Monday, January 25, 2010

JUDGE NOE GONZALEZ OFFERED ME A BRIBE - I HAVE REJECTED IT AND AM NOW ASKING THAT DA VILLALOBS AND THE FBI INVESTIGATE SAME

The full story will be presented herein in the BV. For now what my readers need to know is, on the record Judge Noe Gonzales offered to hold the Brownsville City ordinances I am claiming to be unconstitutional prior restraint unconstitutional if I withdrew a motion to recuse. The statements in the motion to recuse are nearly identical in substance to those which were sent to FBI Director Mueller. Had I withdrawn the recusal it would have been the same as withdrawing the statements to FBI Director Mueller. Noe Gonzalez had these statements before him at the time he made the offer.

I have spent 20 years fighting judicial corruption. I was sitting their in near disbelief. He knew he messed up big time when he drilled the court reporter about whether the recording of the offer could be used as an official record.

People will say- "what is the big deal? he was going to allow you to win- take it." I have told my readers over and over again I am not about the end result I am about the process. This was a corruption of the process. Had I accepted this offer it would have made my 20 years of work a fraud.

There is more to come, but I have to get out the door for about an hour.

This also goes to the Sanchez case - a similar offer was made for a positive ruling in the Sanchez case, but it was very indirect. This morning I informed Travelers insurance of the events. I will not be party to a corrupt ruling, especially when it means an insurance company will have to pay me money because of the ruling.

I would rather loose both cases than be party to Noe Gonzales, corruption.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

"on the record Judge Noe Gonzales offered to hold the Brownsville City ordinances I am claiming to be unconstitutional prior restraint unconstitutional if I withdrew a motion to recuse."

That's not a bribe. It sounds like he was advising you (a pro se) of what was happening. I think it would fall under the category of ex parte mediation. You have a right to make the motion, but he also has the right to fight the recusal. It is the same as a mediated solution. It isn't binding unless both parties agree. You decided to continue with the motion. That does not constitute a bribe.

BobbyWC said...

You can make up stupid legal terms but that will not change the reality.

First there was no ex parte on the issue. We were in court. With the motion to recuse pending he was to take no action and simply state he would grant it or refer it.

he did not - he spent an hour trying to convince me to drop the claims and he would rule right then and there - there was no mediation involve.

Further I would never speak to a judge without opposing counsel present.

The idea he thought he was dealing with a pro se is just stupid. My reputation and appellate record is well known among the judges.

I have won enough mandamuses that I use to be called the mandamus king. He let it be known who I was.

I do not need special help from the judge.

You need to look up the definition of a bribe - the offer of something which is not always money in exchange for me doing something - he had no business discussing his intent in the case

Bobby WC