| Atlanta, Georgia - Having been granted an oral argument before the Georgia Supreme Court (the proceedings were videotaped and are available for download), in the case concerning a 'Writ of Prohibition Against Judge Adele Grubbs', arguing in opposition to the Georgia Attorney General's (AG) Office, needless to say I was in awe, but admittedly frightened by the thought of appearing before justices, addressing the repeated misconduct of a fellow GA BAR Board of Governors Member, the recipient of the Justice Benham Award (Justice Benham being seated and a current member of the GA Supreme Court), fellow Cobb County Chamber of Commerce Member (as is Justice Harris Hines currently on the Supreme Court, and an honorary Department of Justice Member (upon appointment by former Speaker Gingrich, renewed by Hastert).
It was a long overdue, astounding, and splendid view of the legal system, to see the justices asking questions and familiar with the pleadings, as they reviewed each case presented, 2 of which preceded our argument. For the 20 witnesses, along with my family, hope was temporarily restored, having laid witness to repetitive, overt, and excessive corruption time and time again by the lower courts, sanctioned by elected officials and officers of the court. Each party was afforded a 20 minute argument by the Appellant (party filling the appeal - the Rices), followed by 20 minutes for the Appellee (Asst. AG Ann Brumbaugh), and last a rebuttal by the Appellant (the Rices), of issues raised by the Appellee (Brumbaugh) in their 20 minute presentation.
Historically, this action was filed following multiple recusals, disqualifications, a federal lawsuit, and ultimately the subject 'Writ of Prohibition Against Judge Grubbs'. At each and every juncture, more parties became involved in violations of law to include false statements, creation of fraudulent documents, willfully misfiling and/or alteration of legal documents, and repeated threats of incarceration, with or without appeals pending. Clerk William Martin III of the Court of Appeals even destroyed the appellate record in opposition to the rules of the Court, and despite multiple, specific, and written notification to retain the record, destroyed every piece of evidence from the lower court proceedings.
Yet this day, election day (November 7th, 2006), came down to the review of a subject 'Writ' in which Judge George Kreeger in open court before witnesses provided a falsified and unlawful document asserting to be in the record (CAN 05-1-0437-18), which as attested to by witnesses was not. Judge Arthur Fudger issued an 'Order' allegedly dismissing the subject 'Writ', without any prior assignment being filed in the record or provided the Plaintiff. And after having raised these fatal issues, 3 versions of a backdated document appeared in a 'Secret Judge's File' (CAN 05-1-0002), allegedly created by Chief Judge Jim Bodiford's personal friend Judge Jon Bolling Wood of Douglasville. This document first appeared and was faxed to Judge Kreeger the night before our hearing, as clearly noted on the fax footer by Cartersville 7th District Clerk Jody Overcash and received by Cobb Court Clerk Jay Stephenson, as presented by Judge Kreeger.
Despite ALL of these concerns, the assignment of Judge Fudger on the face of this backdated and falsified document, was for jurisdiction over a pleading that was NEVER filed, which a new member of the GA AG's Office making a first appearance in the 'Writ' Matter, asserted as her ONLY argument before the Supreme Court, was merely a "typo," a defense NEVER asserted prior to this appeal or Supreme Court Review, such a new theory barred from consideration, as stated in the rules of the court. Under the rules of the court, an issue NOT raised at the Trial Court Level, is undeniably barred from being raised for the first time on appeal. Conversely, Assistant AG Ann Brumbaugh admitted during Oral Argument, this "typo" failed to meet the essential requirement of stating a specific reason for the assignment of a Senior Judge, thereby rendering the 'Order' VOID, on its face!
You see, the alleged 'Order' assigning Fudger ONLY to a "Motion to Recuse Judge Lark Ingram," was never filed or asserted in the Writ Against Judge Grubbs. But based upon this fraudulent pleading, Fudger dismissed the subject Writ in an Order addressing NOT matters raised in the subject Writ, but instead chose to address a pending 'Motion to Declare Order (Grubbs of April 2003) Void NEVER before him, followed by a vexatious rampage by Judge Grubbs to dismiss every pending action filed by the Rices, as well as an order for "contempt," in order to arrest law abiding citizens seeking redress.
Undeniably, there was never ANY Judge lawfully assigned following the Rices assertion of bias by the Cobb Courts (JQC 220) before Judge Kreeger (a friend of Grubbs and 1 of the officiators at her most recent wedding), who was the last judge clothed with any jurisdiction to rule on the Writ Matter, barring his requirement for self recusal. And Grubbs, aware of these facts, repeatedly refused to recuse herself in various actions including the transfer of a case to her by Chief Judge Bodiford, despite her status as a Defendant. Indubitably, Judge Grubbs could NEVER sit as an unbiased trier of fact, in accordance with her own sworn oath of office, judicial canons, the rules of the Court, codified law, and even UCC requirements!
But the AG provided a defense of false issues and erroneous statements about the LMHA, Inc. and the ACC of LMTHA v. Rice Case NOT the subject 'Writ' matter for which the proceeding was noticed, as evidenced by their brief and statements. The LMHA Matter was NOT currently before the Supreme Court, along with the NEW "typo theory", their only defense to overcome or overt the clear and indisputable evidence of judicial fraud and racketeering. But beyond the AG effort, the only questions asked during the 'Writ' proceeding were by Justice Melton of me (Taffy) and Justice Carly of the AG, related solely to the LMHA matter NOT currently at issue.
I began by correcting our status to that of a 'Sui Juris' NOT 'Pro Se' litigant, in accordance with our pleadings, but in opposition to the repeated change noted by the courts. Next, the erroneous pleading by the AG via brief, in which false statements were made regarding NOT the 'Writ' but the 'LMHA' Case, were addressed. And most importantly, I addressed the REAL issue of the 'Writ.' Indisputably Judge Grubbs had according to DA Pat Head and witnesses, who provided sworn affidavits, discussed litigation involving the Rices PRIOR to ANY adjudication before her, barring the claim of 'judicial immunity' or any other defense. This facts or antithesis of the 'Writ,' the ONLY matter before the Supreme Court, was NEVER disputed or negated by Grubbs, the AG, or ANY party to this moment!
But though I wanted to believe the motto of this body would be upheld "Fiat justitia ruat caelum" (May justice prevail though the heavens fall.), despite the efforts NOT allowed upon review of the AG, I was denied a rebuttal, in opposition to the rules of the court. Was this an error, a willful denial of due process, or simply unnecessary based on the overwhelming evidence and lack of proper defense by the GA AG?
When Chief Justice Leah Sears, whose campaigns were handled at one time by a convicted lawyer and part time judge Fred Tokars, relating to acts before or during the ordered murder of his wife Sara, who I have written about many times, rose to say to me rising for my rebuttal following false statements by the GA AG, "No, I'm sorry your time was up m'am, thank you." My heart literally sank in despair, being met with yet another violation of due process. Without pause, every justice began to file out in a manner akin to an orchestrated military parade at 8th and I (Marine silent military drill team in Washington - Semper Fi!). The audience sat dumb founded, offering to provide affidavits and support. And there lies the culmination of one of the most auspicious experiences of my families' memories in this legal saga and related travesty.
The children wrote of the proceeding as part of their grammar and composition, viewing the effort as grossly unfair. I reflected on the presence of Terence and Susanna Say, along with Ruth and Hobart Leeds, parties to the LMHA Case among others, clients of Brock Clay Calhoun (BCC), Michael Rome, and Weissman, Nowack, Curry & Wilco (WNCW), filing fraudulent as well as conflicting liens and legal actions against my LMT neighbors present in the courtroom (see 'CAI Fraud Sours'). Not only were the Says and Leeds present, but they were actively engaged in friendly conversation with the GA AG's Office, though the issue before the court, was SOLELY a matter relating to Judge Grubbs acts undeniably carried out PRIOR to the 'LMHA' Case or any other. The Says and Leeds were NOT parties to the 'Writ,' and could NOT legally be a client of the GA AG.
Why would former British Citizens and relocated FL residents, attend a hearing concerning ONLY the actions of a British judge, PRIOR to any action taken from her courtroom? Why would the Says and Leeds engage in private conversations with the GA AG>, who has ONLY defended the judge, while refusing to address public corruption and misconduct by an elected official, they were publicly notified of? Keep in mind the Says and/or Leeds have been parties to or involved in no less than 9 efforts to negate the rights and suppress or misstate facts affecting the Rices due process or honor. This does not include billing efforts, documents, depositions, incidents involving videotaping of the Rices on their property, the restatement of land line conversations, or failed door to door campaigns requesting others to engage in predatory action against the Rices based upon false information
What will be the conclusion of this argument? After leaving the hearing, we found an assessment of our case published by the GA Supreme Court via their website, falsely stating we [the Rices] had sued our HOA, which was undeniably wrong, a similar effort carried out by LexisNexis and Westlaw legal reporting services, despite notification. Keep in mind, the ONLY issue in the 'Writ' was NOT about an HOA, but Judge Grubbs actions taken prior to the adjudication of ANY matter. So, why was an HOA referenced in any summary about the 'Writ' scheduled for oral argument?
Upon asking the Public Relations Officer for the GA Supreme Court, who was responsible for that assessment, he indicated it was he who authorized contents posted on the website. But upon further inquiry as to the personal responsibility for published false info, he said the text was actually written by a staff attorney. However my request to identify the staff attorney, was met with the statement, "That's not public information." Welcome to sanctioned, published, and willful misstatements, identified by the GA Supreme Court, prior to the adjudication of a matter regarding the actions of a sitting judge and fellow GA BAR Member. You be the judge!
We pray these travesties having been made publicly known, will be judiciously dealt with, in accordance with the rules of the court, GA Law, and the rights any natural person as guaranteed. But the recent filing by Bruce Ailion of a "SUBPOENA FOR THE PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE," to the corporation "KATHRYN W. RICE," concerning a 'contempt compliance' issue (see SLAPP Subpoena), in which he requests public documents and private communications with a party NOT involved in the titled matter, further solidifies the 'Circling of the Wagons' by the GA BAR Association Members, in opposition to the requirements of those acting as Officers of the Court. Stay tuned!
Attached are pleadings, pictures, and video for verification. Your input, support, and feedback are always appreciated. God be with us, as Bruce Ailion (Ailion vs. Ailion - 'When Wright Becomes Terribly Wrong'), forces a party NOT of interest to appear in the courtroom before a judge and GA BAR Board of Governors Member, who has repeatedly exceeded jurisdiction and demonstrated her willingness to negate the rights of others in opposition to all legal standards! |
|
