Do you feel that the government has the burden of proof to ANSWER QUESTIONS and to prove the lawfulness and constitutionality of their demands?
Diversion and ignoring of the actual issues and questions are the standard procedures of the government. As much as possible, they divert and refuse or fail to ANSWER the issues and questions. And IF they respond to an issue about apples, they often ignore the apple issue by issuing a diverging opinion about oranges. A. This is your experience also?
1. Do the judges and government
workers act honorable?
What does the evidence prove?
Government of the people and for the people?
or
Government of the lawyers and for the lawyers?
or
Government of the lawyers and for the lawyers?
(many audio evidence pieces to be posted)
- They won't say who they work for!
( the public? or they work for lawyers and themselves? 'to get my paycheck')
Eye-opening Evidence: Edie Stanke - senior Dakota County court administrator "will break the law" for Judge Michael Mayer "because I want my paycheck" "that's correct." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ4Ej5zlhII
- They won't say who they work for!
( the public? or they work for lawyers and themselves? 'to get my paycheck')
Eye-opening Evidence: Edie Stanke - senior Dakota County court administrator "will break the law" for Judge Michael Mayer "because I want my paycheck" "that's correct." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ4Ej5zlhII
- They won't say what they took an oath to obey! (because they obey lawyers and themselves?)
- They support child abuse for years if it enriches and protects lawyers and their families
Parental Alienation Evidence - http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCB3TkIXQ1yoGhNJeten20dw
The case which is the subject of this blog is a severe case of child abuse and proven parental alienation and is in the Minnesota 1st District Dakota county with Judge Michael Mayer - and the severely alienating sole custodian is a woman, whose severely alienating father is a lawyer. She and her father are allowed to do almost anything she wants, including violating court orders and abusing the children since 2005.
2. Doesn't an HONORABLE court have the responsibility to ANSWER THE QUESTIONS that they ignore - about ignorance and abuses by courts?
2. Doesn't an HONORABLE court have the responsibility to ANSWER THE QUESTIONS that they ignore - about ignorance and abuses by courts?
3. Is it HONORABLE for government
workers to be TRAINED TO ABUSE CITIZENS, WHO PAY their SALARIES, by THREATENING
and then HANGING UP on citizens when the government worker DOESN'T LIKE
THE QUESTIONS and the evidence of ignorance and corruption?
The Evidence: many audio examples - to be posted - plus:
American government "They put you in jail, if you complain" about them abusing citizens
- 2013 quote by U.S. Senator Rand Paul http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnLHGxH-Lxo
The Evidence: many audio examples - to be posted - plus:
American government "They put you in jail, if you complain" about them abusing citizens
- 2013 quote by U.S. Senator Rand Paul http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnLHGxH-Lxo
4. Can a government worker be honorable
and refuse to answer questions about abuse and corruption against the very
people who PAY their salaries?
The evidence of bias and injustice:
The #2 Senator in the Minnesota government (Julianne Ortman) demanded an investigation of the 1st District and appellate courts and sent the following 4/17/2012 letter to the Minnesota Supreme Court justice and to the Chief Judge Lynch in 1st District (includes Dakota and Carver counties) including these statements:
page 1 "I request... comprehensive investigation into Family Court proceedings in the First Judicial District ... concerns about ... administrative and judicial bias ... have long persisted ... for over a dozen years. The examples and controversies ... have cast a shadow of injustice over our Courts, and questions as to whether there is some systemic problem. ... investigation and report is needed before residents ... will have confidence that disputes in Family Court are being managed in an impartial manner."
page 2, line 5 "Quite frankly it is no longer enough, given the nature and number of complaints, for the courts to rely upon the review of these cases through appeal and on a case-by-case basis. More is now required."
http://carvercountycorruption.com/2012/04/17/letter-from-senator-ortman/
No investigation was done and evidence is lacking that an investigation was honorably considered by the courts.The evidence of bias and injustice:
The #2 Senator in the Minnesota government (Julianne Ortman) demanded an investigation of the 1st District and appellate courts and sent the following 4/17/2012 letter to the Minnesota Supreme Court justice and to the Chief Judge Lynch in 1st District (includes Dakota and Carver counties) including these statements:
page 1 "I request... comprehensive investigation into Family Court proceedings in the First Judicial District ... concerns about ... administrative and judicial bias ... have long persisted ... for over a dozen years. The examples and controversies ... have cast a shadow of injustice over our Courts, and questions as to whether there is some systemic problem. ... investigation and report is needed before residents ... will have confidence that disputes in Family Court are being managed in an impartial manner."
page 2, line 5 "Quite frankly it is no longer enough, given the nature and number of complaints, for the courts to rely upon the review of these cases through appeal and on a case-by-case basis. More is now required."
http://carvercountycorruption.com/2012/04/17/letter-from-senator-ortman/
5. Who will hold the government workers
to HONORABLY ANSWER and OBEY the law and constitution?
before their Last Day
when it will be too late and their eternal condemnation can be the result.
MINNESOTA COURTS REFUSE TO ANSWER LEGAL QUESTIONS SERVED IN WRITING - and verbally - regarding jurisdiction and due process.
B. A citizen empowers the courts to accept the citizen's evidence and to issue the citizen's motion requests as an order, not the process of today - the upside down of constitutional due process. Today the courts manufacture their own false findings as evidence and manufacture their own demands, threats and rulings that they can't back up with evidence or statute, and often violate constitutional protections.
C. Constitution, law and court rules certainly are higher authority than judicial opinions, and in that order, but the Minnesota courts repeatedly cite - a single judicial opinion - as their legal authority - and that opinion or court rule often violates constitution and/or law which are higher authorities than opinions.
THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS AND REPEATED ABUSE THAT THE COURTS USE judicial opinions to OVERRIDE THE CLEAR AND OBVIOUS LAWS and CONSTITUTIONS which are HIGHER AUTHORITY and that the judicial opinions VIOLATE.
Therefore the questions must be asked, and answered?
- did you take an oath and will you obey constitution and law?
- At a minimum, the government workers can confirm that they took an OATH to honor and obey law and constitution. They REFUSE to answer this SIMPLE question about their oaths!
6. Who pays your salary?
court answer: none - diversion
7. Are you a public servant?
court answer: none - diversion - this seems to be the hardest question for government, especially court workers, to answer.
8. These are SIMPLE questions? with OBVIOUS answers?
that an HONORABLE person would have NO problem answering.
- Are you a public servant? Who pays your salary?
--
What is your name?
court answer - often: I won't tell or I'm not comfortable telling.
D. If they aren't abusing their positions of power, and denying justice, then why should they fear?
The Minnesota Court of Appeals and
the Minnesota Supreme Court and Minnesota county courts repeatedly REFUSE TO ANSWER these
issues and questions BELOW that have been repeatedly served in writing and in person.
12/xx/13 motion
m1.
Please dismiss this 'under duress' case
in entirety per 10/xx/13 request ignored in county
court(attached). Government court as jury
and government support agency as one financial benefactor is a conflict of
interest.
m2. Please acknowledge the fact that
the county attorney has no statutory authority in this case to provide free
services regarding support issues outside the expedited process. MN state law authorizes the use of the county
attorney specifically in the expedited process - MN Stat 518.46 and Rule 360.01,
and not at any other level.
Since they REFUSE to answer these
questions which were served in writing to the county and appellate courts, the
court's verbal responses are below.
9. The law and the constitution
are higher legal authorities than judicial opinions?
court answer: "I'm not going to discuss any of this" THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE THAT THEY HAVE REPEATEDLY REFUSED TO ANSWER.
10. You took an oath to obey the
law and the U.S. constitution?
court answer: none - diversion
11. You have to comply with the law?
court answer: none - diversion
12. Can I ask about the court's
demands and about due process?
court answer: NO!
13. Will you read statute
518A.16?
court answer: NO
14. Will you follow the law in your
courtroom?
Judge Michael Mayer's answer: none -
diversion
Questions regarding MOTION ISSUE #2 that the courts refuse to read or acknowledge
As communicated many times to the courts, Giving wealthy parents (a millionaire female in this case) 'free services' of the county attorneys at every level is AN ABUSE OF POWER and ABUSE OF TAXPAYING CITIZENS.
Instead of answering the issues and questions and arguments that were served several times to court, they manufacture a technicality (which violates Supreme Court rulings) and demand a 'memorandum' of the same evidence again, but cannot provide a law or rule that mandates a memorandum instead of the motions filed repeatedly. And it's the government's burden of proof, not the citizen for the 4th time. How do does a citizen prove that authority doesn't exist outside of expedited process, when it doesn't exist? and the court fails to provide a statute to override the clear jurisdictions in 518A.16 and Rule 360.
As communicated many times to the courts, Giving wealthy parents (a millionaire female in this case) 'free services' of the county attorneys at every level is AN ABUSE OF POWER and ABUSE OF TAXPAYING CITIZENS.
Instead of answering the issues and questions and arguments that were served several times to court, they manufacture a technicality (which violates Supreme Court rulings) and demand a 'memorandum' of the same evidence again, but cannot provide a law or rule that mandates a memorandum instead of the motions filed repeatedly. And it's the government's burden of proof, not the citizen for the 4th time. How do does a citizen prove that authority doesn't exist outside of expedited process, when it doesn't exist? and the court fails to provide a statute to override the clear jurisdictions in 518A.16 and Rule 360.
16. What is the
jurisdiction stated in the title of statute 518A.16?
the OBVIOUS answer that the courts refuse to respond:
Expedited Process
518A.46 PROCEDURES FOR CHILD AND MEDICAL SUPPORT ORDERS AND
PARENTAGE ORDERS IN THE EXPEDITED
PROCESS ....
Subd. 2. Role of nonattorney employees; general
provisions. (a) The county attorney
shall review and approve as to form and content all
pleadings and other legal documents prepared by nonattorney employees of the
county agency for use in the expedited
child support process. ...Appellate court merely cites 518A.49 (b) (2012) "The public authority may intervene as a matter of right in those cases to ensure that child-support orders are obtained and enforced, ..."
and IGNORES the previous paragraph 518A.46 AND ITS HEADING! under PUBLIC AUTHORITY, which DEFINES THE ROLE and THE PLACE of "THOSE CASES" - "IN THE EXPEDITED PROCESS" - TWICE!
The county attorney has the statutory authority to make their argument (and already did) at the expedited process, but has no statutory authority at other levels.
The appellate court is INTENTIONALLY IGNORING ALL THE OTHER MOTION ISSUES and AS USUAL PROCEDURE is INTENTIONALLY MANUFACTURING and USING a TECHNICALITY (which VIOLATES SUPREME COURT RULING BELOW) with the INTENT TO KILL THE APPEAL BEFORE THE BRIEF IS SUBMITTED or transcripts obtained.
17. What is the jurisdiction stated in Rule 360?
Rule 360.01 County Agency Subdivision 1. Intervention as a Matter of Right. To the extent allowed by law, the county agency may, as a matter of right, intervene as a party in any matter conducted in the expedited process ... The appellate court is INTENTIONALLY IGNORING ALL THE OTHER MOTION ISSUES and AS USUAL PROCEDURE is INTENTIONALLY MANUFACTURING and USING a TECHNICALITY (which VIOLATES SUPREME COURT RULING BELOW) with the INTENT TO KILL THE APPEAL BEFORE THE BRIEF IS SUBMITTED or transcripts obtained.
The 12/xx/2013 statement of case (appellate) states near the bottom of page 6 (as quoted repeatedly to all courts):
Defendant has the right to submit pro se briefs on appeal, even though they may be in-artfully drawn but the court can reasonably read and understand them. See, Vega v. Johnson, 149 F.3d 354 (5th Cir. 1998). Courts will go to particular pains to protect pro se litigants against consequences of technical errors if injustice would otherwise result. U.S. v. Sanchez, 88 F.3d 1243 (D.C.Cir. 1996).
