http://www.lawlessamerica.com/index.

php/news/blog-of-william-m-windsor/96-nine-federal-judges-sued-for-corruption

2/2/2011 Nine Federal Judges Sued for Corruption

Nine Federal Judges Sued for Corruption

William M. Windsor Hits: 204

I sen t a la w su it t o t h e Cler k of t h e Un it ed St a t es Dist r ict Cou r t for filin g on Oct ober 2 1 , 2 0 1 0 . It is

a la w su it a g a in st n in e feder a l ju dg es. I h a v e ch a r g ed t h em w it h cor r u pt ion .
Not ice of Filin g of V er ified Com pla in t
V er ified Com pla in t (less t h e ex h ibit s t h a t a r e a ll or der s of t h e v a r iou s cou r t s)

T h e follow in g in for m a t ion is t a k en fr om t h e v er ified com pla in t :

"3 . Upon in for m a t ion a n d belief, Feder a l Ju dg es Or in da D. Ev a n s (“ Ju dg e Ev a n s” ), W illia m S.
Du ffey , Jr . (“ Ju dg e Du ffey ” ), Joel F. Du bin a (“ Ju dg e Du bin a ” ), Ja m es La r r y Edm on dson (“ Ju dg e
Edm on dson ” ), Rosem a r y Ba r ket t (“ Ju dg e Ba r ket t ” ), Edw a r d Ea r l Ca r n es (“ Ju dg e Ca r n es” ), Fr a n k
M. Hu ll (“ Ju dg e Hu ll” ), St a n ley Ma r cu s (“ Ju dg e Ma r cu s” ), a n d W illia m H. Pr y or , Jr . (“ Ju dg e
Pr y or ” ) a r e cor r u pt a n d h a v e con spir ed t o da m a g e W in dsor .
"4 . A n on lin e leg a l dict ion a r y defin es cor r u pt a s “ h a v in g a n u n la w fu l or ev il m ot iv e; especia lly
ch a r a ct er ized by im pr oper a n d u su a lly u n la w fu l con du ct in t en ded t o secu r e a ben efit for on eself
or a n ot h er .”
"5 . T h is descr ipt ion pr oper ly defin es t h ese feder a l ju dg es.
"6 . T h e a ct ion s of t h ese ju dg es br in g sh a m e on t h e leg a l sy st em a n d t h e feder a l ju dicia r y . T h ese officer s of t h e cou r t
h a v e con spir ed t o per pet r a t e fr a u d dir ect ed squ a r ely a t t h e in t eg r it y of t h e decision -m a k in g of t h e feder a l cou r t s.
In t en t ion a l m isst a t em en t s of fa ct s or om ission s of m a t er ia l fa ct s w it h kn ow ledg e of fa lsit y , or in r eckless disr eg a r d for
w h et h er st a t em en t s w er e t r u e or fa lse h a v e been m a de.
"7 . Ju dg e Du bin a , Ju dg e Ca r n es, a n d Ju dg e Ba r ket t a r e t h e Elev en t h Cir cu it ju dg es w h o en t er ed a n ou t r a g eou s or der
a g a in st W in dsor t h a t led t o t h e im pr oper ju dg m en t a n d w r it of ex ecu t ion filed a g a in st T h e W in dsor s. T h eir a ct ion s
v iola t ed t h e Feder a l Ru les of A ppella t e Pr ocedu r e a n d W in dsor ’s Con st it u t ion a l r ig h t s. Upon in for m a t ion a n d belief,
t h eir a ct ion s w er e ca lcu la t ed a n d deliber a t e.
"8 . W in dsor is in v olv ed in sev er a l civ il a ct ion s t h a t r ela t e u lt im a t ely t o Civ il A ct ion No. 1 :0 6 -CV -0 7 1 4 -ODE in t h e
Un it ed St a t es Dist r ict Cou r t for t h e Nor t h er n Dist r ict of Geor g ia . T h ese a ct ion s a r e a bou t t h e m ost fu n da m en t a l leg a l
issu es t h a t ex ist : ju st ice; h on est y ; fa ir pla y ; equ a l pr ot ect ion ; du e pr ocess; Con st it u t ion a l pr ot ect ion s; t h e r ig h t t o a fa ir
t r ia l befor e a n im pa r t ia l ju dg e; t h e r equ ir em en t t h a t w it n esses, a t t or n ey s, a n d ju dg es t ell t h e t r u t h ; t h e r equ ir em en t
t h a t w it n esses, a t t or n ey s, a n d ju dg es do n ot v iola t e t h e la w s of t h e st a t e a n d t h e cou n t r y , a bu se lit ig a n t s, a n d com m it
fr a u d u pon t h e cou r t s.
"9 . T h ese a ct ion s a r e a bou t t h ese dish on est feder a l ju dg es, a ju dicia l sy st em t h a t t r a m ples t h e Con st it u t ion a l r ig h t s of
U.S. cit izen s, a n d t h e fa ilu r e of t h e v a r iou s in div idu a ls a n d a u t h or it ies est a blish ed t o pr ot ect cit izen s t o do a n y t h in g
a bou t t h is.
"1 0 . T h e Un it ed St a t es g ov er n m en t h a s com m it t ed fr a u d. T h e g ov er n m en t t old W in dsor t h a t h e w ou ld be pr ot ect ed by
t h e Con st it u t ion . T h e g ov er n m en t kn ew t h is w a s n ot t r u e. W in dsor believ ed t h e g ov er n m en t . W in dsor w a s n ot
pr ot ect ed, a n d h e w a s da m a g ed.
"1 1 . T h e ser iou s issu es pr esen t ed h er ein ca m e t o t h e a t t en t ion of W in dsor t h r ou g h h is ex per ien ce in t h e Un it ed St a t es
Dist r ict Cou r t for t h e Nor t h er n Dist r ict of Geor g ia (“ N.D.Ga .” ) a n d t h e Un it ed St a t es Cou r t of A ppea ls for t h e Elev en t h
Cir cu it (“ Elev en t h Cir cu it ” ). A m a ssiv e fr a u d u pon t h e cou r t s h a s been per pet r a t ed by Ma id of t h e Mist Cor por a t ion
(“ MOT M” ) a n d Ma id of t h e Mist St ea m boa t Com pa n y Lt d (“ St ea m boa t ” ) (join t ly “ Ma id” ), Ma id’s A t t or n ey s – Ha w k in s
Pa r n ell (“ H&P” ) a n d Mr . Ca r l Hu g o A n der son , (“ Mr . A n der son ” ), a n d t h e Defen da n t Ju dg es.
"1 2 . Som e Dist r ict Cou r t ju dg es in t h e Un it ed St a t es Dist r ict Cou r t for t h e Nor t h er n Dist r ict of Geor g ia (“ N.D.Ga .” )
ig n or e t h e fa ct s; in v en t t h eir ow n fa ct s; ig n or e t h e Feder a l Ru les of Civ il Pr ocedu r e (“ FRCP” ), t h e Loca l Ru les, a n d t h e
Feder a l Ru les of Ev iden ce (“ FRE” ); ig n or e t h e la w ; ig n or e a pplica ble ca se la w ; cit e er r on eou s ca se la w ; com m it per ju r y
by m a kin g st a t em en t s t h a t t h ey kn ow t o be fa lse in t h eir or der s; v iola t e pa r t ies’ r ig h t s in a n y w a y t h ey ca n ; com m it
obst r u ct ion of ju st ice; a n d t r a m ple t h e Con st it u t ion a l r ig h t s of lit ig a n t s w it h ou t a t h ou g h t . T h ey m a n ipu la t e t h e
ju dicia l sy st em t o depr iv e pa r t ies su ch a s W in dsor of t h eir leg a l a n d Con st it u t ion a l r ig h t s.
"1 3 . Som e A ppella t e Cou r t ju dg es in t h e Un it ed St a t es Cou r t of A ppea ls for t h e Elev en t h Cir cu it (“ Elev en t h Cir cu it ” )
ig n or e t h e fa ct s; ig n or e t h e feder a l Ru les of A ppella t e Pr ocedu r e (“ FRA P” ); ig n or e t h e poin t s of er r or of a ppella n t s; ig n or e
t h e la w ; ig n or e a pplica ble ca se la w ; cit e er r on eou s ca se la w ; issu e sh or t , in a dequ a t e decision s; do w h a t ev er it t a kes t o
su ppor t t h eir fr ien ds a t t h e Dist r ict Cou r t s; a n d t r a m ple t h e Con st it u t ion a l r ig h t s of lit ig a n t s.
"1 4 . T h e ju dicia l sy st em su ppor t s t h is dish on est y a n d illeg a lit y . T h e “ sy st em ” den ies a n y for m of v a lid r ecou r se for a n
a g g r iev ed cit izen .
"1 5 . A g g r iev ed cit izen s fin d it n ex t t o im possible t o t a ke leg a l a ct ion a g a in st ju dg es. Ju dg es ig n or e per ju r y . T h er e is n o
lawlessamerica.com/…/96-nine-federal… 1/3
2/2/2011 Nine Federal Judges Sued for Corruption
la w t h a t per m it s a n a g g r iev ed cit izen t o su e ov er per ju r y . T h e on ly r ecou r se a g a in st a N.D.Ga . feder a l ju dg e is t o file a
com pla in t w it h t h e Ju dicia l Cou n cil of t h e Elev en t h Cir cu it (“ Ju dicia l Cou n cil” ). T h e com pla in t s m u st be n o m or e t h a n
fiv e pa g es. T h e Ju dicia l Cou n cil ig n or es v a lid com pla in t s a n d cla im s t h er e is n o pr oof w h en t h er e is plen t y . T h e
a g g r iev ed cit izen s h a v e n o r ecou r se. Sin ce t h e Su pr em e Cou r t isn ’t r ea lly in t h e bu sin ess of cor r ect in g er r or s by t h e
low er cou r t s, t h e N.D.Ga . a n d t h e Elev en t h Cir cu it com bin e t o h a v e t y r a n n ica l pow er .
"1 6 . T h e Ch ief Ju dg es of N.D.Ga . a n d t h e Elev en t h Cir cu it h a v e ig n or ed t h e w r on g doin g of t h eir fellow ju dg es. W in dsor
w r ot e t o t h em t o com pla in . W in dsor w a s ig n or ed. T h ese ju dg es su ppor t t h e w r on g doin g , a n d t h ey a ct iv ely pa r t icipa t e
in t h e w r on g doin g .
"1 7 . T h e Ju dicia l Cou n cil (h ea ded by Ju dg e Du bin a ) ig n or es t h e fa ct s; ig n or es t h e la w ; sa y s a n d does w h a t ev er it t a kes
t o pr ot ect t h eir fellow ju dg es; a n d t r a m ples t h e Con st it u t ion a l a n d leg a l r ig h t s of U.S. cit izen s. W in dsor filed a com pla in t
a g a in st Ju dg e Ev a n s, a n d it w a s n ot pu r su ed. T h e Ju dicia l Cou n cil ig n or ed m a ssiv e dish on est y a n d cr im in a l v iola t ion s.
"1 8 . T h e Un it ed St a t es of A m er ica h a s en dor sed v iola t ion of t h e Con st it u t ion a l pr ot ect ion s g r a n t ed t h e cit izen s of t h e
Un it ed St a t es t h a t t h ey a r e su pposed t o pr ot ect .
"1 9 . Sin ce Feder a l policy is t o let t h e “ pr oba bly g u ilt y ” g o fr ee r a t h er t h a n r isk a llow in g la w en for cem en t t o br ea k t h e
la w , it sh ou ld be feder a l policy t h a t ju dg es a n d g ov er n m en t officia ls w h o br ea k t h e la w sh ou ld lose a n y a n d a ll
pr ot ect ion .
"2 0 . In a n a lleg ed effor t t o in su la t e ju dg es fr om r eg u la r leg a l a ct ion s a g a in st t h em , t h ese sa m e ju dg es h a v e oblit er a t ed
t h e fu n da m en t a l r ig h t s of U.S. cit izen s. Ju dg es h a v e been sa n ct ion ed t o com m it cr im es a n d br ea k la w s w it h n o con cer n
a bou t con sequ en ces.
"2 1 . T h e Defen da n t Ju dg es r ou t in ely m a k e fa lse st a t em en t s t o a v oid dea lin g w it h t h e fa ct s a n d t h e la w so t h ey m a y
a ccom plish t h eir ow n im pr oper pu r poses.
"2 2 . T h e Defen da n t Ju dg es h a v e ig n or ed W in dsor ’s u n con t r ov er t ed pr oof of m a ssiv e dish on est y in MIST -1 .
"2 3 . T h e a ct ion s of t h ese Defen da n t Ju dg es su ppor t per ju r y , su bor n a t ion of per ju r y , Ru le 1 1 v iola t ion s, obst r u ct ion of
ju st ice, dish on est pa r t ies, dish on est a t t or n ey s, a n d cor r u pt ju dg es.
"2 4 . By fa ilin g t o follow pr oper pr ocedu r e, Defen da n t Ju dg es v iola t ed W in dsor ’s civ il r ig h t s a s t h ey h a v e been a ct in g in
t h e a bsen ce of a ll ju r isdict ion .
"2 5 . W in dsor h a s sh ow n g r ou n ds t o disqu a lify t h e Defen da n t Ju dg es.
"2 6 . Cou r t s h a v e defin ed “ im pa r t ia lit y m ig h t r ea son a bly be qu est ion ed” a s a “ r ea son a ble per cept ion , of a la ck of
im pa r t ia lit y by t h e ju dg e, h eld by a fa ir m in ded a n d im pa r t ia l per son ba sed u pon object iv e fa ct or r ea son a ble
in fer en ce.”
"2 7 . A NY dou bt r eg a r din g w h et h er r ecu sa l is r equ ir ed m u st be r esolv ed in fa v or of r ecu sa l. Sect ion 4 5 5 cr ea t es a "self-
en for cin g oblig a t ion " for ju dg es t o r ecu se t h em selv es, a n d dou bt r eg a r din g w h et h er r ecu sa l is r equ ir ed m u st be r esolv ed
in fa v or of r ecu sa l.
"2 8 . Sh ou ld a ju dg e issu e a n y or der a ft er h e h a s been disqu a lified by la w , a n d if t h e pa r t y h a s been den ied of a n y of h is
/ h er pr oper t y , t h en t h e ju dg e m a y h a v e been en g a g ed in t h e feder a l cr im e of "in t er fer en ce w it h in t er st a t e com m er ce".
T h e ju dg e h a s a ct ed in t h e ju dg e's per son a l ca pa cit y a n d n ot in t h e ju dg e's ju dicia l ca pa cit y . It h a s been sa id t h a t t h is
ju dg e, a ct in g in t h is m a n n er , h a s n o m or e la w fu l a u t h or it y t h a n som eon e's n ex t -door n eig h bor (pr ov ided t h a t h e is n ot a
ju dg e).
"2 9 . T h e Su pr em e Cou r t h a s a lso h eld t h a t if a ju dg e w a r s a g a in st t h e Con st it u t ion , or if h e a ct s w it h ou t ju r isdict ion ,
h e h a s en g a g ed in T r ea son t o t h e Con st it u t ion . If a ju dg e a ct s a ft er h e h a s been a u t om a t ica lly disqu a lified by la w , t h en
h e is a ct in g w it h ou t ju r isdict ion , a n d t h a t su g g est t h a t h e is t h en en g a g in g in cr im in a l a ct s of t r ea son , a n d m a y be
en g a g ed in ex t or t ion a n d t h e in t er fer en ce w it h in t er st a t e com m er ce.
"3 0 . T h e w h ole idea of ju st ice r equ ir es a fa ir t r ia l w it h a n im pa r t ia l ju dg e. W h en t h e ju dg e is so obv iou sly bia sed t h a t
t h e ju dg e ig n or es t h e fa ct s a n d t h e la w , in v en t s fa ct s t h a t do n ot ex ist in t h e r ecor d, com plet ely ig n or es ch a r g es of
h u n dr eds of cou n t s of per ju r y , ig n or es t h e la w s r eg a r din g su m m a r y ju dg m en t s, con sist en t ly v iola t es it s ow n r u lin g s t o
fa v or of on e pa r t y , h a s ex t en siv e ex pa r t e dea lin g s w it h t h a t pa r t y ’s a t t or n ey s, a n d does t h e m a n y ot h er t h in g s t h a t
Ju dg e Ev a n s h a s don e, it r ea lly sh ou ldn ’t m a t t er w h er e t h e bia s com es fr om . In W in dsor ’s A ct ion s, it w a s a bsolu t ely
im possible for t h er e t o be a fa ir t r ia l.
"3 1 . A pply in g t h e r ea son a ble per son a n a ly sis t o t h is sit u a t ion , a n y r ea son a ble per son w ou ld qu est ion t h e im pa r t ia lit y
of t h e Defen da n t Ju dg es.
"3 2 . T h is is n ot t h e st or y of on e lit ig a n t u pset w it h r u lin g s in h is ca se. T h is is t h e st or y of t h e fa n t a sy of Con st it u t ion a l
r ig h t s a n d ju st ice in t h e Un it ed St a t es feder a l cou r t s in A t la n t a , Geor g ia .
"3 3 . W in dsor h er eby r epor t s t h e cr im es descr ibed h er ein t o t h is Cou r t pu r su a n t t o 1 8 U.S.C. § 4 a n d a sks t h a t t h is
in for m a t ion be pr esen t ed t o a feder a l g r a n d ju r y . W in dsor a lso h opes t h a t t h e Hou se a n d Sen a t e Ju dicia r y Com m it t ees
w ill in v est ig a t e.
"3 4 . W in dsor br in g s t h is a ct ion pu r su a n t in pa r t t o 2 8 U.S. C. § 1 3 3 1 , t o r edr ess t h e depr iv a t ion of r ig h t s secu r ed h im
by t h e Con st it u t ion a n d t h e Fir st , Fift h , Six t h , Sev en t h , Nin t h , a n d Fou r t een t h A m en dm en t s t o t h e Un it ed St a t es

lawlessamerica.com/…/96-nine-federal… 2/3
2/2/2011 Nine Federal Judges Sued for Corruption
Con st it u t ion , a n d u n der t h e Civ il Rig h t s A ct of 1 8 7 1 , 4 2 U.S.C. §1 9 8 3 , 4 2 U.S.C. §1 9 8 8 , a n d t h e com m on la w a n d
r edr essa ble pu r su a n t t o Biv en s v . Six Un kn ow n Na r cot ics A g en t s 4 0 3 U.S. 3 8 8 (1 9 7 1 ).
"3 5 . T h is V er ified A ct ion in clu des a n in depen den t a ct ion in equ it y for r elief fr om or der s, ju dg m en t s, a n d in ju n ct ion s
issu ed in N.D.Ga . Civ il A ct ion No. 1 :0 6 -CV -0 7 1 4 -ODE ("MIST -1 "), Civ il A ct ion No. 1 :0 9 -CV -0 1 5 4 3 -W SD ("Deposit ion
A ct ion "), a n d Civ il A ct ion No. 1 :0 9 -CV -0 2 0 2 7 -W SD ("MIST -2 ” ) t h r ou g h fr a u d u pon t h e cou r t s.
"3 6 . T h is is a lso a n a ct ion for decla r a t or y r elief pu r su a n t t o T it le 2 8 , U.S.C. § 2 2 0 1 & 2 2 0 2 ; for in ju n ct iv e r elief,
pu r su a n t t o Ru le 6 5 of t h e Feder a l Ru les of Civ il Pr ocedu r e (“ FRCP” ); a n d for ot h er r elief. A ll of t h e r elief r equ est ed is
it em ized in t h e Pr a y er a t t h e en d of t h is V er ified A ct ion ."
Not ice of Filin g of Mot ion for T em por a r y Rest r a in in g Or der
Mot ion for T em por a r y Rest r a in in g Or der
Not ice of Filin g of Br ief in Su ppor t of T em por a r y Rest r a in in g Or der
Br ief in Su ppor t of Mot ion for T em por a r y Rest r a in in g Or der
Not ice of Filin g of Cer t ifica t e of In t er est ed Per son s
Cer t ifica t e of In t er est ed Per son s
Not ice of Filin g of Mot ion for In t er cir cu it A ssig n m en t
Mot ion for In t er cir cu it A ssig n m en t
Not ice of Filin g of Mot ion t o A ppr ov e Ev iden ce
Mot ion t o A ppr ov e Ev iden ce

lawlessamerica.com/…/96-nine-federal… 3/3