(MASSACHUSETTS APPEALS COURT PANEL)
JUDGE ANDRE A. GELINAS
JUDGE ELSPETH B. CYPHER
JUDGE JOSEPH A. TRAINOR
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. - Lord Acton
GELINAS
CYPHER
TRAINOR
Nothing in my book, "Exposing the Corruption in the Massachusetts Family Courts," generated more outrage and feedback than the chapters on the three judges listed above, who fraudulently called my appeal "frivolous with no basis in FACT or LAW" to extort thousands of dollars from me to pay double the Mother's attorney fees and costs.
In effect, I was fined $8,606.72, plus "thousands" of dollars in time and court-related costs for reporting judicial misconduct; for incorrectly assuming that constitutional law, state law, U.S. Supreme Court case law, and fundamental parental rights applied to fathers in family court; and for incorrectly assuming that the Massachusetts appeals court would consist of judges who were honorable.
Following Digangi's lead, this three-judge panel of the appeals court concealed its self-evident crimes against me by illegally impounding the case at this level and denying me the opportunity to make an oral argument.
It is a FACT that my appeals court brief and reply brief are all the evidence needed for an impartial jury to find the three-judge panel of the appeals court guilty of crimes that should have all three of them facing jail time, sanctions, and removal from the bench.
Attached to my appeals court documents as addendum items were six "chalks", which communicated with specificity the FACTS pertaining to my appeal. The chalks were titled:
(1)
Court Comments with Rebuttals;
Court Comments with Rebuttals; (2)
Lies, Inaccuracies, and Distortions of the Truth Listed as Facts in Judge Digangi's "Findings of Fact" Document;(3)Meritless Objections Sustained by the Court;
Meritless Objections Sustained by the Court;(4)Lies in the Restraining Order Statements;
Lies in the Restraining Order Statements;(5)Lies Under Oath and in Documents Signed Under the Pains and Penalties of Perjury
Lies Under Oath and in Documents Signed Under the Pains and Penalties of Perjury(6)
and Lies in the DSS Report.The "detail" contained in these "chalks" is all the evidence needed to substantiate the fact that the appeals court committed fraud when it claimed that my appeal had "no reasonable basis" in FACT.
The references to the law contained in my appeals court documents included the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment; numerous case law citations pertaining to gender discrimination and parental rights; and numerous other rules and statutes, including M.G.L. c. 208, §31, which states:
In making an order or judgment relative to the custody of children, the rights of the parents shall, in the absence of misconduct, be held to be equal... The law and case law summarized above and communicated in much greater detail in my briefs are all the evidence needed to substantiate the fact that the appeals court committed fraud when it claimed that my appeal had "no reasonable basis" in LAW.
My petition for rehearing to the same three-judge panel of the appeals court and my application for further appellate review to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court were both denied without explanation in defiance of the fact that I discredited every bogus "fact" and rebutted every flawed argument contained in the appeals court's September 30, 2005-issued "Memorandum and Order."
The denial of my petition for rehearing should be all the evidence needed to substantiate the fact that the appeals court KNOWINGLY defied the facts and law of this state court appeal to rule against me.
The appeals court ruling not only defied the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, but also the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits excessive fines from being imposed.
After my story went public and national with Judge Manzi's "banning" of my book, I received emails and phone calls from lawyers and law professors all over the country, who reviewed my book.
One lawyer shared with me that he had examined my appeals court brief and reply brief, as cut and pasted into my book, and conceded that he could not have written a better appeal himself. As he put it, "it can hardly be disputed that your legal arguments were clearly articulated, applicable to the law, and substantiated by your facts."
Another reader of the book advised me to take my case outside the collusion and corruption of the Massachusetts court system and sue the judges involved in my case in federal court.
This self-identified law expert called the appeals court ruling "an egregious betrayal of public trust and the laws of the land that these three judges had sworn to uphold and, consequently, an act of treason against the country."
If I had limited time to prove judicial corruption, I would request that my appeals court documents be reviewed first - documents, which the appeals court allegedly reviewed to call my appeal frivolous; which the CJC allegedly reviewed to conclude that there was no evidence of judicial misconduct; which the state's Supreme Judicial Court allegedly reviewed to deny my application for further appellate review; which U.S. District Court Judge Douglas P. Woodlock allegedly reviewed before dismissing my case in federal court, and which a three-judge panel of the First Circuit's U.S. Court of Appeals allegedly reviewed to affirm Woodlock's dismissal.
It is a FACT that my appeals court brief and reply brief are all the evidence needed for an impartial jury to find the three-judge panel of the appeals court guilty of fraud and extortion, which is why I have included links to these document below.
Since this evidence is blatantly self-evident and cannot be excused as a matter of judicial discretion, it also implicates every judge who has reviewed these documents since this ruling and done nothing.
It should be noted that everything communicated above and substantiated with the documents that can be accessed below was conveyed in my complaints against these judges to the criminally-negligent Commission on Judicial Conduct, which dismissed all three complaints with the claim that no judicial misconduct had occurred.
Listed below are links to the appeals court documents that this corrupt three-judge panel allegedly reviewed to call my appeal "frivolous with no basis in law or fact". I contend that these documents are more convincing proof of judicial corruption than if I had a video tape of these judges accepting a bribe to rule against me.
It should also be noted that the "Brief of Appellee", which was removed from the website due to privacy concerns, is relevant because the attorney who wrote it, Attorney Debra Dow, alleged that it required 25.8 hours to produce - a claim that was blindly accepted by the three judges in this case to maximize the amount of money that was extorted from me.
I am not a lawyer and do not have access to the generic template responses and case law citations used to respond to the same arguments heard over and over again in family court and I could have still produced the generic drivel that Dow passed off as a professional legal document inside of three hours.
