Monday, March 25, 2019


I only have like 15 minutes at a time I can focus,  So things are slow.  But the Supreme Court has ruled Mike and Carlos can be sued for corrupting the courts.  The judge can be sued for declaratory relief only, but not damages.  I will include damages against the judges, but inform the court that immunity requires that part of the lawsuit be dismissed.  I have written a good 20 pages on the history of judicial immunity and am prepared to agree the trial  court and court of appeals must dismiss the request for damages, but then if a miracle happens challenge the doctrine at the Supreme Court level.  I can show the judge made law is totally unsupported by the history of this country and its Founding Fathers.  Like Justice Jackson said. I see no reason why I should be consciously wrong today because I was unconsciously wrong yesterday."

I can write several pages wherein the Supreme Court used this doctrine to reverse itself.  The best known is Plessy v. Ferguson, separate but equal is constitution then came Brown v. the Board of Education  "separate but equal is inherently unconstitutional." It has reach the point judges believe they can never be held accountable and by same the immunity doctrine has abolished the right to redress.  A judicial made doctrine does not trump the constitution.  I am not suggesting judges be held accountable financially the same as in a regular case.  I am suggesting a higher standard before liability exists and that the trial judge must decide if the pleadings on their face support the high standard or dismiss the damages part of the lawsuit.  The plaintiff should be allowed to file the record which supports their claim.

"These concerns are not insubstantial, either for the judge or for the public, but we agree with the Court of Appeals that the potential harm to the public from denying immunity to private co-conspirators [449 U.S. 24, 32]   is outweighed by the benefits of providing a remedy against those private persons who participate in subverting the judicial process and in so doing inflict injury on other persons."  Dennis v. Sparks.  449 U.S. 24 (1980).

I gave Carlos a way out, but what ever he is after in running this con job with Mike must be worth a lot.  It was an easy out and Carlos made it clear, hell no.


I can tell you since my threat no one is sending me emails to go after Mike.  They fear I will call them out as leeches.  Guys I cannot take money from any elected official or anyone running from office.

But I have had far too many people who I know want Mike destroyed tell me they are broke while driving $60,000 cars and living in $500,000 homes.  Sorry guys, all you leeches want if for someone else to do the work so you can pick up the pieces and gain for yourself.

I am not playing.  

For now, $700 will get me into court along with service and citation.  I do not a lot more to keep things going and refund myself for the money I have already spent.  I am not working.  My legal work right now with only 51 minutes sessions limits me to very little work.

If you want Mike and Carlos to own Brownsville then do nothing and stop bitching.

I have a lot to do before April 7th when I head to SA.  I am tired of using my retirement money to help these leeches just waiting to pick up the pieces.  

No comments: