Call goes out to OCCUPY FOR JUSTICE

A Call goes out to OCCUPY FOR JUSTICE

While the Occupy movement was being vilified and made fun of by the popular press and politicians, to do what they are so effective at doing – controlling public opinion, I was studying the movement.  Watching the people pour into the streets felt like watching the Berlin Wall come down all over again – giving $700 billion to bankers making tens of millions to “bail them out,” when people are having property taken without hearings, can’t find jobs, are asked to tighten their fiscal belts, and listen to diatribe about “economic collapse” and “austerity,” very justifiably tweaks the mind and conscience.  99% was probably a fair representation of those so tweaked.

The problem with the movement was, once out in the streets, there was no organizing principle that sustained it.  It was easy to see, and it is why it was so easily suppressed by the grander institutions of our 21st century America, beholden only to, and at the service of, the almighty dollar.

What brought people out into the streets was a cry for justice, and the occupy movement’s central organizing principle always was justice.  This is a call to OCCUPY FOR JUSTICE, and to make all of your appearances, protests, encampments, and all else in the halls of American justice, the greatest administers of injustice of all, our courts.

It’s just time to tip the tables of some money-changers.  That’s what you were trying to do when you first poured out into the streets two short (or long) years ago.  The courts are the enforcement arm of the money changers.

Ostrowski Settlement Demand and Manifesto for Liberty and Justice

The above is a “settlement demand” I have made, and am sending to the Vatican, the President, my Pennsylvania Senators, the United States Supreme Court and Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justices, a lawyer from Penn State, who I know knows damn well what Jerry Sandusky was doing over 10 years ago, and another lawyer, Pamela Collis, in connection with a related claim.  The lawsuit being addressed is one conceived and developed by me, over time, with every next step being made by the powers-that-be not doing what was right on the last one.  It is a very honest effort, and as well-intended and meritorious as any, and could, depending on how my demand is responded to, be a class action lawsuit by the citizens of the United States of America against its government, through all of the individuals of which it is comprised.  It is called a “manifesto for liberty and justice,” because this is what it is as I see the world, based upon my 20 years of experience in representing injured American citizens in their dealings with the courts, and in walking with them through the abuses and disruptions they feel from having their “God-given” rights, as we all call them, taken away by their employers, governments, and others.

I do not have a good-faith basis to include a claim against the President at this point because there are certain legal standards that must be met, and, while it is likely that they are or could be met, it is a matter of the utmost seriousness to sue the President, and I have always been fairly conservative when it comes to making allegations in lawsuits, probably not as conservative as Don Bailey, though.  If these people ever saw the caution and care with which Don handles people who come to him before taking them into court, you would know, instantly, that there is a vast mis-information campaign that has slandered him immensely, and hurt many dozen of his clients just as badly.  Regardless, this site has laid out in significant detail how it is the Courts, and the chronyist, and even more sinister control of them, which is deliberate, that are the obstacle to liberty and justice that we all feel inside.  I would find it hard to believe that Scranton’s own Joe Biden does not know about Centralia.

Here is how the Occupy for Justice should work – organize in and around your courthouses, they are centrally located, and it is where most of the day-to-day business that affects your lives is done.  Go into courtrooms and watch proceedings – they are air-conditioned in the summer and heated in the winter.  The benches are there for you.  They often have lawns outside, and are pretty nice places.  Most have cafeterias.  When you are in the courtrooms, be quiet, and orderly.  Go into court clerk’s offices, and recorder’s offices, and ask to see documents about cases.  Ask nicely.  These places are staffed by American citizens like yourselves, and they need to be treated with the same respect that you do.  Get court schedules and calendars and post them on your sites.  Go watch what lawyers and judges do, and see for yourselves if justice is being administered fairly.  Your attendance there will do much to improve the chances.

When you are there, at the courthouses, organize under the principle of “equal justice under the law,” and hang all of your corporate greed, political corruption, and social justice banners under that principle.  The fact is, that, whatever your issue is – be it the banking industry, corporate greed, a green agenda, anti-fracking, or any of the myriad of issues I witnessed at my attendance of the Occupy functions, they all depend, and will depend, at some point, on a fair and honest court.  It is justice we are all after, and, whether or not you do actually end up in court one day, it is the lack of discipline that corrupt courts and chrony politics create that we are feeling.  If they try to stop you, sue them for violations of your First Amendment rights.

The first place to organize should be the Pennsylvania Judicial Center on Commonwealth Avenue in Harrisburg.  Go watch that video they show on the Masonic eye that stares at you when you enter and exit the building.  Go try to find a courtroom on your own, and feel welcomed to do so.  Go read the signs they have up, and see if you can make sense of them, and try to tell what office does what, and where to file documents for the three Pennsylvania appellate courts, and other “admin” offices, or where you can find a Judge, and, most importantly, ask yourself why it looks more like a fortress, and not a courthouse, and ask what in the world are they trying to keep from getting in that place.

Research the “Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts,” and see the extent of the “admin” control it has, and how it is so secretive, and how controlled it is.  Research Article 5, Section 10 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and why it was amended in 1968, and what was going on that they wanted to control.  I will be getting into all of these issues in my case, and will reserve getting into all of the evidence of what this all will reveal until in litigation, unless settled sooner.

Our systems of government have failed us – Don Bailey is evidence of what happens when you try to petition your government honestly for a redress of your grievances on the most important of issues through the courts; and we have no better friend in the popular media.  Recall, folks, that we just had a presidential election that cost billions of dollars, as you learned from our media; yet, though I haven’t looked at the numbers or done the math, it was the media who received the biggest boon, and the proliferation of news channels, and politico personalities, shows it – everyone has a show and all the politicians are on them.  While this writer views MSNBC as something of a savior in recent years, it, too, is beholden to the multi-billion dollar political machines that pay their salaries.  As long as Ed Rendell is their go-to pol, there’s not much chance of our Pennsylvania issues being fairly addressed.  Its message is getting more suspiciously steered.  What goes on in all these board rooms, and above, needs to be examined, however.  The point is that there is no access there, either – look at what they did to the Occupy movement last year – they have every bit the same interest in shutting up 99% of Americans that the others do – money, and it very much is the root of all evil.

They are all the beneficiaries of the Citizen’s United decision, a repugnant decision, recognizing rights in a fiction created by man designed to insulate people from their free choices on a par with what we, as Americans, indeed, as sovereign individuals, have divined, based on the collective, combined experience of all of humanity over millennia, as those rights symbolizing man’s bond with his or her creator alone.  They get all the tax benefits and loopholes, and belittle people who don’t swallow the pablum that they are being fed that this “free market system” is ordained by God as some Eleventh Commandment or moral foundation of civilized society – to be sure, this writer endorses it as an economic policy, but “greed” is not “good.”  It is, however, making what one of the greatest social commentators of our time, Eminem, called a “hypocrisy of democracy.”

This “Reagan revolution” that we hear about needs to be over, and this chapter of American history closed.  It is unsustainable anymore.  It was all contrived messaging anyway.  Jimmy Carter, in one of his later presidential addresses, began to warn America, as a true moral and social, not religious, leader, with a finger uniquely on its pulse, would, of the coming dangers of this materialistic society that began to take hold in the 60s and 70s.  America elected Ronald Reagan, and, a mere 30 years later, our economy reached the point of near collapse, bankers making millions are receiving billions of the tax dollars earned off the blood, sweat, and tears of the other 99%, banks and corporations are spending billions to get candidates elected, the media are self-professed “opinion-makers,” children are being slaughtered in our schools and in our streets, Dick Cheney and his first puppet, George W. Bush, contrived at least one war, cut their corporate chronies tax breaks, and bailed them out for taking people’s lives, houses, and savings, and his second puppet, nothing but a stuffed suit by any measure (stuffed with cash, of course), gave quite a scare, running on the “greed is good” platform, and there are more in line.  The daily news discourse involves, cliffs, and austerity, and sequestration, and terror, and poverty – politicians used to talk of eliminating these things, now we are told to expect them.  Among all of this, the Second Amendment has taken the lead on the news shows, and the political agenda, and Dick Cheney’s Haliburton is building internment camps on American soil, or so I’m told.

It is an intellectual and, yes, moral struggle we are involved in, but no one is paying attention, and the distraction of the masses is deliberate, or, at least, a grave consequence of the cultural decisions we have made.  Unless all peaceful avenues are exhausted, it will, very soon, if they haven’t gotten your guns before then, turn to that as a last resort – the signs are everywhere.  It is time to Occupy for Justice.

I will be proceeding with my lawsuit, and I will work with any and every American citizen who wants to join it.  We could ask for the $700 billion back, if it takes that shape, and for all of the properties, possessions, and lives that have been lost because of this absolute mess that has been made of our country.  I could probably use some help organizing it, but the legal issues are really not all that complicated – our Constitutional rights are being violated.  I really don’t think that most lawyers even get it, and if we can get Don Bailey to help us, we could really do something to change this country.

I hope I get a response to my letter, but, whatever that response, there are going to have to be some more enduring approaches to these problems we seem incapable of correcting.  I am judge-shopping, and will file this lawsuit in any state or federal court where there is a Judge with the courage to stand up and do the job they took an oath and get paid to do.  I’ll do some kind of nomination thing on this site.  The only hurry in re-filing the suit is the urgency any of you feel.  I have plenty of time.

This is a big statement and made in bold terms, but it is very serious.  I’m calling for a revolution – if it needs a name, call it the “Bailey Revolution” (he’s the one who started it 35 years ago, or so) – but I understand the pressing demands of people’s daily lives so we can meet all those phony needs created by our money-driven society that is on the brink of collapse, so I have no expectations.  I have a lot wrapped up in this, personally, and will be doing this anyway.  I will follow it on my site, and it will be revolutionary.  I hope you join me in this quest for liberty and justice, and that we all share in their offspring – enduring peace.

As an anthem with some guiding wisdom, look at Eminem – White America.

Thank you.

PCRLN and Andy Ostrowski petition the Supreme Court Disciplinary Board for public comment on Bailey discipline

The Pennsylvania Civil Rights Law Network and Andy Ostrowski have submitted a petition to the Secretary of the Supreme Court Disciplinary Board, to be filed with the full Board, requesting that time be set aside at the next scheduled meeting of the Board for public comment on the matter of the discipline of Don Bailey.  The petition and the closing comments from Don Bailey, are included.

As raised in the Ostrowski Complaint, and in the petition, all proceedings of the third branch of government, the judiciary, in Pennsylvania, are conducted in secret.  It is a design built right into the Pennsylvania Constitution, and adopted as a matter of policy by the Supreme Court.  Neither the legislature nor the executive have any authority whatsoever over the affairs of the judiciary in Pennsylvania, and the Supreme Court won’t even subject itself to the sunshine laws.

Bailey Closing Statement

PCRLN Disciplinary Board Petition

The petition states:

Dear Ms. Bixler:

I write on behalf of myself, as an American citizen, and the Pennsylvania Civil Rights Law Network, concerning the above-referenced matter.  Specifically, I would like to petition the Supreme Court Disciplinary Board to publicly announce the scheduling of their next meeting, and permit a period of public comment on the matter of the discipline of Don Bailey.

On February 15, 2012, I specifically asked Marcie Sloan when and where the next meeting was scheduled, and she told me it was during the first week of March in Philadelphia, and she could give me no further details.  I informed her of my intention to make this request, and she did tell me that she did know that Disciplinary Board meetings were not open to the public.

I am aware, of course, of the letter written by the Supreme Court in November, 1978 to the Legislature, opining that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and its various inferior agencies and/or boards are exempt from the provisions of the Open Meetings Law, and understand that that policy still prevails.  The Court claims that under Article 5, Section 10(c) of the Pennsylvania Constitution, the Supreme Court has the exclusive authority in all matters relating to the business of the courts, among which is the conduct of attorneys, and that any attempt to impose the requirements of a legislative enactment, i.e., the open meetings law, violates the separation of powers concepts built into the Constitutional scheme, with the dictates of the Constitution being supreme, and, in effect, trumping the laws enacted by the Legislature.

What has escaped the analysis, and, frankly, as raised in my federal lawsuit, are the federal Constitutional implications of this state of affairs.  It strikes at the conscience alone that an entire co-equal branch of government has a policy of conducting all of its affairs in secret, regardless of its technical constitutionality under the State Constitution.  I believe this violates First Amendment, separation of powers, equal protection, and due process principles of the United States Constitution.

I offer all of the foregoing because I understand that you likely feel constrained by the policy of your employer.  It is a request that must, nonetheless, be made, and I ask that you pass this request along to the full Board, as a formal petition on the above-referenced docket, for a formal response by the Board.  I will be happy to brief and/or argue it, if necessary.  The policy of the Supreme Court is just a policy until the courts themselves adjudicate these issues, or until the Legislature, in this case, changes the Constitution, and a formal response is requested, so that I can take the matter to the Supreme Court and, if necessary, to the federal court if/when I re-file my case.

As you will see, we have anticipated the concerns for Mr. Bailey’s confidentiality and/or privacy in connection with these proceedings, and he has agreed to endorse this request, and waive any and all such concerns.

Thank you for your assistance with this matter.

Respectfully,

/s/

Andrew J. Ostrowski

I, Don Bailey, have indicated to Mr. Ostrowski that I support his idea of an open proceeding.  Mr. Ostrowski has developed a “press” approach to these matters, and I believe secrecy is counterproductive to effective governance.  I waive any and all confidentiality issues or concerns that the Supreme Court Disciplinary Board may have in connection with their deliberations, or the evidence relating to my disciplinary proceedings..

        /s/                                         

Don Bailey

We are hoping to have an online petition circulated, and will keep you updated on these efforts.

Thank you

The Second Amendment, Section 1983, assault weapons, and the Courts: the view of a non-gun owning civil rights lawyer

“Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”
George Washington

I do not own a firearm, never have, and have no intention of doing so.  They scare me.  I think I’m left-handed, too, which seemed to be a problem the few times I did shoot them.  I agree, however, in every respect, with the view as fairly expressed by our one truly qualified founding father in the field.  It should be modified, and brought forward, to include the right of the people to own assault rifles, and even machine guns, so long as the restraint of evil interference is the goal.

The popular debate misses the mark – the MSNBC brand-second-amendment-supporters-as-the-paranoid-black-helicopter-crowd, or the NRA/Fox canned-line-contrived-by-monied-interest-crowd – and it misses the mark because it misses the meaning, and why, as with all other things covered on this site, it is the courts – fair and honest courts – that hold the key to striking the proper balance to maintain peace, order, and security in our society.

This is not a statement of policy, just the opinion of one writer, but we must, in this debate, err on the side of the caution so clearly and deliberately expressed by General Washington.  It is, after all, evil with which we are concerned.  In a nation, however, with a justice system fairly administered, guns and the absolute right to own them, without qualification, registration, or other than reasonable use restriction (i.e., a municipal ordinance or criminal statute banning shooting them in cities, towns, and the like, except in defense) is irrelevant to the debate, which does nothing but distract from the real social ills that have people all over America, like no other country, killing each other.  It is not in the nature of man to go around killing other men, and no gun is going to change that.  We are otherwise creating the conditions where people kill, some, perhaps, deliberately.

When we talk of the justified use of guns in popular social and political debate, we talk about them in terms of protecting “life,“ and “property,” and have wide agreement that their use is fully protected when in defense of those principles.  Though I don’t need to hear Joe Scarborough say “Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas have told us that we have a right to own a shotgun and a handgun to protect our families and property,” one more time, because he uses it in a misguided way, the fact is he is right (not about his view of the edicts Scalia issues from the bench), but that we can own a handgun and a shotgun for those purposes.  Where that leaves all those poor souls in Chicago, and on the streets of cities across America, in this gun debate, a much more enduring problem, is for another day, unfortunately, if one comes.

What General Washington was discussing, and what the Second Amendment is concerned with is “liberty,” which somehow seems to be the forgotten Constitutional right in this debate.  Our exalted founding fathers, who exercised their political will to construct our Constitution around the institution of slavery (a will we have failed, as a people, to carry out to its moral conclusion), also declared, properly, in this writer’s view, in the Declaration of Independence, that man is endowed by his creator, God, Allah, Yahweh, with “inherent and inalienable” rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” i.e., they are sacred, and signify our bond, alone, to our creator.  When there is risk that those bonds with our creator may be broken, our civil laws and codes provide for the justified use of all appropriate force to meet the threat.  Liberty is of no different quality or character of our bond with our creator, it is the essence of life itself, and everything our soldiers have fought and died for, and its defense is of no different character, legally or factually.

The “life” and “property” defense cases are typically very easy – was there a threat, and was the response appropriate to meet it.  Courts can administer these fairly easily, and maintain an appearance of order in a civilized society.  The case where a rogue and dishonest, sheriff, on the other hand, comes down a driveway with a bogus warrant, or gains entry onto your property under false pretenses, and you shoot him in the leg, lest he succeed in taking you away in handcuffs, while maybe a little different on the conscience, should not be any different analytically.  This is, in essence, what gun rights activists posit.  The gun restrains evil interference with the liberty with which you are endowed by your creator.  It’s nothing but an extension of the same physical force that would allow you to refuse to submit to a request to extend your hands so they can be cuffed.

To characterize this as “black helicopter” thinking is dishonest, and more.  I, personally, have sat in depositions and trials with police officers, often representing police officers who dared challenge them, who I have no doubt would abuse their power and exceed all authority, and enter houses, and violate people’s rights if there was no check, in the individual, to match their power on more than some rudimentary level – they’ve done it already.  Lest the reader get distracted by the Scarborough “but Scalia said we can own a handgun and a shotgun to protect ourselves and families,” I am stressing that these things take on an entirely different meaning when dealing with your government, and the visceral reactions that people have to them, and the internal struggle that goes on over wanting to believe the very best in the people to whom you have entrusted power, and the enduring struggle it is to try to overcome that evil does, indeed, exist, in its most Machiavellian form.

These things also take place on a gradient.  There are one sheriff towns with one bad sheriff, and ten police officer boroughs, with 3 bad ones, and 7 that turn the other way, and they all have guns.  There are good police officers and forces across America, to be sure, and I apologize to all of those fine police officers who I have represented along the way, but just like Judges and lawyers, my experience is that there are far too many that are not.  The opportunity for intrusions on our liberty are magnified in modern society, as is the temptation for abuse of power.  The tendency is for people to submit to that power and authority, even when used excessively or oppressively, and to go to jail, leave the house, or otherwise agree to cede your liberty, rather than risk further loss.  This is why recourse to the courts for restraint and remedies is essential.

Now, to the so-called “extreme” “black helicopter” argument, it is, frankly, shocking that this is passed off and reviled as paranoid imagination.  We just went through two suspect, some mainstream theorists say contrived, wars that drained our nations till to the point of near economic collapse.  If you add to that collapse, which we are all preparing for the coming of, daily, and, perhaps, a dirty bomb in LA or New York by some rogue nation that harbors terrorists, and uses terror, which, ala the Patriot Act, etc, we are told is a daily threat, there may be a rush and grab for power that may be the last – the immense military power of the United States of America in the hands of who is in power at the time, whenever that time comes.

With the collapse of the United States at risk, which, as we are told, is a daily thing, it is so dishonest as to be highly suspect that the media resoundingly brand the gun rights advocates as black helicopter paranoids.  The public comments of that NRA fellow appear to be contrived nuttiness to feed right into the frenzy to “soften,” slowly and deliberately, legislators and the public to in incremental intrusion on their Second Amendment rights.  Who knows what may happen if a Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Eric Cantor, or some other Koch brother “frog”/Dick Cheney water-carrier, ever gets power.  While these frogs may be kissed, and become the leaders of the people’s hopes and dreams that support them, right now they are frogs, and all we hear about from them is gloom and doom, and cliffs, and austerity, and sequestration.  When is this God-forsaken “Reagan revolution” going to stop?  They are at a tipping point, and are desperately gasping at the last straws of power, in this writer’s view – and they are in the vast, vast, vast minority.

Rachel Maddow just broadcast a documentary credibly positing that political leaders to whom our futures have been entrusted in the past may well have duped an entire nation into committing the lives of our sons, daughters, and fellow citizens, and the heroic servants themselves, to a completely contrived cause creating the very circumstances behind the near-collapse.  Having your guns – your machine guns, and assault weapons, with high magazine counts, canisters, calibers, and the like – would certainly seem to be a high priority on the minds of people capable of such things, and registration databases would point them right to where they need to go.  If they come with that state of mind, under my purely legal scenario, and facts that are reasonably conceivable, you would have a completely justified legal right to shoot them, and kill them, if necessary.

These things don’t need to be done with black helicopters, and it was very suspicious the way Alex Jones was uniformly vilified in the popular media for suggesting that drones could be used to kill American citizens, when just a week or so later, a memo authorizing exactly that, without judicial review, was released.  There are various networks in place in law enforcement, the masons being one, that allow the power to be executed on a very local level, and centrally controlled from above.  I know this from many cases, too.  The handgun and the shotguns that, in Joe Scarborough’s view, Justice Scalia has bestowed upon man as his natural right, simply won’t mean much in any scenario beyond the one-horse town, and there just aren’t many of those anymore.

42 United States Code Section 1983 (“Section 1983” as it is commonly known), is a statue, that, in one of Don Bailey’s iterations, is “ordained by God himself.”  Indeed, before resort to the gun, as outlined above, stands Section 1983, a civil law enforcement statute, used primarily in the federal courts, but also applicable in state courts.  It allows American citizens to sue officials who act “under color of law” for violations of their constitutional rights – to restrain them, and to seek remedies for them.  In modern America, the quintessential Section 1983 suit would be when a sheriff comes and arrests you and takes your property on a bogus or fraudulent mortgage claim reduced to judgment by a court beholden to the bankers (sorry, Condoleeza, education is not the civil rights issue of the 21st century, yet).  They come with guns, en masse, and take property, and arrest people, and, short of shooting them when they come – there is evidence of it right on this site, some that I witnessed – the courts must be open to redress these grievances in a proper due process proceeding, with hearings, and witnesses, and proper documents, and the like.  Whistleblower cases, i.e., reporters of official fraud and corruption, are another common Section 1983 case, and one Don Bailey has committed his professional life as a lawyer to more than any other (Ms. Rice hasn’t mentioned these either – See the Garcetti trilogy).

If there is one thing that is made clear on this site, it is that there is a fundamental failing in the courts of the United States to protect your constitutional rights.  These Courts understand this.  I have made suggestions on this site, and they have watched, and they know exactly what I’m saying – that they are deliberately, through the most nefarious of plans, creating an environment where no attorney ever will bring a Section 1983 claim again, or suffer the abuse that Don Bailey and I have suffered, or have your pro se case swept behind a wall of obfuscation that no reasonable, even intelligent, American citizen, will ever understand.  The courts, in failing to enforce their Constitutional mandates, are becoming the vehicles through which official oppression is allowed to corrupt endlessly, and the fillers of the bankers over-stuffed coffers – all at the expense of your individual life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness – it is that simple, and we will lay it out in endless detail, and give you every opportunity to understand it for yourself, and I will teach you through my case, which I intend to re-file.

As far as I know, other than Switzerland, America is the only country with fairly liberal gun ownership protections, for assault-type weapons.  I believe America is the only country in the world with a civil enforcement law that stands between man, his gun, his rights, and his God.  An evil influence is behind what is happening in the Courts, however you define and give face to that term, but there is no moral goodness known to man by which the conduct of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court, and those surrounding the Don Bailey proceedings are anything other than that – evil.

I don’t submit that God himself gave us guns, though appear so-inspired, nor that they are the only defense we have against official oppression and abuse on the scales we have seen.  God endowed us with minds, hearts, voices, and wills, too, and you must use them to see that the rights that bind God and man – life, liberty, and the pursuit of YOUR happiness – are being eroded, drastically, through the very institutions conceived to protect them but, as you will see through my lawsuit, are specifically designed to suppress them.  The gun is a mere technological extension of our carbon-based selves through which to exert our power, our will, thoughts, and ideas, and that is what the Pennsylvania Civil Rights Law Network is all about.  If they are going to take away Section 1983, and they effectively are, and I’ve written about the Supreme Court Garcetti trilogy, and other things, then we need to have institutions built by the people to serve as a check to protect, through political will, and moral duty, against the resort to guns, as the only alternative.  I did hear, after all, that Haliburton has been building some mass internment camps out in Dick Cheney’s stomping grounds somewhere.  I don’t think he’s in the cattle business, and it doesn’t sound like a place where there’s much liberty.

Lest anyone think that this writer has forgotten about those children and their protectors in Sandyhook, it is the tears that I shed, and sickness that I felt, too, that compels me as a civil rights lawyer to speak what I have to speak.  People with mental illnesses, on drugs made in laboratories by people who aren’t studying the conditions of society, and companies that are connected as deeply as any other “person” into this corrupt, chronyist state of affairs, are doing the killing.  They have been oddly timed and spaced, geographically, in recent years, and there also appears to be a video game connection.  I understand they wear head phones when they play these things for hour after hour, day after day, and get all kinds of suggestions about killing, and expressions of the exertion of raw power.  Somewhere in this mix has to be why these poor, ill, Americans are killing innocent people all over the country.  These drugs are bad, and Dr. Stefan Kruszewski knows all about that.

I had a case for a fellow in the United States Army named Kurtis Arman, that I was never able to get going – he is a brave and brilliant man, and he was used for experimental drug treatment when he was a soldier – he was a programmed assassin, and killed a man when things went wrong.  I’d have to confirm the exact facts.  When he was in prison, he had some emergency surgery, and a capsule was removed from his leg, which was used to put the drugs in through which his behavior was controlled, through various environmental signals, and things of that nature.  I have pictures, and all of the documents.  My message, first, is to EA – it is time for you to move on what you have, and thank you for what you have done.  My message second is that there are some very real issues that need to be looked at before people start giving away their guns, and compromising the rights of hundreds of millions of Americans to protect their liberty as they deem fit as the panacea for a plague committed by a very “select” few mentally ill people.

As to the President, I voted for him, and believe he has done a great job given the hatred he is up against, which is appearing more and more contrived itself, and, frankly, the “we need a vote” line, repeated, over and over and over the way it has been, is just very irresponsible, and a bit suspect itself.  We don’t need a vote, we need some societal solutions for these institutional ills, and mass injustices – we need people to look up from their ipads, and iphones, and take some time away from the phony sense of fulfillment they get from their face books, and they need to see what is going on, and how it is a moral decay with which we are involved.  The wisdom of the one founding father who learned his lessons in an actual battle for freedom, with guns, needs to be honestly and thoroughly discussed and debated before this direct encroachment – one vote for now, even, softens the political climate for further erosion down the very near road.

I express my power with the mind and will God gave me, and intend to magnify it with this great equalizer we call the internet, and place a call out for all to do the same.  Guns scare me.

SirLeroy – I was paying just enough attention – if you’re still out there.

Thank you.

PCRLN statement on Lawless America project/Bailey case update/Ostrowski case update

PCRLN statement on Lawless America project

An event has been scheduled for February 5 and 6, 2013 in Washington, D.C..  It is believed that there are events scheduled in and around the capital that have been arranged through the efforts of persons associated with Lawless America.  While PCRLN, and this writer, in particular, fully embrace the efforts of Mr. Windsor, and others, to expose what are real and present problems with the state of justice, at least in Pennsylvania, as we have experienced it, and as the experience of others across America appears to show, and support and encourage every American citizen that can to attend and support the cause, through PCRLN, Lawless America, and elsewhere, it is important on the eve of this event to clarify the relationship between PCRLN and Lawless America.

There is no relationship, work agreement, work-sharing agreement, or formal or informal affiliation and/or association between Lawless America and PCRLN.  The efforts of the PCRLN, as an organization, are solely as reflected on this site, and have been related primarily to our immediate need to shed public light on the very real problems that have been revealed through the civil rights practice of Don Bailey, and the continuing harms being caused to him, dozens of his clients, and others, for doing nothing more than seeking fair and equal access to the courts through competent, licensed counsel, simply because of who their attorney is, who the public official defendants in their cases are, and/or because of the institutional shortcomings reflected by their claims.  Our efforts with Lawless America, as reported in July, 2012 were directed at helping injured people get justice in their valid and legitimate claims, and in furthering the clearly-stated purposes and themes of this site, and nothing more.

We have continued to work on some very exciting ventures behind the scenes, as suggested at various times since beginning this effort in 2011, and will be bringing further, and more regular updates on these matters in the future.  All are, have been, and will be, completely independent of the Lawless America Effort.

In recent weeks, there appears to have been some bad information circulating through the social media networks, and the persons making decisions at Lawless America, suggesting that some people or other, this writer included, are involved in some sort of wrongful conduct or actions in connection the Lawless America effort.  It is offensive to even have to reveal this absurdity here, and it has been addressed as needed with those with whom it needed to be immediately addressed.  No one connected with PCRLN has done anything to dishonor the commitment that has been made, as reflected through the career and practice of Don Bailey, to the cause of justice, as reflected on this site, nor will any ever be tolerated.  None have occurred, and any reports to the contrary are false.

Bill Windsor did agree to provide continuing coverage to the Bailey disciplinary hearings and proceedings, and was even kind enough to send equipment and a film crew back in August or September to do so.  Bill was very supportive of Don, after coming through and hearing the stories for himself, and we were pleased that he was willing to work with us to expose the issues intrinsic to the Pennsylvania courts.  The filming effort in Harrisburg was a success, and there was an air of hope and support that empowered many.  The videos turned out great, as far as I have heard and seen, and everything was going along fine.  There as an agenda established to film certain interviews, and we intended to film at the hearings themselves, but, because of the health issues that Don is known to have had, and, frankly, the enormity of the daily burden of his keeping cases and family alive, and working on the case work burden of the ongoing disciplinary proceedings, we were never able to accomplish everything we had hoped to.  We will, and are still planning to.

I was aware of the discussions of the DC event, but neither I nor PCRLN were specifically involved in any planning or organization, and I, personally, did not follow any of it on face book or wherever else these things were being discussed, but I fully supported every effort to promote the causes discussed on this site, and had every hope and intention that as many attend and get involved as possible.  It was just last week that these things seemed to have exploded.  I have not read the things that are supposed to have been said, but trust the reports I received.  Again, they have been addressed, and will be addressed at some later time, if need be.  Demand has been made that they be retracted.

This would not be addressed on this site at all, but-for the fact that PCRLN supporters who have attempted to communicate with Lawless America that the things that have been said are wrong, have been told that they are no longer welcome to participate in the effort.  Videos have been removed, contacts cut-off, and, as relevant here, some members have been told that they are not welcome to participate in the D.C. event.  This is unacceptable to be associated with, and PCRLN cannot be associated with Lawless America in connection with the D.C. affair under these circumstances.  This is an organizational statement only, however, and all others who have planned to attend to meet with legislators, organizers, or others are free to do so, and are encouraged to do so.

I will be attending a meeting on February 6, 2013, arranged independently by Angela Robinson, with an aide of Senator Toomey, and hope to meet and talk with as many people as I can during this time in our nation’s capital.  All others should feel free to do the same.  I hope to see you there, and meet as many others as I can.

Unfortunately, again, because of the mess foisted upon this writer, I express only one small caution.  I understand that there are certain private affairs that have been arranged by Lawless America.  I have been told that I am not welcome there, and certainly will abide that demand.  Any others who have been specifically so-directed should do the same.  I don’t have the specific information on where the events are, and what, exactly, is involved with them, as I have really not followed or been involved in this organizational effort, but I’m sure it is all available through the Lawless America site.  Check there and your social media networks if you have any concerns.  Anyone is free to contact me if they have any questions.

Let’s all hope that we use this valuable opportunity to further the cause that has affected all of your rights, and brought you into the courts to begin with.

Bailey disciplinary case update

Someday, the effort that Don Bailey has gone through to continue the fight for the rights he fought for in the jungles of Vietnam some 40 years ago, will be seen, and the issues understood, and the injustice remedied.  Colossal due process injustice has been heaped upon colossal due process injustice, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in an “Order” stamped by a clerk, has found what Don has been saying all along – that he is being denied due process hearings.  These are issues that are essential to his “defense,” yet the Court denied his request the he be granted his hearings on factually-flawed, clearly contrived procedural grounds.

There, of course, is nothing to “defend” against, because Don did nothing wrong, and in oppressive systems, hearings are denied to cover up wrongdoing.  The wrongdoing has already been exposed, and the fight is to make Don look as bad as possible for exposing it, and to somehow manipulate all of us into believing they can whitewash the record of all of it by getting rid of Don Bailey.  They can’t.

Much more will be discussed, but the hearings that Don is being denied relate to subpoenas he issued to federal judges and others, his “accusers,” and the documentation they are known to have that would prove their own misconduct as alleged.  They have enlisted the United States Attorney’s Office to invoke their grand federal judicial power to fight these subpoenas, but two of these federal Judges, Christopher C. Conner, and John E. Jones, waltzed right across jurisdictional lines, willy-nilly, and right across the street in Harrisburg, to testify, falsely, in their lawless effort, against Don Bailey.

The expectation at this point is that the full Disciplinary Board will vote on the discipline of Don Bailey, and, rest-assured, unless things change, the dye has been cast.  The next meeting is believed to be in March, and it is our plan to petition the Disciplinary Board for a public comment period before they vote on Don’s discipline.  They appear to conduct their business in secret, not surprisingly, and more will be brought to you on these efforts.

There is an oral argument scheduled on Don’s exceptions to the report and recommendation for February 15, 2013 in the Pennsylvania Judicial Center.  This will be Don’s first real chance to speak publicly about these proceedings, and attendance is encouraged

Again, a further update, with linked disciplinary documents, and other things, will be provided.

Ostrowski case update

The case filed by Andrew J. Ostrowski on October 12, 2012, has been withdrawn pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a).  The withdrawal is without prejudice, meaning that it can be re-filed.  The Complaint was assigned to federal Judge William W. Caldwell, Harrisburg Branch, who Ostrowski has practiced before regularly in the past, and, despite the mass recusals of Judges from Don Bailey’s case, and even the shipping of his federal parallel discipline to New Jersey to create the appearance of fairness, Caldwell is the judge getting assigned the Middle District cases of Don Bailey now.  Ostrowski asked in the complaint that the case be assigned out of the Middle District voluntarily, and that was not done.  The filings of Ostrowski also appear reflect other concerns that he had in dealing with the federal courts in Harrisburg.  All filings and further updates will be provided soon.

Thank you.