California Judicial Council Corrupting
Federal Court Judge(s)?
Federal Judges On Taxpayer Paid
Salaries Outsourcing Their Job?
San
Jose, November 18, 2016
Documents
filed recently in a pending U.S. District Court case # 13:0228 against the
state court entities/agents, accuse the defendants’ and California Judicial
Council (“CJC”) of authoring and engineering orders under Judge Ronald McLeod
Whyte’s digital signature. Oddly enough, effective November 1, 2016, after
Plaintiffs’ ongoing complaint, Judge Whyte is no longer on the Federal judicial
bench.
 |
| Ex Federal Court Judge Ronald McLeod Whyte |
Documents
filed in the case state that plaintiffs “are consistently being victimized by
“naziistic” and “defamatory” orders that purposefully create a false record and
misapply law to fit the “fixed” outcome.. J. Whyte’s conflict of interest and
judicial crimes transformed this case into a farce proceeding, a sheer four
year waste of Plaintiffs’ efforts and time.” “Defendant/CJC et al. who are no
strangers to corrupt the judicial process and exposing J. Whyte to public integrity
law enforcement scrutiny”
The
document offers many examples of proof that J. Whyte did not author orders that
bear his digital name, among which are the following:
1.
A
verbatim quote of the July 15, 2016 court hearing, where Judge Whyte, upon being
confronted, does not make any effort to deny the claim that orders under his
name are not authored by him, while he denies other unrelated allegations.
2.
Likewise,
when Defendant’s counsel, Mr. James Stanley Brown, of Sedgwick LLP, when
confronted with the same allegation, does did not challenge or deny it either.
 |
| Mr. James Brown, Sedgwick LLP |
3.
Order,
under Judge Whyte’s digital signature contains clues that it is not authored by
Judge Whyte. For example, mistakes in verbatim quotes of Judge Whyte’s own handwritten language provides a clue
that “had J. Whyte authored the instant order (#758) he would not have
difficulty recognizing his own handwritten words”
4.
“Yet
another instance of foul play is when a raft of orders ..engineered by Def.’s
were released as late as 6:30 p.m., on J. Whyte’s last day on bench
(Oct. 31, 2016), on matters that were taken under submission 6 months ago, ..
and J. Whyte’s cleanup work done by Def.’s/agents”
5.
“Further
evidence of Def.’s and its agents authoring the Order is the legal standard ..
is [a] verbatim copy of Def.’s pleading”
6.
Another
clue, unlike an order authored by a rational judge, is when the “Def.’s
engineered order discredits the entire world that testifies against them, with
frivolous and “Get-Smart” type over-smart “gotchas” ”.
7.
Per
document, another clue is when “[h]aving interacted with Def.s’/CJC counsel Mr.
Brown, Pltf. can tell that the language and choice of words in [Judge Whyte’s] order,
“in each instance that defendant elicited testimony” are words commonly
used by Mr. Brown, his standard vocabulary, and never heard from J. Whyte,
further solidifying the fact that the Order is engineered/authored by
Def.s’/CJC and its agents”
8.
Per
document, yet another clue is when Defendants and CJC authored order
contradicts what J. Whyte verbally stated during an August 2016 trial, per
reporter transcribed trial transcript. “Def.’s engineered Order’s backtracking
that “review of the complete transcript for that court day” now changes J.
Whyte’s “looking back at the transcript” is nothing but a fraud on this court,
self-serving, and rings hollow”.
9.
When
Plaintiff complained about J. Whyte frustrating justice he got penalized. Per
document filed, “frustrating justice is a crime of legal and moral conscience.
It is shameful that J. Whyte would allow his name to be associated by
publishing this Order. It’s kind of like Nazi party calling the Jews
complaining about frustrating of justice, as the intimidators vs. truly being
the opposite”
10.
Instead
of addressing the California Judicial Council and Judge Whyte’s judicial crimes,
documents recently filed reveal that Plaintiffs’ have been threatened further
with “other sanctions, including termination of electronic filing permission
and monetary sanctions”. In short it
appears that the reported crime is being covered up and silenced.
 |
| Ms. Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Chair of California Judicial Council |
The
document adds that “[w]hen justice is not served but rather abused to achieve
an ulterior end, the engineered orders carry as little weight as the “fixed”
orders of the German courts against innocent Jews’ legitimate claims in the
1930s-40s.” “It is abundantly clear that Def.’s/CJC continues to publish a
false record and reasoning under a Federal Judge’s Whyte’s name and the latter
is willing co-conspirator to it.” “Public trust in the integrity of this court
is totally shattered when this court allows California state authorities to be
proxy, and dictate to this court the “fixed” outcome. Either cure the “rigged”
orders by ruling on facts, merits, proper law, or provide public sufficient notice
that this court is not open for adjudication of claims against state entities,
and individuals associated with state entities so that the public, including
Pltfs’, do not waste and toil over years in the hopes of justice.”
Under
the circumstances public has a right to know whether Judge Whyte’s properties all
over the country for e.g. the 320 Prospect Avenue, Los Gatos, California 95032,
the Ketchum, Idaho property, and the other (41) forty one individual separate
investment assets, are all acquired on taxpayer paid salary as a Federal Judge,
while Judge Whyte outsources his job to special interest entities like the
California Judicial Council?
 |
| Mr. Martin Hoshino, Administrative Director, California Judicial Council |
The
United States District Court Judges at the San Jose Federal Court consists
entirely of ex-California Superior Court Judges, for e.g. Judge Edward Davila,
Judge Lucy Koh, Judge Beth Freeman, Judge Jeremy Fogel, and Judge Ronald M.
Whyte, who effective Nov. 1, 2016 is no longer on the Federal Judicial Bench .
The
Federal court plaintiff in the underlying case has complained the Judge Whyte
and the California Judicial Council are covering up for the civil rights
violations of the California State Judiciary and its affiliated individuals.
The
public suspicion of RICO (racketeering and corrupt) acts between certain Northern
California U.S. District Federal Court Judges and the Defendant(s) California Judiciary
appears to be intensifying and attracting attention and scrutiny from the
appropriate law enforcement agencies.
Please
direct your comments and queries to judicialirregularities@gmail.com
