One must have priorities after all, right?

Tags

Alex "Wizard of Koz" Kozinski, Alex Kozinski, erase Facebook pages, exposed, government thug, Judge A. Howard Matz, Judge A. Howard Matz retires, Matz retirement, The law is pretty clear and I did not follow it

Federal Judge A. Howard Matz admits, and I quote,

“The law is pretty clear and I did NOT follow it.”

This is his way of saying he broke the law.

His penalty? NOTHING. Business as usual. His boss Alex “Wizard of Koz” Kozinski just sweeps it under the rug and behind the curtain.

When Matz is exposed he sends a government thug to take down the website, then uses more thugs to erase Facebook pages!

And then when this is exposed he “suddenly retires” to ensure his pension is not taken away. One must have priorities after all, right?

With Judge A. Howard Matz, ignorance of the law is an excuse

Tags

A. Howard Matz, Alex Kozinski, commit, crimes, future crimes, government censorship, ignorance of the law is always an excuse, Judge A. Howard Matz, Judge A. Howard Matz and Judge Alex Kozinski, Judge Alex Kozinski

“Judge A. Howard Matz and Judge Alex Kozinski are presumed to know the law and to apply it in making their decisions.” Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639, 653 (1990)

Meaning their ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Google:

“The law is pretty clear and I did not follow it.”    ~Judge A. Howard Matz

With Judge A. Howard Matz, ignorance of the law is always an excuse,

to commit future crimes.

Government Censorship by Judge A. Howard Matz and Judge Alex Kozinski and Future Crimes

Who will speak for me?

Tags

Facebook, government censorship, speak, Twitter, Youtube

First they came for the Facebooks,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t “Facebooker.”

Then they came for the Twitters,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a “Twitterer.”

Then they came for the Youtubes,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a “Youtuber.”.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Elena J. Duarte and the Fraud on the Court

Tags

assistant U.S. attorney, California Third District Court of Appeal, Debra Wong Yang, Elena Duarte, Elena J. Duarte, liar, lying skills, Ms. Duarte, U.S. attorney

Elena J. Duarte is an ass-ociate of the California Third District Court of Appeal, having served since December 10, 2010, appointed by the late, Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Of course had Arnold known she was a liar he “most likely” would not have done that. But then again he was lying to his wife while having an affair and child with another woman. Ahhhhh, California, land of fruits and nutzzzzzzz.

Elena J. Duarte used to be an ass-istant U.S. attorney, under Debra Wong Yang, too. This is where she practiced and honed her lying skills. Of course it is easy to practice lying when you are in a court run by Judge A. Howard Matz and you main opponent is Gregory Nicolaysen who was appointed by Matz.

One might say Elena Duarte had a lot of practice being an incompetent ass.  Allow me to show you how Elena accomplished it.

Who else, but a complete, incompetent ass, would A) try a man on Identity Theft charges; accusing him of publishing 2000 social security numbers, home addresses and a lot more, based on her “novel theory” that he
“most likely” published them, and then B) turn around and GIVE HIM 6000 social security numbers, home addresses and a lot more????

She knew she had no jurisdiction to prove her case, but she went ahead anyhow and destroyed a man’s family and career to further hers. In my book that makes Elena J. Duarte a liar and a completely incompetent ass.

I will return to you later Ms. Duarte.

Facebook Censorship Police At The Front Door.

Tags

Censorship, Censorship Police, Facebook, Facebook Censorship, Facebook Censorship Police, government censorship

Facebook Censors Work With Judge A. Howard Matz and Judge Alex Kozinski

Tags

Censorship, EFF, Facebook, Facebook Censorship, Freedom of Speech, government, government censorship, Judge A. Howard Matz, Judge A. Howard Matz Free Speech, Judge Alex Kozinski, Suppression, U.S. Marshal Darcy Smith

In the latest effort to silence critics of Judge A Howard Matz and Alex Kozinski for their Censorship by U.S. Marshal Darcy Smith it has come to our attention that the CENSORS have developed a new tactic.

Killercop.com Facebook profile is allowed to remain uncensored, and even speak, but not really. It is a slight of hand trick. Observe. The first image below is when the account is logged into and making comments on the Internet. Looks good, right? No censorship by them, right? WRONG!  Compare to the 2nd image taken immediately after logging out of Facebook.  ALL COMMENTS CENSORED.

LOGGED IN TO FACEBOOK

Facebook Logged In Shows Uncensored

LOGGED OUT FACEBOOK AND COMMENTS IMMEDIATELY CENSORED

Comments CENSORED by Facebook and Judge Matz and Kozinski

 

Judge A. Howard Matz Reads ‘A Zillion Cases’ ‘All’ The Time

Tags

Central District of California, doing justice, HONORABLE A. HOWARD MATZ, I found, It won't be for me to decide, no final finding, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, unusual issue, you did the things you are accused of

Let’s take a trip on the way-back machine and see what Judge A. Howard Matz was thinking and speaking about in a “complex” computer case that might be called worthy of any “tribute” to Judge Matz next month.

Judge A. Howard Matz

Call People’s Exhibit A: Transcript of Proceedings By Judge A. Howard Matz of the Central District of California.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
- – -
THE HONORABLE A. HOWARD MATZ, JUDGE PRESIDING
- – -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
PLAINTIFF, )
-v- ) CASE NO. CR 02-350-AHM
STEVEN WILLIAM SUTCLIFFE, )
DEFENDANT. )
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LYNNE SMITH
OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
312 NORTH SPRING STREET
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012

You’ re in very good hands. But if, even though you’re wrong, you think that the vibes between you and Ms. Potashner is interfering with the defense that you’re entitled to, then that could be adjusted and that could be changed.

And that’s the best outcome for you. It happens to be the best outcome for my responsibilities, which are not to pick sides in the case. I never will. But to make sure your rights are protected and the public’s right, which by the way is pretty much in sync with yours, the public’s right to have a speedy trial in this case. So here’s the bottom line.

THE DEFENDANT: I was told that the expert who was examining the hard discs would not be ready until October 15th. I’ve got a little problem with that. I have been here in jail, in prison as long as the web site has been up. They want to wait an additional two more months longer that the web site has even been alive.

THE COURT: Yes, but Mr. Sutcliffe you want it to be done right, rather than done fast and not right.

THE DEFENDANT: I agree, Your Honor. With that thought in mind, I would like the court to, when it gets a chance, to review United States versus Gallow,
Eastern District of New York, 1986, 653 F.Sup. 320. I would plead with this court to –

THE COURT: What does that case say?

THE DEFENDANT: Under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, under length of detention, and it almost parallels my case, except for they talk about four months and I’m looking at another two months. But I would ask the court to reconsider the, after reading the case, to reconsider incarceration and consider remanding to the third party custody of either Mr. McAfee as he is offered in the past.

THE COURT: I remember thinking about that. I remember this.

THE DEFENDANT: I wish to contribute to my defense. And for all of the reasons that are listed in the Gallow case, they’re all applicable to me. It would, specifically in here they said it would be against defendant’s interest if any harm were to come to a government’s witness. That’s common sense. Danger to witness was not appreciably reduced by incarceration of the defendant. Witness may have been profiting financially from defendant’s incarceration, emphasis added. Defendant’s encountered difficulties in preparing for trial during incarceration.

 

THE COURT: I’m not going to tell you I have read the whole case. It’s a pretty long case and it’s a judge I respect greatly. He’s one of the finest judges in this country. But I can tell you that part of my job requires me to read a zillion cases all the time. And I can scope out the relevant portions of a case pretty quickly. I may not be doing justice to this case, but Vita and Millulosi in this case you’re talking to me about were charged with different crimes than you.

I don’t know if you’re guilty or innocent. It won’t be for me to decide.

But the crime you’re accused of involves threats to not only possible witnesses but to other parties as well. These guys were indicted on different crimes. Then the question came whether or not their conduct vis-a-vis potential witnesses warranted being held in custody pending the trial. And this is not an unusual issue. Okay.

The question of bail has a very different meaning and, not a meaning but a very different application under the facts of this case.

I found that there was sufficient basis to find by probable cause, but there’s no final finding, that you did the things you are accused of…

So much for,”I don’t know if you’re guilty or innocent. It won’t be for me to decide.“

Please examine the two versions regarding the computer expert and jurisdiction. First my cross examination as to whether I admitted transmitting.

That would be a loud no.

Compare that testimony to the attorney hand picked by Alex Kozinski, like a puppet, Sung Bea Park of Canoga, California. His presentation consists of the Fraud, as lead by Kozinski, since he was clearly aware of the fact there was no proof of any confession, or transmission:

That wasn’t a defense by any stretch of the imagination. It was a FALSE confession and Fraud on the Court.

Care to guess why so blatant? Or why nobody is arrested for these crimes?  I think 8000 of We the People would like some answers.

Do you think any judge who allows frauds on the courts to go unreported is worthy of any “tribute?”

Taking Stare Decisis Seriously: A Cautionary Tale for a Regressive District Court

Tags

Commissioner Debra Wong Yang, Debra Wong Yang, ex disgraced U.S. Attorney, ex U.S. Attorney Debra Wong Yang, Judge A. Howard Matz, Judge Alex Kozinski, L.A.P.D. Commissioner Debra Wong Yang, U.S. -vs- Steven William Sutcliffe

Taking Stare Decisis Seriously:

A Cautionary Tale for a Regressive Central District Court

Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals knew a contract, rules and federal laws had been broken before the case of U.S. -vs- Steven William Sutcliffe appeared on his desk. It bore the names of his close friends, Judge A. Howard Matz and ex disgraced, U.S. Attorney and ex disgraced L.A.P.D. Commissioner, Debra Wong Yang.

Between the three of them they not only managed to put 8000 social security numbers, with matching dates of birth, home addresses and phone numbers into the hands of an about-to-be-convicted Identity Thief.

So they lied for each other to obtain the false confession/conviction on appeal, in a Fraud On The Court, but worse yet, they are now trying to cover it up using U.S. Marshal Darcy Smith.

They knew the information in question had been given to me. And that the F.B.I. failed to take it back. And that I was not guilty of all of the charges.  I’ll return to that later.

Judge A. Howard Matz and the Ex Post Facto Clause

Tags

convict, Ex Post Facto Clause, Judge A. Howard Matz, Judge A. Howard Matz and the Ex Post Facto Clause, punishment, testimony

Judge A. Howard Matz and the Ex Post Facto Clause

1st. Every law/rule/infraction/ticket that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such action. 2d. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. 3d. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed. 4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offence, in order to convict the offender. All these, and similar laws, are manifestly unjust and oppressive.

Judge A Howard Matz In Chambers

JUDGE MATZ: “Well, I am ‘letting’ you speak. It’s ‘important to me’ that I ‘let you’ speak as well as, I think, in most respects ‘your right to speak.’

 If you had said to me judge, I want to be my own lawyer, I would have spent a half hour explaining to you why that would be an absolutely mistaken decision on your part.

I could take you through all the different little and big aspects of fighting off the government at the trial and before the trial in this case, that you need a lawyer to handle.”

Really? Let me? Seriously? You don’t “let me” anything. I “let you.” But no more.

Paying ‘Tribute’ To Judge A. Howard Matz’ Retirement

The Los Angeles Chapter of the Federal Bar Association cordially invites you to join us as we pay tribute May 2, 2013 to Hon. A. Howard Matz On The Occasion of His Retirement

What is TRIBUTE?

A sum of money paid by an inferior sovereign or state to a superior potentate, to secure the friendship or protection of the latter. Brande.
(Black’s Law Dictionary)

Cost:
$170 Individual Ticket
$85 Government/Public Interest
$2000 Table of 10
FREE Federal Judiciary (Please RSVP)

Self Parking at Pershing Square $7, Valet Parking at Biltmore $22

Return with payment to:

FBA
210 N. Glenoaks Blvd Ste C
Burbank, CA 91502
(818) 843-1020
fbala@emaoffice.com

Registration deadline is April 18, 2013.
Date May 2, 2013
Time
5:00 PM – 8:30 PM
Location
Millenium Biltmore Hotel
506 S. Grand Ave
Los Angeles, CA