Prosecutorial Discretion is Alive and Well on Oregon
Oct 24, 2018 10:35:51 #
Today I met with a Deputy DA in Hillsboro. I showed him Presiding Circuit Court Judge D. Charley Bailey's filing into Small Claims court, where he was a defendant and I the plaintiff.
It turns out that his, D. Charley's, small claims court document under penalty of perjury had a lie in it. He said, I never asked for the recorder back. One cannot use the small claim court if one didn't try to resolve the issue. So with item #8, D. Charley stated I didn't ask for it's return.
Then right in the transcript, of my trial in his court, it shows. I asked for its return twice.
I do lawful not legal. Incontrovertible evidence, court documents, prove D. Charley lied, that's perjury; perjury caused me to be defrauded out of my property. Fraud has no statute of limitations. When the fraud was perpetrated upon me; that was a due process violation; 18 USC 3571 states the penalty is 250K in FRN. I prefer silver. Risk Management h**es to pay.
I'll be starting an administrative action against D. Charley Bailey soon. He's already a federal defendant. Whenever, I locate the "one supreme Court claiming original jurisdiction in law and equity in Article III." How can an enumerated court be misplaced?
I attempted to have the Oregon DOJ prosecute D. Charley on another issue a couple of years ago. There was a Special Agent of the DOJ assigned to me. He read the incontrovertible evident on this other issue and took it to a prosecutor for Oregon DOJ. They refused to prosecute.
Later I took a third issue, about D. Charley Bailey, to two detectives I know. One of them had said, "if you have the evidence you say you have I'll take it to Oregon DOJ." I did and he did. The Oregon DOJ refused to prosecute.
Several months ago I mentioned this prosecutorial discretion to a Federal DOJ attorney in Portland. He refused to consider it for prosecution. He also refused to investigate or prosecute Anna J Brown a Federal Judge in Portland. Incontrovertible evidence does not impress these prosecuting BAR attorneys. Especially when it involves judicial malpractice.
Then I met with a retired Judge for coffee, today. I showed her the same documents. She read it and said there was nothing wrong. I don't know how to read and comprehend. That meeting did not go well.
I have concluded there is no law or equity on Oregon at municipal, county, state or federal level. I really need to find that Article III court. Mookini v United States 303 US 201, states the prerequisites of an Article III court.
FOIA demands to many corporate governance entities claiming they are the ones with the enumerated powers from The United States of America's Constitution circa 1819 thru 1860-61 does not locate this one supreme Court of Article III.
I again FOIA demand the name and address for this court. I know they like requests. I prefer demands.
This communique is not intended to mislead, defraud, deceive or threaten in any way and is submitted in “good faith and with clean hands.” I do lawful not legal and this is my best effort.
I close with Love, peace, harmony and a prayer. A US Marshal has determined my prayer is not a threat. He then reneged on his word which is only good one time. "Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition."
The reader should comprehend this is: Testimony in the form of an affidavit of t***h.
Notice to the agent is notice to the principal notice to the principal is notice to the agent
by: Ron Vrooman for the Beaverton Oversight Committee:
It turns out that his, D. Charley's, small claims court document under penalty of perjury had a lie in it. He said, I never asked for the recorder back. One cannot use the small claim court if one didn't try to resolve the issue. So with item #8, D. Charley stated I didn't ask for it's return.
Then right in the transcript, of my trial in his court, it shows. I asked for its return twice.
I do lawful not legal. Incontrovertible evidence, court documents, prove D. Charley lied, that's perjury; perjury caused me to be defrauded out of my property. Fraud has no statute of limitations. When the fraud was perpetrated upon me; that was a due process violation; 18 USC 3571 states the penalty is 250K in FRN. I prefer silver. Risk Management h**es to pay.
I'll be starting an administrative action against D. Charley Bailey soon. He's already a federal defendant. Whenever, I locate the "one supreme Court claiming original jurisdiction in law and equity in Article III." How can an enumerated court be misplaced?
I attempted to have the Oregon DOJ prosecute D. Charley on another issue a couple of years ago. There was a Special Agent of the DOJ assigned to me. He read the incontrovertible evident on this other issue and took it to a prosecutor for Oregon DOJ. They refused to prosecute.
Later I took a third issue, about D. Charley Bailey, to two detectives I know. One of them had said, "if you have the evidence you say you have I'll take it to Oregon DOJ." I did and he did. The Oregon DOJ refused to prosecute.
Several months ago I mentioned this prosecutorial discretion to a Federal DOJ attorney in Portland. He refused to consider it for prosecution. He also refused to investigate or prosecute Anna J Brown a Federal Judge in Portland. Incontrovertible evidence does not impress these prosecuting BAR attorneys. Especially when it involves judicial malpractice.
Then I met with a retired Judge for coffee, today. I showed her the same documents. She read it and said there was nothing wrong. I don't know how to read and comprehend. That meeting did not go well.
I have concluded there is no law or equity on Oregon at municipal, county, state or federal level. I really need to find that Article III court. Mookini v United States 303 US 201, states the prerequisites of an Article III court.
FOIA demands to many corporate governance entities claiming they are the ones with the enumerated powers from The United States of America's Constitution circa 1819 thru 1860-61 does not locate this one supreme Court of Article III.
I again FOIA demand the name and address for this court. I know they like requests. I prefer demands.
This communique is not intended to mislead, defraud, deceive or threaten in any way and is submitted in “good faith and with clean hands.” I do lawful not legal and this is my best effort.
I close with Love, peace, harmony and a prayer. A US Marshal has determined my prayer is not a threat. He then reneged on his word which is only good one time. "Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition."
The reader should comprehend this is: Testimony in the form of an affidavit of t***h.
Notice to the agent is notice to the principal notice to the principal is notice to the agent
by: Ron Vrooman for the Beaverton Oversight Committee:
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.