AFTER MOTIONS I FILED WENT MISSING IN A DV CASE I WAS FOUND GUILTY, THE COURT HAS CONTINUED TO RETALIATE AGAINST MY EFFORTS TO SEEK JUSTICE.
PRIOR TO THE DV TRIAL I HAD REQUESTED TO SEE MY FULL FILE AS I SUSPECTED THE PRIOR RECUSED JUDGES WOULD ATTEMPT TO REMOVE MOTIONS FROM THE FILE TO RETALIATE…. IT APPEARS THIS HAPPENED.
- 6/7/2013 Motion Stamped Received and discussed on the Record 6/13/2013 was removed from the file before the continued 2/19/2014 trial of the DV (after recusal of prior Trial Judge – MISSING FROM CASE FILE FV-11-887-13 (Kathryn Bischoff v. Derek Syphrett)
- 12/11/2013 Motion filed for dismissal of DV claim due to recusal of trial judge who issued the TRO. (Kathryn Bischoff v. Derek Syphrett). THIS MOTION WAS DELIVERED TO THE COURT IN TRIPLICATE ON 2 SEPARATE DATES – ITS MISSING
- 1/12/2013 to 2/4/2013 I sent letters to the court requesting to review my case file prior to the scheduled TRIAL in FV-11887-13, RE-DOCKETED IN BURLINGTON COUNTY AS FV-03-1154-14.
- 2/6/2014 I WAS PUNISHED FOR REQUESTING TO VIEW MY FILE PRE-TRIAL:
Judge Bookbinder issued an unlawful court order: prohibiting me from appearing in court pre-trial or at trial for any reason without EXPRESS PERMISSION FROM A SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE. This was unlawful because it violates my constitutionally protected rights to due process under the 1st Amendment & 14th Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America (1787 Original Jurisdiction)and the New Jersey Constitution which establish the inalienable right to access the court and to be tried consistent with due-process under the law.
- ADDITIONALLY I FILED A “IMMEDIATE APPEAL” with regard to the DV charge. This is a rarely used statutory right if you are accused of Domestic Violence in New Jersey – see Statute N.J.S.A.: 2C:25-28i.
An immediate appeal is meant to allow the Defendant to challenge a TRO issuance since the TRO was issued without the Defendant present in court to defend himself/herself.
THE COURT IS REQUIRED TO SEND LEGAL NOTICE AFTER SCHEDULING AN IMMEDIATE APPEAL ACCORDING TO THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROCEDURE MANUAL (link to PDF). IN MY CASE THE COURT NEVER SCHEDULED THE IMMEDIATE APPEAL AND JUDGE PETER WARSHAW ERRONEOUSLY DENIED MY IMMEDIATE APPEAL BECAUSE HE SAID I SHOULD HAVE NOTIFIED THE PLAINTIFF AFTER I SERVED THE PLAINTIFF THE IMMEDIATE APPEAL.
I WAS DENIED STATUTORY DUE PROCESS BECAUSE THE COURT NEVER SCHEDULED THE IMMEDIATE APPEAL.
- RETALIATION CONTINUED WHEN JUDGE JOHN TOMASELLO THREW ME OUT OF COURT AT TRIAL IN BURLINGTON FOR MAKING MY 1ST AND ONLY OBJECTION IN A DIFFERENT CASE… YET HE IS SET TO BE THE TRIAL JUDGE IN THE POST-TRIAL HEARING DESPITE THE FACT HIS BIAS AGAINST ME IS CLEAR AND CONVINCING!
NEW POST TRIAL FILINGS FOR RELIEF
LOOK AT HOW RIDICULOUS THIS HAS BECOME:
THIS WEEK: I have filed post trial motions to confront the corrupted court process.
Here are the recent letters to AND from the court:’
Letters and Letter Briefs set to the court to protest the court’s failure to schedule my immediate appeal:
LETTER FROM JUDGE BOOKBINDER
LOOK AT ALL THE PEOPLE COPIED TO THIS LETTER !!!
– New Jersey Clerk of the Courts;
– Acting Director of the Courts;
– Chief of Staff for the Courts, etc
IMAGE OF JUDGE BOOKBINDER’S LETTER