarily pre-determined appeal unwelcome for almost any biased reason is sent along an unequal route scripted to end in dismissals. Appellate judges then sign off on these employee-authored Orders/Mandates they neither read, nor vet for accuracy. This is the automatic turn-down route that masquerades as justice. That routinely strip profiled and selected appeals of Constitutional Rights, Procedural Due Process, and Article 111 Judging.
This pre-determined dismissal route helps the criminal syndicate and those with political agendas to destabilize America from within. Many of whom see American Tax Payers and what tax dollars pay for as ripe for infiltration and theft. With the separate and unequal dismissal track in place and accepted as the new normal, corruption given a pass at the federal district court level, can be just as easily blocked on appeal. I’d say “Wake Up America,” but I’m pretty sure we are waking up in growing numbers. We see all around us examples on multiple fronts of attacks against this nation by those we’ve trusted. All accomplished via sanctioned and institutionalized corruption, over-reach seated in treason and tyranny impacting entire segments of government that no longer work for the American people.
DELAY, STONEWALL, LIE AND DENY
The Circuit Executive at the Appeals Courts handle complaints of Judicial Misconduct and Disability. MISCONDUCT to say that judges may have acted wrongly. Or DISABILITY to say that judges may be impaired to the extent that they cannot do their jobs. The three-judge panel assigned to address my Pro Se Appellants Brief filed under the second decoy Case No.: 17-5618 were made DISABLED on the very day that my appeal moved from the first corrupt Sixth Circuit Case Manager to the second via forgery and replacement of a filing.
Failure to address my appeal questions means that every robo-signed Oder/Mandate that addressed fictional appeal questions standing on a foundation of forgery and document fraud is a void judgement; having no power to enforce. The Seventh Circuit ruled that: “…a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final.”
Following the same step practices evidenced by delay, stonewall, lie and deny then sealed the fate that my Complaints of Judicial Misconduct, (two directed to the Screening for Merit abuses at the District Court; two directed to Sixth Circuit corruption) exposing the automatic dismissal route as a Civil Rights Crime perpetrated by the Appeals Court upon those very rights they are sworn to uphold could not be allowed even the whimper of a challenge upon the locked and barred flood gate. Brown v. Board of Education (17 May 1954) ruled that “separate is inherently unequal.”
Corrupting the Error Correction primary role of the Appeals Courts would of course, be followed by corruption of the complaint process. Why wouldn’t the Circuit Executive employ the same catch and kill tactics engaged by the Clerk’s Office that they and the Chief Judge at the time allowed? This is the unequal treatment they are protecting. Doing so, first under the control of Clarence Maddox and now under the control of Marc Theriault the Circuit Executive have failed to apply the rules that govern how complaints are to be handled.
GUIDE TO JUDCIAL POLICTY: RULES FOR JUDICIAL-CONDUCT AND JUDICIAL-DISABILITY PROCEEDINGS. ETHICS AND JUDICIAL CONDUCT… . Corruption skimming the surface of accountability, operating under cover of hijacked authority, will always thrive to infect every person and thing it touches.
DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE
And thus, the over the top, crack-addict on steroids determination to catch and kill my Complaints of Judicial Misconduct before they could be addressed. Commentary under Rule 19 reads that Complaints of Judicial Misconduct upon being assigned to a council, that council’s job is to investigate the claims. The playbook doesn’t change. The opportunity for corruption is a wide-open-come-hither invitation made possible by the arbitrary assignment of appeals to the sole control of those that are not judges. One might hesitate to bribe a federal judge. Not so much career bureaucrats wielding power that is not theirs to possess; enabled to decide what judges will and will not see.
Just as my appeal questions were never addressed my claims of Judicial Misconduct, proven by the courts own record and under the auspices of the Sixth Circuit – Circuit Executive, have never been addressed. The rules read that, complaints of Judicial Misconduct and Disability are to be treated: “for all practical purposes as an appeal.” This did NOT happen. “…or in exceptional cases, taking appropriate action.” Forgery and document fraud operating as actual crimes are exceptional circumstances.
After three years with no possibility of justice in sight, the proverbial buck (the buck stops here) has now come to a screeching halt with the Judicial Conference in Washington, DC. In part, whose job it is to: “Exercise authority provided in chapter 16 of the title 28 United States Codes for the review of the Circuit Council conduct and disability orders filed under that chapter…”
The Circuit Executive has been protecting the practice of delegating “less than appeals” for quick disposal to Clerks and Staff Attorneys. Forgetting the rules, they see this as their job. No person can defend against the separate and unequal track to which pro se appeals are overwhelmingly assigned if they do not imagine these Civil Rights Violations as stripping them of their Constitutional Rights. Getting away with this, it stands to reason that appeals that reflect on institutionalized corruption or unwelcome issues, are also slid along the same conveyer belt coming with, not only denial of access to a panel of Appellate Judges, but with automatic denial of Oral Arguments. Appellate Judges robo-signing employee-authored Orders, indulging and affirming the unrecognized confirmation bias regarding “less than” appeals makes a mockery of any notion of equality before the bench.
Implicit in the delegation practices is the idea that certain “less than” appeals are not worth the time and attention of Appellate Judges. They are not intellectually challenging. They are not precedent setting or career building. Appeals are weeded out before they can be heard. If this sounds inherently unconstitutional, that is because it is.
The Case Manager you are assigned will not say: “Hey, judges are too busy for you. We don’t like your appeal nor the inconvenient or politically charged challenge(s), nor the issues you seek to be heard on. Furthermore, you are under-represented. Or you are not represented at all by an attorney. Game on! You are ripe for this weeding out process. Before you can even be heard you are cancelled by career bureaucrats having hijacked judicial authority. Now follow the Pre Se Script and give up any foolish defense of your Constitutional access to a level playing field; to be heard on every appeal question involving your rights, before actual judges.
THE COMPLIANCE CHARADE
Walking through the administrative pretense, ticking all the boxes is not the same as complying with the requirements dictated by the rules and regulations required of the Judicial Complaint process. The Circuit Executive at the Sixth Circuit failed to address that not a single one of my appeal questions were answered. That my Pro Se Appeal was stripped of Procedural Due Process safeguards. That the rules of Appellate Procedure were not followed. Failed to address denial of notice to judges and other crimes engaged in by the administrative arm of the Sixth Circuit. They are preserving the streamlined, second class, separate and unequal delegation practices seated in toxic levels of contempt for those that cannot afford to pay for legal representation. Called in one court publication, “a headache.”
These “weeding out” delegation practices have corrupted the appeals process. They have fueled abuses seated in the huge disparity of power. In a nut-shell this is the largely unrecognized and hibernating Civil Rights issue of our times. Brown v. Board of Education (17 May 1954) ruled that “separate is inherently unequal.” Why? Because separate and unequal always leads to institutionalized sanctioned and rights-stealing bias breeding contempt for those perceived as powerless and therefore ripe for exploitation. The Circuit Executive engaging in cover-up are defending policy at the expense of law. Confronted with evidence they seek to bury that evidence. Instead of saying, “the error correction appeals process failed,” a dysfunctional and inherrently dangerous Circuit Executive has doubled-down to unflinchingly proclaim, “Rules do not apply; I am so right; I am above the law.”
As far as I can tell nothing related to my complaints have ever been docketed. Ongoing corruption requires that the Circuit Executive limit the public record. It is doubtful that Judicial Council members, other than Judge Karen Nelson Moore and Judge Eric L. Clay, whose appointments both expired in September 2021, were ever joined by other council members. Not all federal judges approve the delegation of appeals to clerks and staff attorneys. Upon belief that the Original Complaints sent in November 2018 no longer exist; likely fed to a paper shredder. A real council formed by a diverse group of judges could not be counted upon to deliver the needed coverup outcomes committed to by the Circuit Executive in November 2018. The Circuit Executive in failing to do their job are hiding evidence of forgery and document fraud.
FROM THE CIRCUIT EXECTUTIVE TO THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE
I was then told that I had NO RIGHT to petition the Judicial Conference Committee in Washington for review and action. To say that the Judicial Conference would not be interested in document fraud and forgery operating as actual crimes under their watch. The thing about being repeatedly lied to is that you no longer listen. I did appeal to the Judicial Conference in Washington, DC. I sent all off per overnight delivery at a cost of $95.50; arriving October 19, 2021, tracking No.: EJ881545926US.
Why, share these details? Because in the past I have been told something was not received to the sixth circuit and upon proving that it was, the corrupt Clerk’s Office, after first blame shifting to me, suddenly “found” what was missing. The Original November 2018 Complaints were dropped into a black hole at the Circuit Executive; three years and counting, still not addressed on content and claims. Excusing failure to submit the En Banc Petition to all judges, protecting recognition of corruption, the Clerk’s Office called that Peititon a “Suggestion.” The last filed Motion for a Void Judgement sits in the que at the Sixth Circuit treated as though it does not exist in the realm of fact. Prior conduct being a predictor of future conduct it is therefore, not outside the realm of possibility that networked bureaucrats would ensure that my petitions never got to the Judicial Conference or to the desk or attention of seven justices. Feeding the confirmation bias that comes with dismissive labels, I have been called a crack-pot; my complaints of Judicial Misconduct “frivolous.” Such is the sanctioned contempt to which pro se litigants, precieved as powerless, are treated.
Our founders intended for each federal court to serve a different purpose. The Appeals Courts address possible errors made at the district courts involving issues of law, procedure, and the Constitution. The error correction mandate of the Appeals courts stand in the breach between a beleaguered populace, growing corruption and the greed, tyranny, and treason engaged in by those that see the Constitution of the United States of America as an impediment.
THE WEEDING OUT ABUSES
My voice was obliterated so as to shield Screening for Merit as the first tool to weed out pro se cases at the District Court level. Doing so before cases can be heard in the open forum of a courtroom. Secondly when appeals and those that file certain appeals are profiled as not worth the time and attention of an Appellate Panel of Judges. This is the secondary weeding-out-tool, i.e., the separate and unequal delegation practices. Taking federal Judges out of the appeals equation made the tyranny that I and others have experienced in faceless, silent, growing numbers, possible. Pause and think. Corrupt clerks were able to run a kangaroo court absent all oversight and accountability under the noses of the very Circuit Executive now actively engaged in coverup.
Remember this. The Circuit Executive is investigating themselves. They are over the administration functions of the appeals process. They see their job as protecting the reputation of the federal courts. Ironically perserving public trust; essential for a healthy republic. Because we have conflicts of interest built into the system, and because the entire complaint process is so secretive the role played by the Judicial Conference is essential in preserving Constitutinal rights.
RICHMAN, REYNOLDS, PETHER AND POSNER
What happened to my appeal and to me personally as a single example is addressed in the book: INJUSTICE ON APPEAL written by, two retired law professors. William Richman (College of Law – University of Toledo) and William Reynolds (University of Maryland – Francis King Carey School of Law).
This book should be on the required reading list of every law school in America. Becaue it is expensive, I cannot read it with highlighter and tabs in place as I would like.
I did however read and quote the late Villanova Law Professor: Penelope Pether: “Sorcerers, Not Apprentices: How Judicial Clerks and Staff Attorney’s Impoverish U.S. Law;” 39 Ariz. St. L.J. 1 (2007) “…that the corpus of clerk and staff attorney-authorized opinions is not merely likely to be sloppy or wrong, but that it has structurally subordinating effects. On the rare occasion that they register the kind of second-class treatment that is likely to produce injustice, they (federal courts) do not make the connection between flawed procedure and its result: systemic injustice somehow becomes invisible.” FJC Report; supra note 82.
Between 2007 and today, there is no “rare occasion” any more. Seperate and unequal has become the new normal. Like all Civil Rights crimes the delgation practices have become increasingly more enabled disenfranchisng selected and profiled appellants from the Error Correction primary role of the Appeals Process.
Seventh Circuit Judge, Richard A. Posner attempted to level the playing field with no effect. Other judges have done the same; many feeling very strongly about the delegation practices. Another person denied their rights emailed me this statement: “Researchers have shown that it takes at least 4% of a population to push for change before favorable change occurs. In America that would mean about 12,000,000 people would have to demand equal protection for the poor.”
I don’t agree. All it would take is for federal judges to stop being so enamored of their power and the rarified status of their appointments, the opinion of powerful peers who in part do not want to see more judges appointed. Standing up to say, NO MORE. Proclaiming: The oaths we took to, administer justice without respect of persons… That oath to faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties… and solemnly swear to support the Constitution of the United States of America… ACTUALLY, MATTERS and yet IS CURRENTLY MALIGNED, THAWARTHED, AND CORRUPTED; at threat to our very republic.
There are many nonprofit advocates. Some are quite famous and others are kitchen table prisoner-rights defenders. In my humble opinion all should collectively focus on those delegation practices that deprive the poor and operationally disenfranchised persons of their rights. Civilizations have vanished when average people are more and more denied access to justice, moral equibalance, equal application of the law executed with compassion, fairness, and a commitment to truth.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN AT THE JUDCIAL CONFERENCE?
I don’t know. As near as I can tell there is no requirement that I will ever have an answer or an outcome. I have only the postal receipt to tell me that what I sent actually arrived. This speaks again to the levels of disdain to which American citizens who dare to persist in pursuit of transparency, answers, and an equal playing field are treated. Any response may be a mere droplet of rain lost in the insider politics of judicial affairs, leaving victims out of any equation.
I can however, tell you some of what I wrote to the Judicial Conference asking for review of the cover-up decisions from the Sixth Circuit – Circuit Executive. Laying out the chain of corruption engaged in by the Clerk’s Office. At the end of this blog are some quotes from other cases that might help any person treated as I have been.
CORRUPT CHAIN OF CONDUCT
I WROTE TO THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE THAT… That the the Order of 11/14/2017  Second Case No.: 17-5618 quashed and obliterated my voice. Fictional appeal questions substituted for my actaul appeal questions. That the document fraud produced by corrupt clerks is proven by the sixth circuit own record. That this is never addressed or acknowledged to have taken place under the cover-up control of the Sixth Circuit – Circuit Executive complaint process. Now three years on. Now hoping for an outcome from the Judicial Conference… Will the seven justices be outraged by document fraud and forgery?
- MOTION TO APPOINT COUNCIL IS NOT AN APPEAL QUESTION. Second Case Manager, Jeannine Hance writes into the docket:  ORDER Filed: We affirm the judgement of the district court and DENY as moot the motion to appoint council. If any Motion to Appoint Council is found to exist it would be a whole-cloth forgery. Motion to Appoint Council is not even cited in the Jeannine Hance authored order of 11/14/2017  Second Case No.: 17-5618. As a pattern of practice, seen in the conduct of both Sixth Circuit Case Managers, this lie misleads any superficial reviewer to believe that an actual trial took place at the District Court. This lie is repeatedly woven into the record serving to conceal the Screening for Merit context of every actual appeal quesion. Hereafter, as a fraud narrative, MOTION TO APPOINT COUNCIL will be treated as a valid appeal question by those that fail to read what I have actually written. Such is the bias and contempt made possible by the delgation practices to which Pro Se Appellants are treated. Pro Se Appeals are not even deserving of an honest read.
- THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT OR ANY AMENDED COMPLAINT is NOT an appeal question. It functions as a smokescreen intruding nine-times into the clerk-authored Order of 11/14/2017  Second Case No.: 17-5618, quashing the actual fourteen appeal questions from recognition.
The first Panel of Judges, 16-6672,  02/24/2017; Case Manager Karen Fultz, sent my appeal back to the district court for ruling on what were, outstanding appealable “ISSUES” (plural and not singular). The Second Amended Complaint was the only one of the “issues” named in this substandard employee authored order. It was NOT an APPEAL Question. The district court never supplied an answer thanks to the exit provided by the Karen Fultz conduct described further along as the Petition for Rehearing lie.
As a paper tiger, much space is devoted to the Amended Complaint and, or, the Second Amended Complaint including, within Acting Chief Judge Moore’s Memorandum and Order(s) of 04/23/2021. This brings one to ask: was acting Chief Judge Moore supplied with a full record from the Circuit Executive? In repeating the fraud narrative coming from the corrupt clerk’s office, Judge Moore appears not even remotely aware of what is alleged in the Complaints of Judicial Misconduct. In presiding over the destiny of my Complaints of Judicial Misconduct she elevated this utterly fictitious appeal question as the dishonest red herring it was intended to function as.
In her Memorandum and Order of 04/23/2021; addressing the district court complaints as Complaint No.: 06-18-90 103 and 104 the words, “Screening for Merit” do not even appear. SCREENING FOR MERIT IS NOT DUE PROCESS was essential for her to recognize as the basis of every unanwered Appeal Question, each quashed by forgery.
As a federal Judge sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America I must wonder. How does Judge Moore feel about being used to conceal mistakes, errors, document fraud and forgery? Each perfecting denial of the right to be heard on actual appeal questions as an ongoing provable pattern of engagement and then cover-up? How can she feel about being used to bury the Complaints of Judicial Misconduct now, still not addressed on content, three years on; first filed Nov. 2018? Today Nov. 2021? I’d like to know. As Alan Dershowitz is claimed to have said: “Judges are the weakest link in our system of justice and they are also the most protected”
Being hyper averse to admitting mistakes speaks to a dangerous culture, persons and institutions, doing harm; no longer capable of being “salt nor light.”
“FRIVOLOUS” THE CATCH AND KILL LABEL
Acting Chief Judge Moore’s Memorandums and Orders of 04/23/2021 were then rubber stamped by Circuit Judge Eric L. Clay. He too appears to be acting as another hand puppet for the Circuit Executive and, or, he too has been deprived of a full record.
“Frivolous” is a catch and kill blanket-label speaking to and excusing operatonal bias pre-supposing that Pro Se Cases are not worth the time and effort to actually read what is asserted. Nor, as a logical next-step, to investigate those specific claims presented on Appeal as to whether errors took place at the lower courts and are: “capable of being established.”
Judge Clay and Judge Moore walked through the charade of meeting the superficial administrative requirements of the Circuit Executive cover-up scheme committed to in November of 2018 without ever addressing.
- That not a single one of the actual appeal questions have been answered by any Order issued from the Sixth Circuit.
- Failed to address the separation of filings; two Case Managers, two Case Numbers.
- Failed to address replacement by forgery of the 06/01/2917 Notice directed to the first Panel of Judges that my appeal should resume in which fourteen summary appeal questions, later fleshed out in the Pro Se Appellant’s Brief, all stemming from Screening for Merit violations, are listed.
- That forgery and replacement of a filing was used as a fraud device to open a second Case Number; appointing a second Case Manager.
- Does not address that in a complete failure of oversight Procedural Due Process, meant to protect persons from mistaken and, or, unjustified deprivations of life, liberty, or property, were not applied to this appeal.
- Nor that the separate and unequal delegation culture deprive persons of access to judges and judging,
- Deprived of the Error Correction function of the appeals process;
- Deprived of oral arguments which could not be allowed, since if allowed the fictitious appeal questions as examples of document fraud and forgery, intruding into the sixth circuit record and…
- The Assignment of Errors filing buried under the first case number…
- …and other actions informing concert of action between two Case Managers to sink this appeal before it could be validly addressed, would have been exposed in a forum producing a record that could not be buried and ignored.
THE PETITION FOR REHEARING IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF DOCUMENT FRAUD
The docket is a vital record that judges, litigants, lawyers, researchers and others rely upon; depending on it being absolutely truthful and accurate. It was used by Karen Fultz and Jeanine Hance as a fraud device to convey a story in blatant contradiction of the truth. Entries were not in place to deceive me. Arrogance and bias, is so prevalently embedded in the group dynamics that no one cared about me or my rights. In the exercise of this corruption, I was a mere after-thought. The docket entries were in place to placate the biased insider echo chamber. They were in place on the outside chance that my claims of forgery and document fraud are ever validly investigated. An investigation that fails to restore the right to be heard on every appeal question involving rights is a crime upon me, but also upon the appeals court.
The first Case Manager, Karen Fultz, docket entry reads: Petition for Rehearing before original panel filed by Ms. Alexandra Clair… Case No.: 16-6672, . The Petition for Rehearing could not be before the first panel of judges because IT DID NOT EXIST. What I actually filed was a request for clarity as to what the first panel of judges considered not answered by the District Court. If the chain of corruption would unfold as intended I could not have any answer that would restore jurisdiction; allowing me to move forward. This ORDER, premised on a lie is locked by the sixth circuit over the www.pacer.gov system. This is concealment of document fraud. How did the Case Manager, absent all oversight and accountability get away with this? The docket entry reads: ***ENTRY LOCKED – DOCUMENT TO BE REFILIED AS A PETITON FOR REHEARING. Appellant MOTION filed by Ms. Alexandra Clair to clarify order dated 02/24/2017. Certificate of Service: 03/06/2017 – [Edited 03/09/2017. (KSF) [Entered: 03/09/2017 12:08 PM}.
No person at the Sixth Circuit read the Karen Fultz “edit” as a possible red flag, requiring a routine supervisory review. If they had, they would have seen its purpose. The District Court needed to be supplied an excuse not to supply an answer to me, or to the first panel of judges. I had to be stopped. A criminal enterprise needed to be protected. Screening for Merit needed to be protected. A corrupt district court Magistrate Judge needed to be protected. Karen Fultz played her part. Enter the fictitious Petition for Rehearing Label corrupting the docket. When at this juncture there was NOTHING to rehear since I had not yet been been granted permission to file the Pro Se Appellant’s Brief. The Lie of this Petition allowed Ms. Fultz to then write into the docket that the first panel of judges had in sequential order:
- PRODUCED A WRITTEN ORDER
- RULED ON THAT PHONY ORDER
- And then DENIED THAT NONEXISTANT PETITION FOR REHEARING.
- To then, per use of FORGERY and REPLACEMENT OF a FILING, open a SECOND CASE NUMBER.
- To thus, SEVER THE ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS FROM THE LATER FILED PRO SE APPELLANT’S BRIEF in anticipation of successfully deceiving and denying notice to the second panel of judges.
- Misleading the SECOND PANEL OF JUDGES to sign off on the Cerk-Authored ORDERS that bore no resemblence to what was filed by me.
Such is the culture that comes with all Civil Rights violations, separate and unequal, assigning “less than” appeals to the sole discretion and control of those that have no authority to usurp Article 111 Judging. Who are then, in all effect, empowered to run a kangaroo court. The outcomes are planned, executed, and scripted.
Case No.: 16-6672  Order filed: The petition for rehearing is DENIED . Alan E. Norris, Circuit Judge, Alice M. Batchelder, Circuit Judge, Julia Smith Gibbons, Circuit Judge. Just as the first panel of judges exercised no oversight, nor could they have read anything that was filed, so did the second panel of judges follow suit. They relied on those to whom they had handed off judicial authority absent any due dilligence review.
I have never seen this Order. I cannot access it over the Pacer System; www.pacer.gov. With a lot to hide it cannot be read. Even by me, because God forbid that I, or anyone else be provided enough information that we can recognize and defend against this dual system that strips “less than” citizens of the right to be heard at the second highest courts in our land.
The two Case Managers coordinated their actions. They fully believed that no one was looking over their shoulder. They were right. No one wondered. Why one appeal, but two Case Numbers and Two Case Managers? “Hey, let’s look into this.” The Clerk’s Office and others I spoke to, could then not accept that what worked with other Pro Se Appellants was not working with me. It seems the Chief Clerk has lawyered up; “Sincerely Alicia Harden; Counsel to the Clerk;” 11/03/2020. This timely letter, repeats the illogical mantra I am continually assaulted with that… although not a single one of my appeal questions have ever been answered by the robo-signed Orders somehow magically they have been.
The Karen Fultz actions were specific. They were intentional. Her conduct was picked up by the second Case Manager. This behavior is mirrored in the same exact goals flowing forward from the District Court. While the District Court slandered my claims, the Sixth Circuit obliterated the appeal questions. Both achieveing that my Civil RICO Case would never see the light of a courtroom.
WHY THE SECOND CASE NUMBER AND THE SECOND CASE MANAGER?
The Pro Se Appellant’s Brief could not exist in the same space as the Assignment of Errors filed under the first case number. Not if the second panel of judges could be sold on the phony appeal questions. As it turned out the second corrupt Case Manager had nothing to worry about. There was no follow-up, oversight, due diligence comparison with anything filed by me. As acknowledged by Jeanine Hance, the Second Panel of Judges never read the Pro Se Appellant’s Brief.
The ease and risks embarked upon by two Case Managers at the Sixth Circuit informs us that they believed they would never be held accountable. Others had their backs and still do. Proved by the fact that my Pro Se Appellants Brief has still never been ruled on. Proved in that the right to object has been trashed. Proved in that the En Banc Peition was not sumitted as required to all judges of the court. Rather it too was immediately trashed; dumbed down as a “suggestion.” The last filed Motion for a Void Judgement and Motion to Compel an Answer sit in the que, treated as though they do not exist in the realm of fact. The first three were inserted into an envelope and mailed back to me unfiled.
After reading the two Memorandum and Orders produced by, Judge Karen Nelson Moore dated 04/23/2021. Acting on next steps, I filed request for an actual investigation. Appealing to the Circuit Executive I wrote: “Doing so in their (your) role of, administration of the judicial policy and discipline process.” As is my right under the First Amendment where repeated violations: abridging the freedom of speech and right to petition the government for redress of grievances has been fatally and repeatedly suppressed.” I then filed:
- Petition for Review by the Judicial Council; Complaint No. 06-18-901 103/104; (District Court) dated May 27, 2021.
- Petition for Review by Judicial Council; Complaint No. 06-18-901 105/106/107/108; (Sixth Circuit) dated May 27, 2021.
These petitions could not have been read. This because the Constitutional Right to have actual appeal questions addressed, foreclosed by two Case Numbers, two Case Managers, separation of filings, forgery of a filing, document fraud, and no due diligence review or oversight – all this flew under the bar of any honest examination into the facts.
THE SCAPEGOAT LIE OF INTERVENING EVENTS… (I have a theory)
Acting Chief Judge Clay, responsible to address these Petitions stepped lock-step into line. He merely rubber-stamped the two Judge Moore Memorandum and Orders. Where are his Memorandum’s laying out reasons for conclusions?
Under Rule 11(g)(2); reads in part: If the chief judge disposes of the complaint under Rule 11(c),(d), or (e) the chief judge must prepare a supporting memorandum that sets forth the reasons for disposition and… must be provided to the complainant. I’ve asked for this Judge Clay Memorandum, doing so on 09/29/2021. It has not been provided. The Circuit Executive does not want a repeat of my two responses (District Court and Sixth Circuit) to the Judge Karen Nelson Moore Memorandum and Orders. In controling the footprint of what I’ve charged they are perfecting the coverup committed to in 2018. They will not address that my right of access to a level playing field at the sixth circuit was blocked. Right to be heard was forclosed. The actual Error Correction primary role of the Appeals Process was shut down before it could even begin. As a pattern of practice the Circuit Executive is limiting their own exposure by quashing my voice. Sound familiar?
I have a theory on why I’ve been denied the Judge Clay Memorandums. Among the Rules and Regulations that govern how judicial complaints are handled comes: 28 U.S.C. § 352(b)(2) conclude the proceeding if the chief judge finds that appropriate corrective action has been taken or that action on the complaint is no longer necessary because of intervening events.
- Magistrate Judge Vescovo, having slandered my claims at the Screening for Merit precursor to Due Process. Whose very assignment was to dispense with Pro Se Cases clogging the district court docket to thus, improve statistics. With multiple conflicts of interest with the defendants named in the Civil RICO Case… She retired from her position at the Federal District Court for the Western District of TN in May 2020. Doing so, one month after my book: Illegal Foreclosure, Title Theft, and its Chain of Corruption came out.
- Clarence Maddox who “lost” or perhaps even trashed the Original 2018 Complaints along with the exhibits (apparently not supplied to Acting Chief Judge Moore or to Acting Chief Judge Clay) has been replaced by Marc Theriault. He has picked up the threads of the cover-up scheme begun in November of 2018.
- Susan Rogers, running defense for the Civil Rights violations and for the two corrupt Case Managers. Identifying herself as the Deputy Chief Clerk is no longer in her position. She appears to be replaced by Julie Cobble who is spewing the same Orwellian logic that… though there is no record of my appeal questions ever being answered, somehow magically they were answered. Phone call of 03/20/2021. Which I imagine was taped.
- I notified Chief Judge Cole early on of two Case Managers, Two Case Numbers, separation of filings, no complete record before any judge decison-maker, etc. Trashing the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure resulting in no Procedural Due Process safeguards… Chief Judge Cole has been replaced by, Chief Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton. Although I’ve written to him. Which always irritates the Clerk’s Office who then must remind me, yet again, that I have no right to be heard on actual appeal questions.
- Senior Judge Damon Keith passed away while still in Office.
Nothing is “handled” by the departure of Magistrate Judge Diane Vescovo, or anyone else. My right to be heard on appeal at the Sixth Circuit, first on the Pro Se Appellant’s Brief, on actual appeal questions. Then on the series of objection filings including the last filed Motion for a Void Judgement and Motion to Compel an answer. All await a Sixth Circuit outcome. A process never begun cannot logically or legally be foreclosed.
RETRIBUTION FOR SPEAKING OUT
Which leads me to Commentary Under Rule 16: …a special committee may consider the degree to which a complainant has cooperated in preserving the confidentiality of the proceedings in determining what role beyond the minimum required by these Rules should be given to that complainant.
If I had not published the Original Complaints of Judicial Misconduct in my book. If I had not written the blog post: Catch and Kill: A Civil Rights Violation, cover-up not withstanding, there would still be no response whatsoever from the Circuit Executive. There are laws that protect crime victims. 18 U.S. Code § 3771 Crime Victims’ Rights (7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay. As a reminder, I am a Crime Victim. All I want is the right to stand before an actual trial judge and a jury of my peers and present the massive amounts of evidence I’ve compiled related to Title Theft Schemes. All I have ever wanted on Appeal is for a Panel of Judges to address the Pro Se Appellant’s Brief. The Appeal Questions are factually substantitated by the Assignment of Errors filing buried by the two Case Managers under the first Case Number. And which factually lays out Slander of my Claims by the District Court at the Screening for Merit juncture, where access to due process is blocked. I never expected to encounter the levels of corruption I am now fighting against. Distilled to, right to be heard; foreclosed at every turn.
One must hope that in real time as corruption unfolded, the Second Panel of Judges might have actually wanted to know that the clerk-authored Orders they recklessly signed off on, failed to answer a single one of the appeal questions. If they had ever read the Pro Se Appellant’s Brief and had access to the Assignment of Errors filing, they might have wanted to address the Screening for Merit abuses; extreme by any measure. They might have welcomed the chance to clarify for lower courts when Screening for Merit crosses a line; masquerading as Dur Process. Denied notice and lied to by those they trusted, failing to “trust but verify,” Judge Keith, Judge Cook, and Judge Thapar did not give themselves that chance. Either that or they were fully on board, under cover of expediency, with employees hijacking judicial authority for reasons that have nothng to do with the rule of law or the Constitution of the United States of America.
QUASHED BY FORGERY AND DOCUMENT FRAUD
Because there have been repeated efforts to conceal the actual Appeal Questions. Going so far as to replace the list of Appeal Questions with a forgery… What substitutes for the first two pages of this filing directed to the first panel of Judges is a copy of the letter assigning the decoy Second Case Number and new Case Manager, Jeanine Hance. What substitutes for page-two and page-three is the list of defendants. Forgery is an actual crime. For copies and proof of this forgery, or anything else, I’m happy to send. The FORGERY CAN BE SEEN: http://www.pacer.gov. Case No.: 17-5618, 06/01/2017 . Its purpose was to close the first case number doing so premised on document fraud, i.e., the utterly fictitious and phony PETITION FOR REHEARING IS DENIED fallacy. The second decoy case number, as intended, severed the Assignment of Errors (First Case No.: 16-6672  12/08/2016) from the Pro Se Appellants Brief to thus, deprive asleep at the wheel, judges of notice that Slander of the Claims at the Screening for Merit blockade is the substance of the Appeal.
Only after I’d read the clerk-authored Order of 11/14/2017 could I be shocked to discover that not a single one of the appeal questions had been answered. The push back I then experienced from the Clerk’s Office made clear that I should follow the pro se script and merely give up defense of my right to be heard on appeal. They knew that the system had their backs. Thus, unfolded the Orwellian logic empowered by the huge disparity in power and position. Thus unfolded refusal to file and address the series of objection filings; The En Banc Petition and Motion for Void Judgement(s); quashing my voice at every turn. For these reasons…
I take every opportunity to list the actual appeal questions systemically and deliberately quashed from recognition by two corrupt clerks at the Sixth Circuit. Fed fictitious Appeal Questions this is what the robo-signed Judicial Orders failed to address:
- Appeal from: Judge Vescovo personal bias and conflict of interest in favor and protection of banking-defendants.
- Appeal from: denial of due process.
- Appeal from: culture of prejudice against pro se litigants.
- Appeal from: failure to accord a liberal construction of Clair’s case.
- Appeal from: failure to quote accurately the factual allegations.
- Appeal from: failure to screen the case, in all effect, ruling on the case itself in the manner of a defendant-attorney resulting in obstruction of a meaningful opportunity of the case to be heard before a jury.
- Appeal from: Obstruction of, and, refusal to add, JP Morgan Chase Bank as a defendant based on new evidence. And refusal to add REO ID#: 00906148; as a number identifier used to conceal theft, a RICO Violation.
- Appeal from: Stripping of independent collaboration of fraud documented per the U.S. Dept. of the Treasury and the State of TN Department of Commerce and Insurance.
- Appeal from: Abuse of judicial power in the failure to correct and acknowledge significant and overt misquotes of content codified into the record in support of the biased intent to dismiss.
- Appeal from: failure to grant Clair a fair judge-decision-maker.
- Appeal from: Omission of content that support the RICO claims and which in the totality of those selected omissions did materially alter and slander Clair’s complaint(s).
- Appeal from: failure to voluntarily recuse for conduct noted within the: Objection to the Report and Recommendations , Motion for Disqualification , The Assignment of Errors, dated November 5, 2016 and which does not appear to have been docketed. Also, the Amended Assignment of Errors , which addresses additional errors.
- Appeal from: Denial of the Motion to Reverse Judgment of December 28, 2016  for in part, the judicial abuses raised herein.
- Appeal from: District Court slanderous label of the case (in part) as a “foreclosure” when, in point of fact, there was no foreclosure; an error repeatedly codified into the court records.
The Civil RICO Case that I filed at the District Court in Memphis, TN in April of 2016 (this is how long I’ve been fighting to be heard in a court of law) centered on Title Theft of my home, operating within both a local and national footprint. I’ve written two books about the national scope of these crimes networked to the local footprint. Illegal Foreclosure, Title Theft, and its Chain of Corruption; (ISBN: 9780984705948). And a small pocket book which lays out how both simple and complex title theft schemes operate. How to recognize and protect against them early on in the chain of theft. Title Theft Quick Guide of Lists: (ISBN: 9780984705979)
The IV Amendment protects us from illegal seizure of private property. The XIV Amendment guarantees “Privileges or Immunities of citizens of the United States.” It reads: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.
It was a civil rights violation when the Sixth Circuit failed to apply Constitutional Rights, Procedural Due Process, and the courts own rules to my Pro Se Appellants Brief. This unequal dismissal track impacting untold numbers of American citizens trample upon Constitutional Rights. In my case, followed by the trashed Motion(s) for a Void Judgement also not addressed. Despite the fact that Courts have ruled over and over again that the right to be heard on objection filings is synonymous with the right to be heard. Just not at the Sixth Circuit regarding those appeals sent along the automatic dismissal tracks. Separate and unequal is the very essence of a Civil Rights Crime.
The Alabama Supreme Court in Sharp v. State, 560 So. 2d 1107 (1989) stated: “We consider the phrase ‘opportunity to be heard’ as synonymous with the phrase ‘opportunity to object.’”
Violations of Rule 27 (b) Disposition of a Motion for a Procedural Order states: A party adversely affected by the court’s, or the clerk’s, action may file a motion to reconsider, vacate, or modify that action. And: …; a motion requesting that relief must be filed.
A judgment or decree is invalid where it has no foundation of procedural due process. As where there is an absence of notice or opportunity to be heard. 16A C.J.S. Constitutional Law, § 625; Yellowstone Pipe Line company v. Drummond, 77 Idaho 36, 287 P.2d 288.
“Parties whose rights are to be affected are entitled to be heard.” Baldwin v. Hale, 68 U.S., (1 Wall.) 223, 233, (1863).
There is ample evidence that this assumption about the quality of the work of those to whom the majority of Article 111 appellate power is delegated is not a safe one.” Penelope Pether. “How Judicial Clerks and Staff Attorney’s Impoverish U.S. Law; 39 Ariz. St. L.J. 1 (2007).
A void judgment is a nullity, and no rights can be based thereon; it can be set aside on motion or can be collaterally attacked at any time. Garren v. Rollis 375 P.2d 994 (Idaho 1962).
Courts lose jurisdiction if they do not follow Due Process Law. Title 5, US Cod Sec. 556(d), Sec. 557, Sec. 706.
The Constitution of the United States of America and those rights conferred therein are affirmed by what is called the Supremacy Clause, Article VI. It reads that: …and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary not, withstanding. Next paragraph: …and all executive and judicial Offices, both of the United States and the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution…
There have been many times that the Constitution has been challenged by those that found the equality it guarantees irrespective of persons, power, or wealth detrimental to causes and crimes. Getting around this is getting to career bureaucrats having control of appeals absent all oversight and accountability. A famous ruling came early on in our history, affirming what is called the Supremacy of the Constitution over lesser and secondary rules and laws. It reads in part:
“No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect;” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law;” “Cleary, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the basis of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bare no power to enforce… for unconstitutionality… It operates a near nullity or a fiction of law. Marbury v. Madison: 5 US 137 (1803).
The impartial functions of the sixth circuit were corrupted. The Seventh Circuit defined fraud upon the court: “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 dual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication.” Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3 689 (1968); 7 Moore’s Federal Practice, 2d ed., p.512 – 60.23. Further writing: “…a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final.” This is what the Circuit Executive at the Sixth Circuit is actively concealing.
In closing I have a few questions. Will the JUDICIAL CONFERENCE in Washington, DC., sitting with my petitions and exhibits mailed, as proven by postal receipt, priority mail on October 18, 2021, take action? Does the Catch and Kill reach of the Circuit Executive extend to what goes on at and with the Judicial Conference? Will they give a pass to forgery and document fraud operating as a FRAUD UPON THE SIXTH CIRCUIT? Will I ever be heard on appeal as an immutable right guaranteed under law and the Supremacy clause of the XIV Amendment? Logic, common sense, and the rule of law would say that I have an outstanding appeal at the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Does anyone care?
I can be reached at: (901) 504-9704. email@example.com Using Final Draft, I recently wrote a pilot based on the Illegal Foreclosure book. Call me if interested in producing a riveting film series.
Books can be purchased at: https://www.amazon.com/Alexandra-Clair/e/B008PY1XIQ%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share