NEWS: NJ PARENTS PLAN PROTEST IN TRENTON OCTOBER 2, 2015 2PM

Standard

MEDIA TAKES NOTICE:

NJ PARENTS PLAN PROTEST AT THEIR BILLBOARD IN TRENTON RESCHEDULED TO OCT. 22 NEAR FEDERAL COURT HOUSE (State & Canal Street)

SEE TRENTONIAN NEWSPAPER ARTICLE BELOW FOR DETAILS:

(FCLU.org Billboard Protesting Family Court Injustice, located on State & Canal Street in Trenton, near Federal Court House)

REPRINTED ARTICLE FROM THE TRENTONIAN NEWSPAPER

By Ed Forchion, NJWeedman.com For The Trentonian

Posted: 09/18/15, 1:30 PM EDT | Updated: 3 days ago

2 Comments

Today I walked out of my Joint smoking a joint, and I ran into a billboard on East State Street near City Hall across the street from the Federal Courthouse. (Yeah, I feel in the open air I should have as much right to smoke my joint as the tobacco addict does to smoke his plant.)

I instantly loved this billboard, it was right up my antagonistic alley. Here was a big sign calling the courts corrupt, right at the Fisher Federal Building — that’s ballsy. Somebody wanted some attention, and me being a media whore myself — I’m game. So check out this billboard.

After my initial reaction to it I decided do a little research and reach out to the people behind it.

I was able to find out the sign was paid for by a group called FCLU — Family Civil Liberties Union (FCLU.org). It’s made up mostly of men who’ve been screwed by the system, but there are also women in this group who have been screwed as well. Its founder, Greg Roberts, www.FCLU.org, fought a false accusation through the NJ Family Court system for years to no avail. I was able to make contact with Roberts as well as one of the group’s members named Derek Syphrett.

I personally met Syphrett in the Burlington County Jail two years ago, he was fighting a family court–inspired imprisonment. I’ve been there and done that too.

Syphrett explained that the FCLU is a nonprofit dedicated to reforming what the group sees as a dysfunctional family court system. “Its ridiculous and shameful that here in a New Jersey people are losing their children without even being provided a hearing, a chance to testify, or having any evidence properly examined by the court. The most precious thing in most parents’ life (their children) can be taken from them without even having a proper hearing to decide the matter, or a chance to defend their parenting rights.”

Roberts didn’t mince any words about the group’s position: “The New Jersey Family Courts are perhaps the greatest fraud ever perpetrated upon the people of New Jersey. For example, there are many parents in our group who have been deprived access to their children/had their custody change without a proper fact-finding hearing, sometimes without any hearing at all.”

While it might be easy for people to presume these men are just two “disgruntled litigants,” they both provided specific examples of how the NJ family courts have often disregarded the very laws that the courts are supposed to follow.

Mr. Roberts adds, “We are looking to get this story out and the billboard is part of that. We are tentatively planning a rally in Trenton on Friday, Oct. 2, 2015 (weather permitting). We want the media there, and most importantly: We want to get the public involved in this movement.”

I’ll be at this protest. I lost visitation and custody of one of my daughters simply because I publicly told the truth about marijuana. Judge Bell stripped me of my visitation and custody in 1999; as she ruled she said she didn’t care about my First Amendment rights—it’s all about the child’s well-being—and I never got a fair visitation ever again. (We endured unbelievable restrictions that made visitations horrible for us all, and sadly they were more like a punishment for my daughter rather than a chance to spend quality time with me.)

Mr. Roberts says, “We want your readers to hear our stories, and to join our movement for reform, because New Jersey’s families and children deserve much better treatment and honest services from our courts. The public can contact us to find out more at www.FCLU.org/reform, we set up a dedicated phone line (856-441-FCLU), and we expect that this billboard and the ones we purchase in other NJ cities will help us start THE meaningful public conversation, that our letters, calls, and motions to the courts have to date failed to accomplish.” And Mr. Syphrett adds, “There are constitutional violations involving family courts. So parents effectively don’t have constitutional rights—they can’t be enforced in federal court because of the Family Exception Doctrine (a judge-made law, not a legislated law) and the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine (another convenient law created by federal courts, purportedly to avoid conflicts with state courts, but in reality this law benefits state lawyers and harms families).”

I’m certainly no stranger to having my constitutional rights violated by family court. I totally experienced this at the hands of Judge Simandle who used the Doctrine to keep my family court issue out of federal court. The state’s family court took away my visitation for exercising my free speech. I never won my visitation back.

But on January 24, 2003, Judge Irenas was able to overcome the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine and issue his ruling that freed me from my five-month-long illegal imprisonment in Burlington County — I was a political prisoner for making commercials in which I publicly told the truth about marijuana.

For the content of my free speech, calling for the legalization of marijuana, the state imprisoned me and took my child.

But any way you slice it, you can’t win at family court. Federal Judge Simandle used the Doctrine to keep the federal courts from interceding in my state family court case. (Family courts seem to be exempt from the Constitution.)

For the exact same content I went to jail and lost my child for, saying legalize it, Judge Irenas ruled the state actions unconstitutional, Judge Simandale ignored in regards to my free speech in regards to family court.

I agree with Mr. Roberts – the family court system is corrupt. I’m so joining this group.

Alleged Racketeering: State of New Jersey Judicary

Standard

AFTER AWAKENING FROM

BENIGN ACCEPTANCE OF CORRUPTION

IN NJ:

I REPORTED THE FOLLOWING CRIMES

TO THE FBI

SEE THE LETTER COMPLAINTS HERE:

2014-10-22 Fax FBI False Claims Act 2014-10-22 – FAX FBI AOC

2014-10-22 Fax FBI False Claims Act

WHEN A MAN IS STRIPPED OF HIS RIGHTS& CHOICE

…HE WILL MAKE THE ONLY CHOICE AVAILABLE

…HE WILL FIGHT

Many of Mr. Syphrett frends, family, non-prPED ofit contacts, former lawyers, and local law enforcement have asked him , what what he is hoping to accomplish, by advocating for his rights:

He was visibly ashamed and timid in his answer to us:

“I am ashamed to say it, but I am still optimistically (without good cause) hoping for justice and the right to my pursuit of happiness, liberty, and freedom…. with my beloved Children.”

“… HONESTLY, I DON’T THINK I HAVE ANY OTHER CHOICE. MY FATHER TAUGHT ME TO BELIEVE THAT THE EASIEST DECISIONS A MAN CAN MAKE, ARE THE ONES WHEN HE IS GIVEN NO CHOICE, AT ALL”

LETTER TO NJ SUPREME COURT: RIGHT TO FILE CHALLENGE TO A VOID COURT ORDER

Standard

LETTER TO THE SUPREME COURT HERE

COPY OF VOID COURT ORDERS BY

ASSIGNMENT JUDGE RONALD E. BOOKBINDER HERE

(Denying Attorney, Witness of Fact, and Father right to appear for own trial)

COPY OF JUDGE JIMENEZ FRAUDULENT COURT ORDERS & TRANSCRIPTS HERE

(Fruadulently claim a Public Defender was Assigned, No Fact Finding for Order, Warrantless Arrest, No legal notice of “First Appearance” given to Defendant)

COPY OF PROOFS THAT JUDGE MARY C. JACOBSON ISSUED TRANSFER ORDERS WITHOUT FACT FINDING IN ORDERS, AND DESPITE THE FACT SHE WAS A PARTICIPANT IN THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION RELATED TO ONE OF THE CASES

HERE:

2014-08-18 – SHERIFFS INVESTIGATIVE REPORT – Redacted

2013-11-22 – ORDER – CASE 13-2502 – Jacobson – Jimenez Recusa

l 2014-01-17 ORDER TRANSFER CIVIL DOCKETS

JOHN TOMASELLO ISSUES FALSE FACTS IN OPINION

JOHN TOMASELLO ISSUES FINAL ORDER FOR CUSTODY BASED ON STATEMENTS ATTRIBUTED TO PEOPLE WHO WERE NEVER WITNESSES NOR APPEARED IN COURT

HERE:

2014-10-07 – FV-03-1154-14 Derek Writ Coram Nobis (SEE EXHIBITS)

► WALL OF SHAME: Judge Lawrence DeBello of Trenton, NJ; liar, ethical gimp

Standard

JUDGE DEBELLO

INAPPROPRIATE SEXUAL OVERTURES , REPRIMAND BY SUPREME COURT &

ALLEGED OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT:

(AN HONORABLE JUDGE WOULD RESIGN UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES… NOT DEBELLO)

I HAVE HAD THE DISTINCT DISPLEASURE OF HAVING JUDGE LAWRENCE DEBELLO VIOLATE THE LAW, AND REFUSE TO SCHEDULE A TRO ALLOWING ME TO SEE MY CHILDREN AGAIN.

BY LAW I WAS ENTITLED TO A FRO HEARING IN 10 DAYS… DEBELLO CONTINUED IT FOR REASONS THAT WERE NOT ALLOWED BY LAW AND I WAITED (WITHOUT SEEING MY CHILDREN FOR OVER 400 DAYS FOR AN F.R.O. HEARING THAT WAS DISMISSED, BY A TRIAL JUDGE WHO SAID:

THE RESTRAINING ORDER SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ISSUED!

DEBELLO MANAGED MY CASE UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF JUDGE CATHERINE FITZPATRICK, WHO WAS LATER UNOFFICIALLY RECUSED FROM ALL OF MY LEGAL AFFAIRS AFTER SHE GOT CAUGHT BREAKING THE LAW (ALLEGEDLY)!

I DIGRESS:

DEBELLO IS EVEN MORE OF A SCUMMY PERSON BECAUSE HE WAS CAUGHT HAVING ROMANTIC COMMUNICATIONS WITH A LAW CLERK.

SEE DETAILS BELOW. AN HONORABLE JUDGE WOULD HAVE RESIGNED… THERE IS NO HONOR HERE.

HEY LADIES, DEBELLO SPECIALIZES IN SEXUALLY INAPPROPRIATE ACTIVITY:

YOU SHOULD PROBABLY ASK FOR RECUSAL IF YOU ARE A WOMAN!’

THE BELOW IS REPUBLISHED FROM:

COMMITTEE TO EXPOSE DISHONEST AND INCOMPETENT JUDGES, ATTORNEYS AND PUBLIC DEFENDERS

(A WEBSITE IN NEED OF A NEW NAME):

► Judge Lawrence DeBello of Trenton, NJ; liar, ethical gimp.

Judge Lawrence DeBello of Trenton, NJ; liar, ethical gimp

The New Jersey Supreme Court presented Lawrence DeBello with a law license in 1982.

During his unremarkable tenure on the bench, Judge DeBello was found guilty of the following misconduct by the New Jersey Judicial Commission.

Giving misleading (liar) testimony during Commission hearing
Impugned the integrity of the judiciary (How’s that even possible?)
Engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice
Brought the judicial office into disrepute (What’s new?)
Undermined the public’s confidence in the judiciary (What confidence?)
Demonstrated disrespect for the judiciary

Larry’s conduct related to his improper use of a court computer to repeatedly send romantic emails to a former law clerk. Larry continued this conduct even though the presiding judge warned him that it was improper. The continuing emails dealt were of a personal nature and were intimate in nature. Many of the emails included offensive language.

As a consequence of his misconduct the enablers for Judicial Misfits sitting on the New Jersey Supreme Court punished Larry by gifting him with a complimentary censure.

Because Judicial Misfit s are held to a lower standard of conduct then everyone else in New Jersey, Larry was never criminally charged for giving false testimony (aka, perjury). Surprised?

As we speak Larry continues to sit as a Family Court Judge in the Mercer Vicinage Court

REVENGE OF THE DAD: WRIT OF MANDAMUS & HABEAS CORPUS FOR RETURN OF MY CHILDREN

Standard

PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES,

(PURSUANT: NEW JERSEY STATE CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE I, et seq.

PURSUANT: BINDIN COMMON-LAW inclusive of Haines v. Kerner (1972)

WRIT OF MANDAMUS, IN LIEU OF WRIT, LEGAL BRIEF

WRIT OF HAEBEAS CORPUS, FOR BENJAMIN AND VANESSA SYPHRETT

(Submitted in Forma Pauperis, by Indigent Citizen, (See Proofs in Dockets: FV-03-1154-14 & FO-11-131-13)

SEE FULL PETITION TO SUPREME COURT, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURT, COURT CLERK

WITH EXHIBITS DETAILING SOME OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS HERE:

2014-10-12 Petition – Writs – Legal Brief

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE

(Pursuant: New Jersey State Constitution Article I, Par. 18;

Pursuant: Haines v. Kerner U.S. Supreme Court 1972; &

Binding Common-Law within this Jurisdiction)

Derek C. Syphrett, Esq. 10/10/2014

In the following capacities, and as the following legal persons:

Attorney; Citizen of New Jersey; Citizen of the United States of America; The Sovereign Power / Authority, in parte et in lege, et in lege; Permanently Disabled Person; Real Party of Interest; Defendant Pro Se; The Public, in parte; Naturalis Homo In Carne; Amicas Curiae; Witness-of-fact; Parent & Legal Guardian of Benjamin & Vanessa Syphrett (Citizens of Connecticut, and victims of Parental Kidnapping in 2010, in putative court ordered custody of Margaret Wallace, by putative court order of the State of New Jersey);

252 Fountayne Ln,

Lawrence Township, NJ 08648

VIA U.S. MAIL & FACSIMILE BY THIRD PARTY PERSONS

M. Smith, Hon. Chief Justice Rabner, Hon. Justice Albin, and all Employees of the New Jersey Courts with: any connection to my legal affairs: praeterita vel praesentia

Supreme Court of New Jersey

25 Market St, Trenton, NJ 08625

RE:

THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE NEW JERSEY COURTS;

WRITTEN REQUEST FOR ACCOMODATION PURSUANT THE FEDERAL AMERICAN’S WITH DISABILITIES ACT (A.D.A. / ADA)
THE ADDRESSEES OF THIS LETTER WILL BE IN VERY BIG LEGAL TROUBLE IF I DO NOT GET ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS AND DEMANDS IN 7-DAYS. THE GIG IS UP. MY PATIENCE HAS EXPIRED. NO PERSON ON EARTH WOULD PUT UP WITH WHAT I HAVE IN SUCH A CIVIL AND LAWFUL MANNER, AND YET I REMAIN CIVIL & LAWFUL AND I SHALL REMAIN SO AT ALL TIMES. YOU MAY BE SUBJECTED TO DIRECT OR COLLATERAL PROSECUTION IF THE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE IS NOT BOTH “CURED” AND “PURGED” REMEDIALLY

Dear Michelle M. Smith, Hon. Chief Justice Rabner, Hon. Justice Albin, Judge Glenn Grant, J.A.D. And all officers of the Unified Courts of New Jersey, Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct:

I have sent this letter to you in all of your “official capacities”, whether they be administrative or judicial in nature, or otherwise.

In my aforementioned legal capacities, and on behalf of the multitude of legal persons I both represent, and, in fact, am: I must at this point propound upon my (in parte) Court the following concerns and requests pursuant the interest of Justice, Court Rule 1:33, New Jersey State Constitution, 1947, Constitution for the United States of America, 1787 (inclusive of subsequent Amendments), the American Common-law / constitutionally operable portions of the ius civilli, within this states jurisidiction, and pursuant the A.D.A.:

PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES,

PURSUANT: NEW JERSEY STATE CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE I, et seq.

&

WRIT OF MANDAMUS, IN LIEU OF WRIT, LEGAL BRIEF

WRIT OF HAEBEAS CORPUS, FOR BENJAMIN AND VANESSA SYPHRETT

I demand by operation of the Common-Law of this Jurisdiction, and pursuant timely and properly filed Writ of Coram Nobis, in Lieu of Writ, and papers submitted by right pursuant Court Rule 4:50, that my legal matters in Vincinage 3 be immediately relocated to an appropriate court.
1. TO BE CLEAR: I demand (pursuant my prior and present written notices (in toto) which detail violations of “THE LAW” with relation to my legal affairs that the Administrative Office of the Courts consider Intervening in a material and impactful manner, in the interest of Justice; AND in support of my constitutionally protected rights; AND the RULES-OF-LAW (eg. Court Rules in toto)) THE COURT RESPOND IN WRITING TO ADDRESS THE VIOLATIONS OF COURT OFFICERS JUDGE PEDRO JIMENEZ, JUDGE FITZPATRICK, JUDGE JACOBSON, JUDGE BOOKBINDER, JOHN TOMASELLO, ETC.
2. TO BE CLEAR: BY COURT RULE (1:33 and others) IT IS NOT THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL CONDUCTS SOLE RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THE PROPER ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURTS. IT IS IN FACT THAT OF CHIEF JUSTICE STUART RABNER, in his administrative capacity, and it is further the delegated responsibility of the Director of The Courts, and all Assignment Judges.
3. AS SUCH: I DEMAND THE PROPER ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURTS WITH REGARD TO MY LEGAL AFFAIRS AND THE APPARENT NULL & VOID COURT ORDERS CURRENTLY PROPOUNDED UPON MY PERSON(S) AND MY PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE-PROCESS UNDER-THE-LAW, AND WITHOUT FOUNDATION IN THE LAW.
I DEMAND THE COURT TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE CASE FILES IN FM-03-790-14, FV-03-1154-14, FV-03-1162-14, AND PROSECUTOR’S CASE # 13-2502, in toto, and inclusive of the Transcripts for the Same.
I DEMAND THE COURT EXPLAIN UPON WHAT LAWFUL AUTHORITY I WAS ARRESTED ON 8/19/2013, AND THEN ARRAIGNED BY JUDGE PEDRO JIMENEZ WITHOUT ANY LEGAL NOTICE TO MY ATTORNEY (MYSELF), OR MYSELF (DEFENDANT), PRIOR TO BEING HANDCUFFED AND BROUGHT BEFORE A JUDGE ON 8/19/2013 1-DAY PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED “FIRST APPEARANCE”, WHICH WAS SERVED UPON ME ON 8/18/2013.
1. FURTHER I DEMAND TO KNOW: ON WHAT BASIS IN FACT MY WARRANT OF 8/18/2013 WAS AMENDED, AS THE COURT, PROSECUTOR, AND SHERIFF’S OFFICE HAVE TO DATE NOT SUPPLIED ANY ANSWER TO MY WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THIS INFORMATION.
  1. In Fact in June of 2014: The Sheriff’s Office Falsely Claimed that they had no record of my 8/19/2013” arrest in response to the O.P.R.A. Request of John Paff. THIS WAS AN ACT OF MAIL FRAUD AND A LIE.
  2. THE AFOREMENTIONED LIES / FALSE STATEMENTS WERE: ONLY CORRECTED AFTER A COPY OF THE ARREST RECORD WAS SENT TO THE MERCER COUNTY OFFICE OF COUNSEL!!!
2. FURTHER I DEMAND TO KNOW: ON WHAT LAWFUL AUTHORITY I WAS ARRESTED WITHIN THE SUPERIOR COURT WHILE SERVING AS AN ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, FOR A CASE PENDING BEFORE THE COURT AT THAT TIME AND/OR
3. I DEMAND TO KNOW ON WHAT AUTHORITY WAS I ARRESTED ON 8/19/2013, AFTER LAWFULLY POSTING BAIL ON 8/18/2013 IN PROSECUTORS CASE #13-2502
I DEMAND THE COURT TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS FROM (dsyphrett@gmail.com) TO EMPLOYEES OF THE COURT AND EMPLOYEES OF THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT FROM (1/2013 to 10/12/2014):
1. The Court Acknowledge written receipt, via “mail”, of my objection to the Probation Departments enforcement of a “Null & Void” child support order, and the courts / probatins failure to schedule an Administrative Hearing on the disputed facts of the matter.
2. The court acknowledge my pre-adjudication requests in both FM-03-790-14 and FV-03-1154-14 (via an un-scheduled, Immediate Appeal requesting counsel be assigned): that I repeatedly requested counsel as a indigent, and as a result of my documented disabilities. THE COURT FAILED TO HEAR MY PROPERLY PLACED MOTIONS, AND/OR FAILED TO EVEN ISSUE SUMMONS FOR THE 3/1/2014 IMMEDIATE APPEAL (this was a violation of State Statutory-due-process, the will of the People, and contrary to the New Jersey State Legislature’s Authority, to demand the court provide immediate appeals as of right to a D.V. Defendant)!!!
3. The Court Acknowledge that the proceedings in FM-03-790-14, were in fact and/or law in violation of the rights of the real parties of interest (Derek Syphrett, Benjamin Syphrett, and Vanessa Syphrett), in the manners described in the past correspondence with The Court, A.C.J.C. Sent via various forms of “mail” to the Court, and contained in the motion papers of Mr. Syphrett. This includes:
  1. THESE FACTS, EVIDENCE, AND TRANSCRIPTS CONFIRMING THAT: THE COURT PROHIBITING A WITNESS OF FACT, THE DEFENDANT, AND THE DEFENDANT’S ATTORNEY (Derek Syphrett) FROM APPEARING AT TRIAL IN FM-03-790-14, FV-03-1162-14, AND FV-03-1154-14, on 2/18/2014 and 2/19/2014, where the court in some cases adjudicated the matters ex-parte, as a result of prohibiting one litigant from appearing at all, via court orders of 2/6/2014, and 2/19/2014.THE AFOREMENTIONED BASIS IN FACTS AND EVIDENCE (AND THE OTHER EVIDENCE I HAVE SENT TO THE COURT PREVIOUSLY) REPRESENTS: CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT THIS COURT HAS PARTICIPATED IN IUNLAWFUL ACTS, THAT ARE REPUGNANT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS STATE, AND AS A RESULT AFFORDS THE COURT NO OFFICE, TO ISSUE FINAL ORDERS IN ANY OF THESE MATTERS BY OPERATION OF THE COMMON-LAW.
  2. LEGAL FOUNDATIONS SUPPORTING THIS DEMAND AND/OR LEGAL ARGUMENT INCLUDE: “LAW OF THE VOIDS” AND/OR “DOCTRINE OF RECIPROCALS”
    1. Vallely v. Northern Fire & Marine Ins. Co.,254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920)
    Excerpts from “The Valley Supreme Court:
    
    “Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal.”
    1. Boyd v. United 116 U.S. 616 : Justice Bradley said: “It is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the Constitutional Rights of the Citizens…”
    2. Gomillion v. Lightfoot 364 U.S. 155:“Constitutional Rights would be of little value if they could be indirectly denied.”
    3. Norton v. Shelby County 118 U.S. 425:An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.
    4. In Marbury v. Madison, U.S. Supreme Court: Chief Justice John Marshall stated:“the very purpose of the written constitution is to ensure that the government officials, including Judges, do not depart from the documents fundamental principles”.
    5. RE: THE DOCTRINE OF RECIPROCALS: This Court has attempted to order Mr. Syphrett to pay child support for children that the State placed in the Physical & Legal Custody of Margaret J. Wallace, THIS VIOLATES “THE DOCTRINE OF RECIPROCALS”, AND EXCLUSIVE OF THE VIOLATIONS OF MR. SYPHRETT’S RIGHTS AT TRIAL, THIS COURT HAS FURTHER COMPOUNDED ITS ERRORS BY ASSERTING THAT MR. SYPHRETT IS OBLIGATED TO PAY CHILD-SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN THAT THE COURT HAS PUTATIVELY ASSERTED ARE NOT HIS CHILDREN UNDER-THE-LAW, OR WITHIN THE PHYSICAL / NATURAL WORLD. FURTHER:FURTHER: THIS UNIFIED COURT HAS ASSERTED THAT MR. SYPHRETT IS OBLIGATED TO SUPPORT THE SAME CHILDREN THAT THE COURT ASSERTS ARE NO LONGER HIS TO RAISE, REAR, OR PARENT IN THE MANNER HE SEES FIT AS A PARENT.
      FURTHER:
      
      Mr. Syphrett Cited “RE: The Matter of Baby “M”” during the trial proceedins in FM-03-790-14, for judicial notice. He explicitly demanded the court to acknowledge that it would be waiving the right to set an so-called “child-support” obligation if the court prohibited Mr. Syphrett from having legal and physical custody of his children. The court was effectively executing a quasi-adoption, and as such Mr. Syphrett would have no obligation to pay “support” to any party.

AS SUCH: THIS UNIFIED COURT IS WITHOUT ANY LAWFUL RIGHT TO DEMAND OR PURPORT THAT MR. SYPHRETT HAS ANY “SUPPORT” OBLIGATION TO MS. WALLACE, OR THE CHILDREN, AS IT VIOLATES THE DOCTRIN OF RECIPROCALS

I DEMAND THIS COURT ENFORCE MY LEGAL RIGHTS IN ALL OF MY AFOREMENTIONED CAPACITIES, OR ACCEPT LIABILITY FOR ITS FAILURE TO DO SO, AND THAT ALL COURT OFFICERS WHO HAVE FAILED TO ENFORCE MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS EITHER TAKE IMMEDIATE REMEDIAL ACTION, OR ALSO AVAIL THEMSELVES TO PROSECUTION IN THE APPROPRIATE COURTS OF LAW.

I DEMAND A WRITTEN RESPONSE, INCLUSIVE OF WAIVORS OF JUDICIAL IMMUNITY FOR THOSE OFFICERS WHO VOLUNTARILY VIOLATED MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS IN ANY OF THE AFOREMENTIONED CASES, FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUCH WAIVOR, WILL BE DEEMED AS A THREAT AGAINST MY PERSON, AND PROOF, THAT SUCH OFFICERS INTEND TO FURTHE HARM ME AT A FUTURE DATE

I DEMAND THIS COURT PROVIDE ME THE NAME AND ALL OTHER APPROPRIATE INFORMATION PURSUANT THE ADA WITH REGARD TO THE PERSON RESPONSIBILE FOR ADMINISTERING THE “AMERICAN’S WITH DISABILITIES ACT” AT THE HUGHES JUSTICE COMPLEX, THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, WITHIN THE APPELLATE DIVISION, AND WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS. I DEMAND THIS INFORMATION AS A PERMANENTLY DISABLED PERSON, PURSUANT THE RECORDS CONFIRMING THE SAME PREVIOUSLY SENT TO THE UNIFIED COURTS OF NEW JERSEY.

I DEMAND PROBATION CEASE / STAY ANY ENFORCEMENT OF MY SO-CALLED “CHILD SUPPORT” COURT ORDERS UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT AND THE COURT PROVIDE ME A FOUNDATION IN THE LAW FOR THE SAME, THAT IS NOT CLEARLY THE RESULT OF NULL & VOID COURT ORDERS, WHICH WERE NULL & VOID AB INITIO (for the reasons cited herein, and for the reasons previously submitted to the Court and/or probation in writing).

I RESERVE THE RIGHT TO FURTHER PROSECUTE THIS MATTER AND ALL RELATED PERSONS, IN THE EVENT THAT MY GRIEVANCES ARE NOT FULLY ADDRESSED BY THE ADDRESSED PERSONS AND GOVERNMENTAL BODIES.

I DEMAND RESTORATION OF MY PARENTAL RIGHTS, MY CUSTODY RIGHTS, AND MY LEGAL RIGHTS WITH REGARD TO MY CHILDREN BENJAMIN AND VANESSA SYPHRETT. I DEMAND THIS SUA SPONTE, AND IMMEDIATELY

BASIS IN FACT INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO THE FACT THAT THE TRIAL JUDGE ORDERED A CHANGE OF CUSTODY BASED ON FACTS, EVIDENCE, AND TESTIMONY NEVER PUT PROPERLY BEFORE THE COURT (1. Therapists in Connecticut, who did not appear in court, submit reports, or affadavits AND 2. witnesses whom the court did not allow the Defendant to Cross-Examine, the Defendant’s wife! AND 3. Witnesses the court refused to allow the Defendant to produce, his children!)
BASIS IN FACTS AND THE LAW:
1. THE DEFENDANT WAS NEVER PROVEN TO BE AN UNFIT PERSON TO A CLEAR AND CONVINCING STANDARD OF EVIDENCE. THE DEFENDANT WAS DENIED DUE-PROCESS AT TRIAL.
2. THE DEFENDANT WAS DENIED THE RIGHT TO APPEAR AT HIS OWN TRIAL, AS WAS HIS ATTORNEY, AND HIS WITNESS-OF-FACT. THIS IS EXTRINSIC FRAUD! (See the current edition of Black’s Law Dictionary for “Extrinsic Fraud”)

iii. AS A PRESUMED FIT PARENT, WITH ONLY POSITIVE PARENTING TIME SUPERVISOR REPORTS THE DEFENDANT IS ENTITLED TO RELIEF PURSUANT:

– In Parham v. J.R. et al 442 U.S. 584 (1979) in toto, inclusive of cited cases, and specifically with regard to its findings that:

The Supreme Court declared the ‘best interest of the child’ resides in the fit parent – not in the state: “Our constitutional system long ago rejected any notion that a child is a “the mere creature of the State” and, on the contrary, asserted that parents generally “have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare [their children] for additional obligations.”

– Santosky v. Kramer 455 U.S. 745 (1982) in toto and specifically with regard to its legal findings that:

To deny a parental right requires constitutional due process that proves he’s either unfit or a clear danger to his children – proven with ‘clear and convincing’ evidence. As such, Santosky v. Kramer 455 U.S. 745 (1982) emphasized to restrict a fundamental right of a parent to any extent, requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence that serious harm will come to the child.

I ADVISE THAT: I WILL ONLY CONSENT TO THE PERMENANT SEALING OF MY FILES IN THE EVENT:THAT MY CUSTODY IS RESTORED AND THIS COURT WAIVE ALL FUTURE JURISDICTION OR RIGHTS TO INTERFERE IN THE RIGHTS OF MY PARENTAL RIGHTS SO LONG AS MY CHILDREN REMAIN CITIZENS OF A FOREIGN STATE

CONCLUSION:

YOU WILL OBEY THE SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY /PARTY,

MEANING: ME (in parte / in toto)

I DEMAND THAT THIS PETITION BE CONSTRUED LIBERALLY PURSUANT BINDING OPERATION OF THE COMMON-LAW, AS CITED IN HAINES V. KERNER, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT (1972), AND ITS BINDNG PROGENCY WITHIN THIS JURISDICTION.

FURTHER: I submit that to the extent that this document IN FACT DOES NOT ADDRESS ALL OF MY LONG-DATED CONCERNS PREVIOUSLY PUT BEFORE THIS BODY, I RESERVE AND DEMAND THE RIGHT TO BE FULLY HEARD, PLENARY PROCEEDINGS, AND ORAL ARGUMENTS… BECAUSE THIS COURT WILL NOT PROPOUND A SILENT INJUSTICE UPON ONE OF ITS CITIZENS. AS SUCH I REMIND THIS COURT THAT AS A CITIZEN I AM IN FACT A MEMBER OF THE BODY THAT POCESSES THE SOVEREIGN-AUTHORITYOF THIS COURT,

I AM IN FACT AND LAW: A CONSTITUTIONAL CREATION MYSELF AS A “CITIZEN”.

VERY TRULY:

Derek C. Syphrett, Esq.

Attorney-in-Fact

Citizen of New Jersey

Citizen of the United States of America

Permanently Disabled Person, pursuant the ADA

Witnesss-of-Fact

Real-Party-of-Interest

The Sovereign-Power, in parte / in toto, in iure civili, et in carne

Naturalis Homo in Carne

Legally Competent Person, Pursuant:the findings and Precedential Law in Kyle v. Verona Green Acres, and its progency in New Jersey Courts

The Putative Pro Se

SEE THE TRANSCRIPTS OF JUDGE PEDRO JIMENEZ

ACTING AS JUDGE, WITNESS-OF-FACT, PROSECUTOR,

IN JUST ONE EPISODE OF THIS UNMITIGATED DISASTER

HERE

THIS WAS AN UNLAWFUL KIDNAPPING OF AN ATTORNEY,

APPEARING IN COURT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE!

JUDGE PEDRO JIMENEZ ACTED BEYOND ALL AUTHORITY AND MAY NOW BE

ARRESTED AND PROSECUTED CIVILLY AND CRIMINALLY FOR THIS!

(Gadsen Flag Circa 1775)

THE ABOVE PROVIDED TO:

REMIND NEW JERSEY PUBLIC OFFICIALS THAT:

SOME OF US HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN THE REASONS

THIS STATE IS “SELF-GOVERNED”

THE END FOR AN UNLAWFUL JUDGE – It Looks Like This!

Standard

LETTER TO ASSIGNMENT JUDGE RONALD E. BOOKBINDER

SENT AFTER HE ATTEMPTED TO PROHIBIT A DEFENDANT FROM:

APPEARING IN COURT FOR HIS OWN TRIAL, VIA

UNLAWFUL COURT ORDERS

SEE THE FAXED LETTER AND FAX RECEIPTS TO ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT (A.C.J.C.)

ADMINISRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS (A.O.C.) AND THE SUPERIOR COURT HERE:

2014-10-10 – LTR to Bookbinder ACJC AOC Goodbye

10/10/2014

Derek C. Syphrett, Esq.

Pro se litigant (Defendant)

252 Fountayne Ln,

Lawrence Township, NJ 08648

VIA U.S. MAIL & FACSIMILE BY THIRD PARTY PERSONS

Family Division Clerk, Suasan Fortino, Judge Bookbinder, John Tomasello, John Call, Judge Covert, Sharyn Sherman, Law Clerks for the Judges named herein.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part (Burlington County)

49 Rancocas Rd

Mount Holly, NJ 08060

RE: Bischoff v. Syphrett

Docket No.: FV-03-1154-14 – DIQUALIFICATION OF TRIAL JUDGES

Dear Judge Bookbinder:

I am writing the court (not you) to further propound upon the court my demands for justice, pursuant my right to petition my government for redress of grievances, as secured by the People of New Jersey, pursuant the New Jersey State Constitution of 1947, and pursuant my right to communicate in the interests of Justice as an attorney-in-fact (citation: Hawkins v. Harris, 141 N.J. 207 (1995): see courts findings which provide legal foundation supporting my judicial litigation privileges)

I wanted to follow-up on the Status Conference of 10/7/2014, to address your offer to allow me to “Judge Shop” and choose to have the Judge of my choice hear my petitions for redress of grievances (my motions papers generally) with regard to FV-03-1154-14 (only).

Please be advised that I decline your request to participate in any form of “Judge Shopping”, because the offer and the concept itself is offensive and disrespectful to the courts, the litigants, the public trust, and the institution of the Superior Court itself.

SEE SOME OF THE UNLAWFUL, NULL & VOID COURT ORDERS HERE:

2014-02-06 and 2014-2-19 and 2014-3-10 COURT ORDERS BOOKBINDER

TO BE CLEAR:

My concern about either yourself or John Tomasello attempting to adjudicate my legal matters is borne from my desire to enforce litigant’s rights for the legal person(s) I represent (myself and all other legal persons that I, in fact, am). My concern is that both John Tomasello and yourself have ceased to be Neutral third parties in due to a multitude of actions each of you have voluntarily chosen to engage in, which are clearly contrary to the law, rules-of-law, the state constitution, the federal constitution, my civil rights, and the interests of justice generally. BOTH YOURSELF AND JOHN TOMASELLO ARE ALREADY DISQUALIFIED BY RULE FROM HEARING MY MATTERS PURSUANT THE JUDICIAL CANONS AND MANDATORILY BINDING COMMON-LAW OF THIS JURISDICTION (WHETHER IT BE JUDICIALLY NOTICED OR NOT).

I say the above because the facts, testimony, process, etc that is already before the court 100%, clearly and convincingly support my position that your offending court orders of: 2/6/2014, 2/19/2014, 4/1/2014, 9/12/2014, and others are in fact null and void.

AGAIN: I REQUEST YOU TAKE NOTICE OF THE COMMON-LAW IN TOTO, AND SPECIFICALLY INCLUSIVE OF THE DOCTRINE OF “THE LAW OF THE VOIDS”

The common-law right to attack a court order that is null & void ab initio remains inviolate. As such I assert that the final order in FV-03-1154-14 is NULL & VOID ab inito. Further I assert the orders of Judge Bookbinder dated 2/6/2014, and 2/19/2014 are both Null & Void, and that they represent acts of extrinsic fraud, in that they purport to interfere with the appearance of a witness-of-fact (The Defendant). Such orders may be attacked at any time and are not time barred. They may be legally attacked directly at the trial court and/or collaterally in any court with jurisdiction over the matter.

SEE THE FOLLOWING LEGAL ARGUMENTS AND LEGAL FOUNDATIONS SUPPORTING MY CHALLENGE TO THE FINAL COURT ORDER AS A CHALLENGE DIRECTED AT ANY AND ALL NULL & VOID COURT ORDERS AFFECTING MY LEGAL INTERESTS:

The law is well-settled that a void order or judgment is void even before reversal. Take Judicial Notice of:

Vallely v. Northern Fire & Marine Ins. Co.,254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920)

Excerpts from “The Valley Supreme Court:

“Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal.”

Boyd v. United 116 U.S. 616 : Justice Bradley said:

“It is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the Constitutional Rights of the Citizens…”

Gomillion v. Lightfoot 364 U.S. 155:

“Constitutional Rights would be of little value if they could be indirectly denied.”

Norton v. Shelby County 118 U.S. 425:

“An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”

In Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice John Marshall stated:

“the very purpose of the written constitution is to ensure that the government officials, including Judges, do not depart from the documents fundamental principles”.

CONCLUSION:

For some not fully transparent, but yet apparent reason: it appears that you and your colleagues have attempted to obstruct justice in an unlawful manner with regard to my legal affairs and my communications with the court and third parties.

THIS WAS A BAD IDEA (MEANING STUPID). I am not the sort of man who should be trifled with by people or persons who have financial assets or lifestyles they wish to maintain at the status quo. I say this not to threaten or scare you, but to emphasize my firm and appropriate position that I will endeavor in any and all civil and lawful manners to hold those who transgress my children, my property, or my rights fully accountable to the law, or at a minimal: I will always endeavor to ensure that those who violate my personal rights or those of my children will be forever discouraged from doing so EVER again, by standing up for my rights in a civil, lawful manner, pursuant the interests of Justice.

TO BE CLEAR: I am not an intolerable jerk, BUT I CAN BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE… I CAN BE AS BIG OF A JERK AS THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE REQUIRE, AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM TAKING THAT POSITION IF/WHEN IT SERVES THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE.

FURTHER:

The history of people who’ve doubted my legal skill, and/or my professional skill is a very sad story. They do not fair well generally, because ultimately my success leads to their downfall and scrutiny of their peers. I am a very thoughtful person, and so when I speak or interact with the court it is ALWAYS PURPOSEFUL AND DESIGNED TO CREATE JUDICIAL EFFICIENCY AND AN END RESULT THAT IS IN FACT AND LAW: JUST.

Please also take some solace in the fact that while you have offended me and my family in a very personal manner, my dispute with you is not “personal”. I don’t care about you, or your family, your thoughts, your dreams, your aspirations, your retirement, your occupation etc. It’s just not something I want to concern myself with.

In fact if it were not for your awful conduct as a Judge I believe I could enjoy pleasant conversation with you and a few cocktails at a local eatery. At times you can seem to be a fairly enjoyable personality. However, as a Judge in my matters, you are a distraction, intolerable, and you’ve violated the law. For these reasons alone – I can not abide you handling of my legal affairs a second longer (Please see my writ of coram Nobis for details of my concerns and my legal rights to banish you from this case).

FURTHER: IT HAS NEVER MADE SENSE FOR BOTH JOHN TOMASELLO AND FOR YOU TO CO-DEPENDENTLY SERVE AS TRIERS OF FACT IN FV-03-1154-14… IT OFFENDS ALL MANNER JUDICIAL INDPENDENCE TO HAVE TWO JUDGES ACTIVELY HEARING THE MATTER, WITHOUT BOTH BEING PRESENT TO HEAR PRESENTMENT OF FACTS, TESTIMONY, OR MOTION PAPERS!!!

LASTLY: MY OFFICIAL POSITION IS YOUR COURT ORDERS DO NOT EXIST:

Please be advised that Your Court Orders and those of John Tomasello in FV-03-1154-14, FM-03-790-14, FV-03-1162-14, LITERALLY DO NOT EXIST IN THE CORPUS JURIS (THE BODY OF LAW)

I officially provide you this letter as legal notice that the orders are null and void, the aforementioned court orders: confer no rights; it impose no duties; affords no protection; creates no office; they are in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed … THEY DO NOT EXIST TO ME. FURTHER I WILL NOT CONSENT TO FURTHER HEARINGS BEFORE YOU AS YOU ARE LAWFULLY DISQUALIFIED AS OF 2/6/2014, WHEN YOU ACTED SUA SPONTE AS AN ADVERSE PARTY TO THE DEFENDANT AND THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE BY IMPEDEING THE LEGAL PROCESS UNNECESSARILY AND CONTRARY TO THE LAW AS CITED IN MY WRIT OF CORAM NOBIS.

SO WITH THAT I SAY, HAVE A NICE LIFE AND BEGONE. IF I SEE YOU AGAIN I WILL MOST ASSUREDLY ARREST YOU AND PROSECUTE AS IS MY RIGHT IN NEW JERSEY UNDER THE LAW AND COURT RULE 1:21 et seq.

Kind regards,

Derek Syphrett

Pro se Defendant

P.S. PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS VIA INTEROFFICE MAIL UPON THE UNIFIED COURTS RECEIPT OF THE THIS LETTER.

cc: Judge Glenn Grant

cc: Administraive Office of the Courts (Appropriate Person Overseeing the Compliance with the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act)

cc: Michelle Smith Clerk of the Court

cc: Chief Justice Rabner

cc: Justice Albin

cc: Plaintiff – Kathryn Bischoff (the woman who never refuted or replied to my pleadings that she lied to obtain a FRO, delivered via Court Clerk, pursuant DV Procedural Manual)

For more background on the UNLAWFUL ISSUES ENDURED BY THIS MAN IN NEW JERSEY SUPERIOR COURT (FAMILY COURT) READ MR. SYPHRETT WRIT OF CORAM NOBIS HERE.

Note a Writ of Coram Nobis is a ancient common-law writ that has origins in Chancery Courts. The New Jersey Family Court is still a Chancery Court, sitting within a Chancery Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey, as such it is totally appropriate to file a Writ of Coram Nobis as of a Common Law right to Demand the correction of court errors of fact. Further Pursuant Court Rule 4:50 it is our well-researched (non-legal opinion) that within 1-year of a FINAL JUDGEMENT, a motion for NEW TRIAL may be appropriate if a litigants rights were violated through no fault of that litigant, and/or over that litigants objections to the same at trial.

SEE THE WRIT OF CORAM NOBIS HERE:

2014-10-07 – FV-03-1154-14 Derek Writ Coram Nobis

IT IS SCATHING AND HILARIOUSLY RUDE TO THE JUDGES WHO LIED!

(IT CONTAINS MANY GRAMMAR ERROS, AND WILL BE AMENDED)

… AND …

STATE OF NEW JERSEY COURTS – IGNORE SUPREME COURT RULINGS – UNLAWFULLY INTERFERE IN PARENTING TIME

Standard

BELOW IS SOME INFORMATION SUBMITTED TO THE WEBSITE BY A PERSON IN NEW JERSEY THAT COMPILED RESEARCH FOR THEIR OWN MOTION TO THE COURT.

ITS A FASCINATING SUMMARY OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS THAT PROHIBIT NEW JERSEY COURTS FROM INTERFERING IN PARENTING TIME DECISIONS OF “FIT PARENTS”.

IT HAS BEEN SUGGESTED TO THIS WEBSITE THAT:

1) Any Court that issues orders inviolate of these Supreme Court Decisions is violating parents Constitutionally Protected “Due Process Rights” and orders issued contrary to these decisions are legally null and void.

2) In practice I suspect the New Jersey Courts and the Bar Association will Continue to Ignore these U.S. Supreme Court Decisions because these decisions get in the way of bilking innocent families out of hundreds of thousands of dollars individually and billions of dollars collectively

U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

PROHIBITING “THE STATE” FROM

INTERFERING IN PARENTAL DECISIONS

THE FOLLOWING TEXT IS CIRCULATING AMONG FAMILY RIGHTS ADVOCATES TODAY

WE HAVE REPUBLISHED IT HERE TO INCREASE THE DISTRIBUTION OF THIS FREE INFORMATION:

THE FOLLOWING CITATIONS COME ALSO FROM: HERE

In Parham v. J.R. et al 442 U.S. 584 (1979) in toto, inclusive of cited cases, and specifically with regard to its findings that:
- The Supreme Court declared the ‘best interest of the child’ resides in the fit parent – not in the state: “Our constitutional system long ago rejected any notion that a child is a “the mere creature of the State” and, on the contrary, asserted that parents generally “have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare [their children] for additional obligations.”
Santosky v. Kramer 455 U.S. 745 (1982) in toto and specifically with regard to its legal findings that:
- To deny a parental right requires constitutional due process that proves he’s either unfit or a clear danger to his children – proven with ‘clear and convincing’ evidence. As such, Santosky v. Kramer 455 U.S. 745 (1982) emphasized to restrict a fundamental right of a parent to any extent, requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence that serious harm will come to the child.
Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399, 401 (1923) in toto and with regard to the legal fact that the Supreme Court established the following:

‘liberty’ protected by the Due Process Clause includes the right of parents to “establish a home and bring up children” and “to control the education of their own.”

Washington v.Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 719 (1997) in toto, including citations, and with regard to:
- The right to Due Process includes a substantive component to the process that “provides heightened protection against government interference with certain fundamental rights and liberty interests.” Id., at 720; see also Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292, 301302 (1993).

… IF THE CITIZENS CAN NOT GET THE COURT TO ABIDE THE ABOVE LAWS, THEN:

WE SHOULD PREPARE TO DO THE FOLLOWING:

Note: We think it is worth filing / citing these cases with our motions now that we have reviewed them. Why Not? Can’t make things any worse with regard to our cases. What readers of this cite do with this information is an individual decisions, which we withhold any advisement concerning. This website is does not provide this information as legal advise nor do we have any certified legal expertise express/implied or otherwise.

I FILED THIS LETTER BRIEF & REQUEST FOR NJ SUPREME COURT RULING

Standard

LETTER BRIEF

A CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE

I filed a letter brief to challenge two issues related to the judicial misconduct I endured in Burlington County Superior Court at the hands of Judge Ronald Bookbinder and his accomplice John Tomasello (Retired & Recalled Judge).

The issues in dispute are:

UNLAWFUL RESTRAINTS OF MY LITIGATION PRIVILEGES, INCLUDING:
- ORDERS THAT PROHIBITED ME FROM APPEARING IN COURT AT MY OWN TRIALS.
- RESTRAINTS AGAINST MY CONTACT WITH THE COURT OMBUDSMAN (ACCESS TO THE COURT).
- RESTRAINTS AGAINST MY ACCESS TO THE COURT TELEPHONICALLY OR IN PERSON DURING MY LITIGATION.
- SEE THESE OUTRAGEOUS COURT ORDERS HERE: COURT ORDERS BOOKBINDER

ASSIGNMENT OF A RETIRED JUDGE TO HEAR MY CASE MAY BE A VIOLATION OF THE N.J. CONSTITUTION.

Here is the letter brief in its current form:

2014-08-22 – LETTER BRIEF 2 – OPPOSING RECALL JUDGES

CONCLUSION:

I MAKE JUDICIAL RETALIATION LESS FUN FOR ALL

SURVIVING FALSE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CHARGES (as a Pro Se) | New Jersey Pro Se Research

Standard

SEE UPDATED ARTICLE / RESEARCH ON HOW A PRO SE CAN:

1. FILE CONTRARY TO THE COURT RULES

2. DEFEND AGAINST DV CHARGES

3. RE-OPEN A CASE POST-TRIAL VIA RULE 4:49 & RULE 4:50

SURVIVING FALSE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CHARGES (as a Pro Se) | New Jersey Pro Se Research.

NJ Family Court Related Stress Killed This Father – Judges Probably Laughed

Standard

COURT: REMOVED / LOST MY FILED MOTIONS BEFORE I WAS FOUND GUILTY OF DV

Standard

MYSTERIOUSLY MISSING FILES IN MY CASE

RESULTED IN GUILTY FINDING

The links in this article show my efforts pre-trial to view my DV file before a trial on the Matter.

In response to my 2/4/2014 letter requesting to see my file (because I suspected retaliation from the recused judge), the new assignment Judge – Judge Bookbinder – actually punished me for asking to see my file.

Later it was revealed that 2 motions were missing from the file including pre-trial pleadings that proved the Plaintiff Kathryn Bischoff (resident of Robbinsville / teacher in Hightstown) filed a false complaint against me.

JUDGE WHO ISSUED TRO VIOLATED COURT RULES – SHOULD HAVE RECUSED HIMSELF

The motion papers also called for the vacation of the DV TRO because the Judge who issued it. Judge R.Douglas Hoffman was actually involved in a legal dispute with me at the time he issued the TRO. In otherwords he had a conflict of interest that wasn’t waivable by himself or myself, and according to court rule 1:12-1(g) he was required to recuse himself prior to hearing the application for the TRO – HE DIDN’T.

MY MOTION FOR JUDGE HOFFMAN’S RECUSAL WENT “MISSING” SEE IT HERE:

2013-06-07 – FV-11-887-13 Reconsideration Motion

In July of 2013 I had Judge Hoffman recuse himself from my legal affairs based on the same paperwork I filed in response to Kathryn Bischoff’s TRO application, I submitted that recusal order to the court in a letter and later in a 11/26/2013 motion.

The 11/26/2013 motion was removed from the case file after being timely filed with the court pre-trial.

Additionally a 6/7/2013 motion was removed from the file despite my timely filing of those pleadings which were converted into motions in limine (in trial motions).

LETTER TO COURT REQUESTING TO INSPECT MY FILE
2014-02-04 LTR COURT FILE INSPECTION

SEE THE COURT ORDER PUNISHING ME FOR WRITING THE COURT TO VIEW MY FILE HERE:

LETTER DEMANDING MY CASE BE TRANSFERRED TO JUDGES WHO WON’T PUNISH ME FOR REQUESTING TO SEE MY FILE AND WHO WILL ENSURE MY MOTIONS WILL BE HEARD FAIRLY IN THE FUTURE:

LETTER – 2014-08-13 – Burlington County Courts

Naming Names:

Trial Judge in Mercer County Superior Court: Judge Janetta Marbrey (responsible for file).

First off the Motions I filed should have resulted in Judge Marbrey DISMISSING the entire DV complaint because it was obviously a false report. Kathryn Bischoff continued texting me from 1/15/2013 despite claiming in her complaint she was in fear. She instead sent me birthday wishes, texts with hearts and smilies etc all the way until 1/31/2013… so the complaint appears to be false clearly. See Proof Here: ALL MISSING MOTIONS WITH EXHIBITS SHOWING PLAINTIFF COMMITTED – APOLOGIES THE SCAN IS SLIGHTLY OUT OF ORDER

Trial Judge in Burlington County Superior Court: Judge John Tomasello

Assignment Judge who refused to allow me to see my file pre-trial: Judge Ronald Bookbinder

NJ FAMILY COURT & INSTITUTIONALIZED HARASSMENT – DOCUMENTED BELOW

Standard

(image source: from PPJ Gazette website)

BELOW IS AN UNBELIEVABLE STORY OF HOW MY LOCAL FAMILY COURT CONTINUES TO HARASS AND IMPEDE MY ACCESS TO THE COURT IN RETALIATION FOR: MY COMPLAINTS TO THE JUDICIAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE

I WENT TO COURT TO VIEW MY FILE AND SHERIFFS’ OFFICERS ESCORTED ME THROUGHOUT THE COURT HOUSE AND EVEN DOWN THE STREET.

THIS WAS NOTHING MORE THAN HARASSMENT.

TO DISCOURAGE FURTHER HARASSMENT:

I AM PREPARING A LAWSUIT WITH ANOTHER LAWYER AND MAKING OPRA REQUESTS (COSTLY FOR THE STATE TO COMPLY WITH) TO DISCOURAGE FURTHER MISCONDUCT AND DOCUMENT THE ISSUES.

==========================================

O.P.R.A. REQUEST SENT 8/8/2014

TO DOCUMENT THE CONTINUED HARASSMENT

==========================================

SENT TO: SHERIFF KEMLER, UNDER-SHERIFF MEDINA, FREEHOLDER BRIAN HUGHES, MERCER COUNTY OFFICE OF COUNSEL (A. Sypek), Court Staff (Sandra Terry)

O.P.R.A. Request #6 TO MERCER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE & Request to Judiciary for Common-law right of access
RE: Harassment Allegations of Derek Syphrett

INTRODUCTION TO O.P.R.A. REQUEST:

I am writing today to get information about a bizarre personal experience I endured while reviewing my court files at 400 Warren St. and paying for my copied files at 175 S. Broad Street.

I am writing to place an O.P.R.A. Request which is listed below my statement of facts below the sections of this email denoted as “Introduction…” and “introductory comments regarding 8/6/2014 Statement of Facts.

PLEASE TAKE NOTE:

1) That part of the reason I am making this O.P.R.A. request is to prepare for a lawsuit and to discourage the Sheriff’s Office and the Superior Court from attempting to harass or intimidate me further. I am probably the last person on earth that the court or the Sheriff’s Office should attempt to harass, intimidate, or stalk.

2) Please be advised if I continue to be confronted with bizarre behavior and actions by the Mercer County Sheriff’s Office I will continue to update the FBI and document the issues via O.P.R.A. requests and or lawsuits to discourage:

a) any further misconduct with regard to my enforcement of my civil rights;
b) obstruction, impediments, or harassment related to my right to access the court.

3) I believe all parties will be well served by a strict adherence to my personal boundaries and my constitutionally protected rights. Further questionable conduct will lead to more O.P.R.A. requests and increased claims of damages in the future.

INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS REGARDING
/6/2014 STATEMENT OF FACTS:

When I arrived at the 400 Warren Street court house for my scheduled appointment with the court to view my court files (which were deficient of missing documents AND inclusive of misfiled protected documents). I felt unnecessarily harassed by the Mercer County Sheriff’s Office.

(Note: Both my lawyer and I felt it was inappropriate that my family court files were ONLY available for viewing in the “criminal” court house at 400 Warren Street rather than within the Family Court. I believe that this is a sign that the Family Court is unwilling to accommodate my access to the Family Court, unless I protest as I did on 8/6/2014 when I insisted on going to the family court to pay for my copies rather than having my lawyer write a check and reimbursing him as was requested by court staff).

This O.P.R.A. request has been sent to get information about the Sheriff’s Office’s activities related to my visit to the court houses at the aforementioned addresses on 8/6/2014.

Specifically be advised that:

I was “stalked” by 2 Sheriff’s Officers. One officer was badge #239 (his approximate name was “Ristuccia”) once I entered the court house. When I asked the officers if there was any order for them to escort me through the court house, they responded no, but they continued to follow me and my lawyer Laurence Sheller throughout the court house as if we were suspects of a crime.

Once I arrived in court room 2A as I had arranged by appointment with Sandra Terry, The Officers remained in the court room and I asked the court staff in the room if there was any order for me to be escorted throughout the court house. They responded “no”.

Yet when I left the court to pay for the copies of my file the officers again followed me to the 175 S. Broad Street Court house and began following me throughout that court house.

I found this activity to be quite unnerving given:

my past experience with the Sheriff’s office and the still unexplained “kidnapping” of my person on 8/19/2013 that was purported to be an arrest on 8/19/2013, but later revealed to be a simple abduction of my person “under the color of law”. The Sheriff’s Office no longer takes the position that an arrest occurred on 8/19/2013 despite the fact I was told I was under arrest in front of a witness that accompanied me to court AND I was read Miranda, AND a Miranda form was filled out.

Once I left the court house to get into my car the Officers followed me until I passed the 400 Warren Street court house. At that point I asked Officer (Badge #239) If there was any order to escort me throughout the court house and he said “I can’t divulge that information”.

I then asked some follow-up questions to make sure the officer was aware that I am not a suspect to any crime or a convicted felon, and in fact I intend to Sue Catherine Fitzpatrick and the Sheriff’s Dept. For the aforementioned “kidnapping” and the emotional damages I suffered, which contributed to me ending up on Federal Disability (Permanently) with documented PTSD.

Also Note:
1) Prior to the facts cited above I found that Under-Sheriff Medina was cyber stalking my LinkedIn page and I called the FBI to complain about the incident given my past experience with the Sheriff’s Office and the prior FBI investigation of my complaint. I found Mr. Medina’s contact via LinkedIN to be unsettling especially given my well founded concerns for misconduct by the Mercer County Sheriff’s Office and my fear of further retaliation for my “whistleblowing”.

2) There is a court order from Judge Covert and Judge Bookbinder of the Superior Court of New Jersey (oral order with written minute order) that denotes the fact that I am not deemed to legally be a threat to self, others, or property. It is therefore VERY SUSPECT FOR THE MERCER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE TO ESCORT ME THROUGHOUT A COURT HOUSE, WHEN THE COURTS ACCOMODATE VISITS FROM CONVICTED FELONS AND VIOLENT CRIME OFFENDERS WITHOUT ESCORTING MANY OF THESE INDIVIDUALS THROUGHOUT THE COURT WHEN THEY APPEAR FOR PROBATION OR WHILE ON BAIL…. IT MAKES NO COMMON SENSE THAT I AM BEING TREATED AS A GREATER SECURITY THREAT AND/OR HARASSED TO A GREATER DEGREE THAN VIOLENT CRIMINALS WHO APPEAR AT YOUR COURT HOUSE WITHOUT ESCORTS!!!

=====================================================================
O.P.R.A. REQUEST #6 Dispatch / Sheriff Officer Assignment Records for 8/6/2014
=====================================================================

TO MERCER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE – RECORD CUSTODIAN
TO SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY (MERCER COUNTY VINCINAGE): RECORD KEEPER, ASSIGNMENT JUDGE, COURT CLERK, & SANDRA TERRY

O.P.R.A. REQUEST AND COMMON LAW RIGHT OF ACCESS REQUESTS FOR:

1. Mercer County Sheriff’s Office (AKA MCSO): Dispatch Log for 8/6/2014

2. MCSO: Incident Summaries for 8/6/2014

3. MSCO and/or Superior Court: Internal Communications, Emails, Memorandum, or like correspondence from 6/15/2014 to 8/8/2014 containing Derek Syphrett’s name or any of the following variations of Mr. Syphrett’s name such as “Mr. Syphrett, D. Syphrett, Syphrett”.

4. Any communication from the Superior Court Judge(s) or staff to MCSO staff regarding Derek Syphrett between 6/15/2014 to 8/8/2014

5. Any document in the MCSO possession or Superior Court Possession requesting or ordering the MSCO to escort Mr. Syphrett on 8/6/2014.

6. A Blank “Notice of Claim” Form, which applies to filing a legal claim against the MCSO staff.

7. Documents detailing / summarizing the the dispatch or assignment of Sheriff’s Officers to Family Court court rooms on 8/6/2014.

Note: As part of your O.P.R.A. responsibility, please request common law access to any records not in your possession but in the possession of the Superior Court, to the extent to such records exist and are possessed by the Superior Court.

Note: I have submitted this email as a letter to the courts. It should arrive at the court on Monday or Tuesday. I hereby request common law access to any records possessed by the Superior Court, which meet the descriptions above.

=====================================================================
Format of response:
Please provide this information via email or in electronic format.

Frequency of response:
Please deliver the documents: “as discovered ”

Destination for response:
Deliver to dsyphrett@EMAILREDACTED preferred destination is email)

Derek Syphrett

MY ADDRESS REDACTED

(only mail the records if you are unable to deliver them via email)
=====================================================================
O.P.R.A. NOTICE REGARDING FELONY CONVICTIONS and CITIZENSHIP OF PETITIONER
=====================================================================
I am not a convicted felon.

I am a dual citizen of the sovereign state of New Jersey AND the United States of America

=====================================================================

Very Respectfully,

Derek C. Syphrett

P.S.
I’ve been extremely patient under the above described circumstances. I believe your agencies & personnel are continuing a pattern of abuse that began with my kidnapping on 8/19/2013.

KANGAROO COURT: A DAD’S MOTION TO VACATE DUE TO VIOLATIONS OF CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS

Standard

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY IS OFTEN A KANGAROO COURT:

Here is a motion that I just filed with the court to remind the court that it was unlawful and a violation of my constitutional rights to hold a trial while prohibiting me to appear in Court (By Order of Ronald Bookbinder).

The underlying trial I am addressing in this case was domestic violence case where the Plaintiff Kathryn Bischoff made false statements to the police and to the court stating that she had attempted to cease contacting me on 1/15/2013 when in fact she continued to message me via text, Facebook, and even wished me a happy birthday via text (1/24/2013); A Facebook Friend Request (1/26/2013) and additional texts from this woman were sent to me on 1/27-1/31/2013).

I submitted this evidence to the court via an “immediate appeal” and a motion for dismissal… all to no avail!

SEE DOCUMENTS HERE:

IMMEDIATE MOTION FOR APPEAL – Katy Bischoff Evidence Katy Bischoff – Google and Facebook

Of course I was found guilty of domestic violence based on a fictional account of events. Best of All Judge John Tomasello in Burlington County actually ignored my “immediate appeal” filing which was a statutory right. Judge Tomasello ignored my due process rights and found me guilty by default despite the fact I submitted pleadings to the court (which he didn’t consider).

BELOW IS THE MOTION I JUST FILED WITH THE COURT TO VACATE THE UNLAWFUL COURT ORDER FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

LINK TO DOCUMENT:

MOTION TO VACATE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE FINAL ORDER (COURT RULE 4:50)

(Remember there was no harassment and no violence, no threats of violence, and no consideration of my written pleadings by Judge Tomasello)… that is supposed to be justice!

BEST OF ALL THERE WAS A COURT ORDER

PROHIBITING ME FROM APPEARING IN COURT

SEE THIS RIDICULOUS COURT ORDER HERE:

LINK TO DOCUMENT:

UNLAWFUL COURT ORDERS OF JUDGE RONALD BOOKBINDER

(Thanks Judge Bookbinder, that seems fair… I can have a trial so long as I don’t appear in person…. I feel very colored… or negro now circa 1845 slavery)

SERIOUSLY TAKE A LOOK AT THE ORDER WITHOUT CLICKING HERE:

LEGAL NOTICE:

THE INFORMATION ABOVE HAS BEEN POSTED FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING TRANSPARENCY INTO THE COURT

FURTHER:

THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE DOCKET CEASED BEING CONFIDENTIAL WHEN JUDGE BOOKBINDER COMBINED STATUS HEARING ORDERS WITH A PUBLIC CRIMINAL CASE FILE – THUS ELIMINATING THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF THIS MATTER BY EXPOSING THE MATTER IN PUBLIC CASE FILES

I THEREFORE INVOKE MY RIGHT TO DISCUSS THIS PUBLIC MATTER.

PROOF OF CORRUPTION: Judge Bookbinder’s Unlawful Court Orders: Prohibiting Father from Appearing in Court at his Own Trial

Standard

JUDGE BOOKBINDER VIOLATED A FATHER’S RIGHT TO PROTECT HIS CHILDREN AND REPRESENT HIMSELF AT TRIAL WITH THIS COURT ORDER.

CLEARLY IT IS UNLAWFUL TO PROHIBIT A DEFENDANT FROM APPEARING IN COURT AT HIS OWN TRIAL, BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT JUDGE BOOKBINDER DID.

JUDGE BOOKBINDER MUST BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE UNLESS HE TAKES REMEDIAL ACTION. EVEN THEN HIS FITNESS TO SERVE AS A JUDGE IS QUESTIONABLE

SEE EVIDENCE BELOW:

ADDITIONALLY:

This court order violates the Supreme Court ruling in Haines v. Kerner 1972 by requiring a pro se defendant to file all pleadings consistent with the court rules. In fact the Supreme Court has ruled this is not a requirement any court can legally enforce or make upon a Defendent.

FURTHER:

Within the Third Circuit Federal Courts (New Jersey’s Jurisdiction) the court has confirmed that a pro se litigant can not be held to be strictly bound by court rules. See Todaro v. Bowman or Picking v. Pennsylvania.

CONCLUSION:

It is quite clear from the evidence above and Judge Bookbinder’s numerous ex-parte communications with me that he is not acting lawfully, but instead trying to continue a pattern of retaliation and abuse that began in my case before it was transferred from Mercer County to Burlington County due to the improper conduct of Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick.

SEE THE OTHER ARTICLES ON THIS CITE ABOUT THE MISCONDUCT OF JUDGE FITZPATRICK AND JUDGE BOOKBINDER, THE INFORMATION IS QUITE ILLUMINATING.

Remember: If you have to go to a New Jersey Family Court You’ll need to prepare to have your savings raided and have your 1st Amendment Rights eviscerated (become a Serf)

Former Client of Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick Describes Unethical Practice of Law

Standard

Introduction:

Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick was a Mercer county lawyer. As a lawyer she failed her clients, damaged children and destroyed fathers for profit, according to a former client.

Below is a description of her conduct by a former client (from West Windsor Plainsboro Today):

“My experience with Catherine Fitzpatrick was slightly different. She charged me less than $20,000 for my divorce but the damage she caused my children who were just 4 and 5 at the time of separation was beyond repair.

When I separated a few years ago, I had some issues with my ex-husband but nothing that should have caused me to file for divorce. He used little alcohol but was never drunk, no drugs and was never physically abusive to me. He got angry sometimes, but so did I, mostly due to the pressures of every day life.

Now I know better.

He is a good man who has always been very good to my children. What Fitzpatrick wrote in the divorce papers made him appear to be the No. 1 danger to my kids and to society. She wrote asking that he only receives supervised visitations, undergo psychological testing, anger management, AA, etc. and counseled me against allowing him to see or even talk to his own children for over 3 months “just to have an upper psychological edge” and bring him down to his knees.

Since separation took him by surprise, my ex did not learn how to file a motion to get some visitations until 2 months later. The children had to suffer from not seeing or talking to their father of over 3 months. Later, rather than counsel me to work things out with him on 50/50 custody, she kept insisting that giving him any overnights meant less child support money for many years and made my children to go through 3 grueling child custody assessments.

The children did not seem to be affected few years ago, but later I found out that they were deeply affected and were having self esteem issues from what I foolishly made them believe was abandonment by their father, as well as many problems learning at school and developed psycho-somatic problems like problems with speech and comprehension, emotional outbursts, fear of trusting people and making friends etc. I do not want to get into details but I feel horrible for what I put my ex and my children through for $150/week in child support money. A divorce lawyer should counsel her clients to do what is best for the children not be money hungry and destroy the lives of the children. Fitzpartick is not a good lawyer.”

FORMER CLIENT OF CATHERINE FITZPATRICK

Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick Alleged to Retaliate & File False Criminal Charges

Standard

( ACTUALLY JUDGE FITZPATRICK TRIED TO JAIL ME FOR 5 YEARS… FALSELY…)

================================================

Quick Summary of Facts & Events:

================================================

6/4/2013 Judge Fitzpatrick stripped me of my right to represent myself and appointed both a Guardian Ad Litem & a court appointed Lawyer in violation of:
- my constitutional right to due process (14th Amendment, U.S. Contitution);
- New Jersey Rules of Evidence 703; &
- New Jersey Court Rule 5:3.

She issued a sua sponte order (on the courts own motion) without any evidence or testimony before the court supporting her order. She did not even give me the opportunity to cross-examine or present evidence before issuing the order.

THIS WAS UNLAWFUL AND JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT.

NOTABLY: in 4/2013 I won my last motion before the court and had my wife Margaret J. Wallace (of Gales Ferry CT) found in contempt & my unallocated support enforcement stayed… SO CLEARLY I WAS LEGALLY COMPETENT

NOTABLY: ACCORDING TO SETTLED CASE LAW IN NJ NO COURT COULD DEEM ME LEGALLY INCOMPETENT AFTER SUCCESFFULLY DEMONSTRATING COMPETENCE BEFORE THE COURT IN MY LAST MOTION – SEE KYLE V. VERONA GREEN ACRES JUDGE FITZPATRICK IGNORED THIS BINDING PRECEDENT… THIS TOO WAS UNLAWFUL.

2. 8/14/2013 Judge Fitzparick apparently fabricated criminal charges against me

3. 8/16/2013 Judge Fitzpatrick apparently retaliated by sitting as a judge in my divorce and a now dismissed Domestic Violence case status hearing and order defaults in both cases on 8/16/2013 (see Mercer County Dockets: FV-11-725-13K & FM-11-97-13B)

THIS WAS BOTH UNLAWFUL AND A VIOLATION OF COURT RULE 1:12:-1(g).

IMPORTANT: JUDGE FITZPATRICK’S ORDERS FOR DEFAULTS WERE LATER TREATED AS VOID COURT ORDERS AND VACATED – BECAUSE WHAT SHE DID WAS ILLEGAL.

JUDGE FITZPATRICK DID NOT DISCLOSE HER ATTEMPT TO FILE CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST ME, AND SHE THEN SAT TO HEAR CIVIL CASES DESPITE THE FACT SHE FILED A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST ME AND WAS CONFLICTED

IMPORTANT: I was ordered to appear in civil court on 8/19/2013 for a Default hearing in the DV case FV-11-624-13. When I appeared I learned that my wife and her lawyer were told not to appear in court and I was arrested without new charges being filed, without a warrant, and without probable cause I apparently was kidnapped to shut me up

4. 8/18/2013 I WAS ARRESTED AT MY HOME. I POSTED BAIL AND WAS RELEASED FROM JAIL.

5. 8/19/2013 When I appeared I learned that my wife and her lawyer were told not to appear in court and I was arrested without new charges being filed, without a warrant, and without probable cause I apparently was kidnapped to shut me up.

There was no warrant for my 8/19/2013 Arrest

There was no criminal charges for the 8/19/2013 arrest

No Probable Cause was issued for the 8/19/2013 arrest

No criminal charges were filed for the 8/19/2103 arrest

IT ALL APPEARED TO BE RETALIATION TO SHUT ME UP AND TO KEEP JUDGE FITZPATRICK FROM GETTING IN TROUBLE.

6. In January of 2014 I recorded a phone call with my wife’s lawyer Jennifer Weisberg-Millner of Fox Rothschild. She revealed to me that Judge Fitzpatricks chambers called and told her not to appear in court on the morning 8/19/2013 because I’d been arrested. ODD BECAUSE I HADN’T BEEN ARRESTED IN THE MORNING OF 8/19/2013… ODD BECAUSE THE COURT NEVER CALLED ME TO TELL ME NOT TO COME IN… ODD BECAUSE THESE COMMUNICATIONS WERE EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS BY THE COURT WITH MY WIFE’S LAWYERS!

================================================

OTHER ISSUES FROM EARLY IN MY DIVORCE:

================================================

7.9/2011 My visitations with my children were converted to Supervised visits without a Plenary hearing. When I filed a motion in 9/2011 for Plenary hearing Judge Fitzpatrick refused to schedule the plenary hearing AS REQUIRED BY LAW. SHE ALSO REFUSED TO GIVE ME BACK MY UNSUPERVISED VISITATION.

8. 2011 The Supervised Visitation order was ridiculous it required my wife and me to agree on a supervisor… so my wife just continued to refuse to agree to use any supervisor I wanted to use and refused to pay for supervision. The result was I rarely saw my children for the next 2 years. This was devastating because my children were 2yrs old and 4yrs old at the time and I couldn’t hug, hold, and love them or the next 2 years on a regular basis. IT WAS ABSOLUTELY DEVASTATING AND I NEVER WAS GIVEN DUE PROCESS BY THE COURTS TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE.

9. Domestic Violence Charges by my wife appeared to abused by my wife to separate me from my children. In 2010 my wife filed a DV claim and it was dismissed and she admitted she had falsely stated facts in the complaint. She said I showed up unnannounced despite the fact I had texts from her inviting me to come see the children. Judge Fitzpatrick never held my wife accountable for these apparent lies.

10. In 2012 My wife filed another DV complaint. I was entitled to a hearing in 10 days. Instead Judge Fitzpatrick coordinated with Judge Warshaw and Judge Debello to prohibit a hearing on the DV complaint for over 240 days.

When the case was finally sent to Burlington County the new judge said the Temporary Restraining order Should have never been entered!!

11. Judge Fitzpatrick (or somebody using her user name) created FRAUDULENT COURT DOCUMENTS STATING MY DV CASE WAS 19 DAYS OLD WHEN IT WAS 240 DAYS OLD … THIS OBSCURED THE CASE FROM TRIAL ADMINISTRATORS SO THAT THEY COULD NOT INVESTIGATE WHY MY CASE WAS TAKING SO LONG.

======================================

SEE PROOF HERE:

======================================

12. The DV court order for temporary restraints did not require a psychiatric evalution. but the DV Judges Judge Debello and Judge Fitzpatrick said the would not schedule my hearing unless I went to a psychiatric evaluation (that I consented to go to in the divorce case). I told them I wouldn’t schedule it until the DV matter was handled.

JUDGE FITZPATRICK AND JUDGE DEBELLO UNLAWFULLY REFUSED TO SCHEDULE MY DV CASE WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE TRO AS REQUIRED BY N.J. LAW.

I researched the DV law and found that a DV case can only require a psych. eval if it is ordered as part of the TRO… In my case it was not!!

I told Both Judge Debello and Judge Fitzpatrick regardless of whether I was mentally ill or not it was irrelevant to whether or not I committed a crime, or committed an act of DV… so they needed to schedule the hearing. Additionally I reminded them there was no order for a psych eval in the DV case… THEY IGNORED MY MOTIONS AND LETTERS.

MY DV CASE WASN’T HEARD FOR OVER 425 DAYS, WHEN IT WAS HEARD IT WAS DISMISSED BY THE NEW JUDGE!!!

I WENT OVER A YEAR WITHOUT SEEING MY KIDS BECAUSE THE COURT DENIED ME DUE PROCESS, VIOLATED THE DV LAWS, AND RETALIATED AGAINST ME!

PROOF & EVIDENCE JUDGE FITZPATRICK FRAUDULENTLY MARKED MY CASE AS 19 DAYS OLD WHEN IT WAS 245 DAYS OLD:

DOCUMENT: COURT RECORDS SHOWING CASE WAS FALSELY DATED FACTS

CLICK LINK ABOVE TO SEE DETAILS

==========================================================

ALLEGATIONS AGAINST FOX ROTHSCHILD ATTORNEYS INCLUDE:

==========================================================

Note: My wife was represented by Fox Rothschild. They are professional lawyers, but they litigate with a win at all costs strategy that appears to be ignorant of due-process for their client or adversaries.

Jennifer-Weisberg Millner – a lawyer for over 20 years surely should have known that the submissions by my wife of altered evidence were not admissible in court and that submitting such documents was unethical… but she was complicit with it.

Eliana Baer – Testified to false facts on 12/5/2012 by stating I had sent my wife over 12 emails in a single day.. This was a flat out lie and Elaina Baer never submitted any evidence to substantiate this claim. This was unethical and despite my numerous discovery requests Elaina Baer never submitted 12 emails sent in a single day… she lied.

Jennifer Weisber Millner (Jennifer Millner) should have known that both her clients due-process rights and my due process rights were violated for the over 425 days that the DV case wasn’t scheduled, but she allowed it to happen without ever motioning the court for justice or adherence to the court rules.

Jennifer-Weisberg Millner & Eliana Baer have both been lawyers long enough to know that the sua sponte order Judge Fitzpatrick issued to strip me of my right to represent myself was unlawful and a violation of court rules, yet they were complicit with it.

==========================================================

CONCLUSION

==========================================================

1. In the end all of this will cost my wife and I much more time and money to resolve, which only benefits these slimy lawyers from Fox Rothschild.

2. I reported all of my concerns to the A.C.J.C. for Judicial Misconduct, Judge Glenn Grant – Acting Administrator of the Courts, Judge Mary C. Jacobson, etc… all of them just worked to cover this up, even after my cases were transferred to Burlington County where the retaliation continued under Judge John Tomassello who continued to violate my rights and retaliate for Judge Fitzptrick

3. Judge Tomasello is a total scumbag in my opinion. He actually took ex-parte testimony during the divorce trial and refused to allow me to cross-examine the witnesses he did this with. he also along with Judge Bookbinder prohibited me from appearing in court for my own trial dates on 2/18/2014 and 2/19/2014… THIS WAS ALSO UNLAWFUL AND MEANS MY FINAL ORDER FOR DIVORCE IS NOW VOID AND I HAVE TO GO BACK TO COURT FOR MORE TRIAL DATES JUST TO GET JUSTICE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BY LAW AND BY COURT RULES.

MOST IMPORTANTLY HERE IS THE BOTTOM LINE:

N.J. FAMILY COURT IS CORRUPT & INCOMPETENT – THE JUDGES FEEL THEY ARE ABOVE THE LAW AND THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE BEST INTERESTS OF YOUR CHILDREN.

ALL THEY WANT TO DO IS HELP THEIR FRIENDS IN THE LOCAL BAR ASSOCIATION FLEECE YOU FOR ALL YOUR MONEY AND THEN ISSUE COURT ORDERS THAT WILL KEEP YOU DESTITUTE AND UNABLE TO HIRE A LAWYER TO GET JUSTICE.

==============================================

CLEARLY THESE PEOPLE MUST NOT UNDERSTAND THEIR OATHS OF OFFICE

…. PERHAPS THEY ARE CONFUSED???

==============================================

Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick & Alleged Cronyism

Standard

==================================================================

HERE IS A SHORT STORY OF APPARENT CRONYISM IN THE COURTS:

==================================================================

JUDGE FITZPATRICK’S OLD BOSS TOOK A JOB WITH HER HUSBANDS FIRM RIGHT AFTER SHE WAS PROMOTED TO PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE FAMILY PART.

A lot of Lawyers here in Mercer county have commented that my divorce Judge Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick became a presiding judge of the Family part incredibly quickly.

One lawyer John Hartmann revealed that she got the job because her husband was a high profile attorney for Stark & Stark. (John Hartmann is Judge Fitzpatrick’s cousin-in law.. Husbands Cousin).

Well for me the story was too compelling not to investigate – it ended with some tragic discoveries:

Story of the Presumed Judge Quid Pro Quo that bought Fitzpatrick’s Job:

1. Judge Fitzpatrick became a Judge in 2009 she became presiding judge of the Family Part in March 2010 (wow fast right).

2. Her husband is John Sakson of Stark & Stark.

3. Judge Smithison Retired (Former Presiding Judge of the Family Part) about March 2010 and took a Job at Stark & Stark (working for Judge Fitzpatrick’s Husband).

Note:

(a)Judge Smithison allowed his wife to sit on a jury as an alternate juror – the ACJC took no action but sent a letter telling him he shouldn’t do that! A wrist slap for misconduct was appropriate for the A.C.J.C. judicial disciplinary committee, because their job is primarily to cover up judicial misconduct rather than investigate it.

(b) Judge Smithison decided the Megan’s Law Case (he’s got juice).

4. Judge Fitzpatrick worked under Judge Andrew Smithison who was the presiding judge of the FP in 2009

5. THE SHOCKER: My wife’s attorney Jennifer Millner worked as a law clerk in the 80s for none other than Judge Smithison

Note Judge Fitzpatrick & Jennifer Millner also serve on a committee of the Mercer County Bar Association (Bench-Bar Committee). They actually discussed agenda items during my hearings and stated they would continue ex-parte discussions about issues related to my case at the Bench Bar’s next meeting.

Opinion:

It’s hard to have respect for a court system that runs on cronyism at the expense of the appearance of justice and integrity of the system.

Obviously the Judges and Lawyers do not place much emphasis on the appearance of justice or integrity, because if they did, stories like this would not be so common and not go un-investigated or reported.

This is just a small example of how our Judiciary has become the 3rd Branch of Government to fail the people. We are akin to prisoners of our own government than participants in it due to cronyism like this.

I’ve lost all respect for New Jersey and American Government, I really don’t believe the government officials care about anything else but fleecing their victims / ascending on the backs of honest poor people.

================================

Summary & Conclusion:

================================

My wife’s lawyer and my judge both worked for Smithson.

My Judge probably bought her position from Smithson in exchanged for giving him a no show job, around the same time Judge Jacobson was promoted to Assignment Judge – so she kept her mouth shut and probably owes Fitzpatrick a favor for that too.

Presumably: Everybody in my case was related via money or favors except for me lol.

Presumably: It follows / is likely that Judge Smithison traded favors for a Job at Stark and Stark that resulted in a unqualified lawyer Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick (per comments from her own clients) lawyer to become the Presiding Judge of the Family Part purely for political considerations and quid-pro quo favors to her old boss Judge Smithson.

Isn’t that quaint…

Very Truly,

A plebeian scumbag & Victim of Legal Cronyism

Alleged Judicial Misconduct of Judge Bookbinder

Standard

Quick Summary – Punchline:

CLICK LINK BELOW TO SEE COURT ORDER – EVIDENCE OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT:

RONALD BOOKBINDER’S COURT ORDERS VIOLATE THE LAW 2/6/2014 – 3/10/2014 – HE REFUSED TO PRESENT ANY EVIDENCE SUPPORTING HIS DECISION (CLICK TO READ COURT ORDERS)

JUDGE RONALD E. BOOKBINDER’S ILLEGAL COURT ORDERS VIOLATE:

THE U.S. CONSTITUTION,
N.J. CONSTITUTION,

SUPREME COURT RULINGS:

BINDING PRECEDENTS OF FEDERAL 3RD CIRCUIT

JUDGE BOOKBINDER IS ALLEGED TO HAVE ABUSED HIS OFFICE FOR THE PURPOSES OF BULLYING A SELF-REPRESENTED FATHER

JUDGE BOOKBINDER VIOLATED THIS FATHER’S RIGHTS AND EFFECTIVELY SABATAGED THE FATHERS ABILITY TO PARTICIPATE IN HIS OWN TRIAL FOR CUSTODY OF THE FATHER’S OWN CHILDREN.

JUDGE JOHN TOMASELL AND JUDGE JOHN CALL WERE COMPLICIT IN THE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AT TRIAL IN FM-03-790-14:

Judge Tomasello held trial without the Defendant present, took testimony from the Plaintiff, and refused to allow the Defendant to cross-examine the Plaintiff

Judge Tomasello refused to hear the Defendant’s immediate appeal (a statutory right of the Defendant) in FV-03-1154-14

Judge John Call was the complicit presiding (Supervising) judge.

================================================

EVIDENCE OF JUDGE BOOKBINDER’S JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

(supported by Judge John Call & Judge John Tomasello):

===================================================

RONALD BOOKBINDER’S COURT ORDERS VIOLATE THE LAW 2/6/2014 – 3/10/2014 – HE REFUSED TO PRESENT ANY EVIDENCE SUPPORTING HIS DECISION (CLICK TO READ COURT ORDERS)

1. A Father ((Self-Represented / Pro Se litigant) prohibited from appearing in court for his own Trial! THIS IS A VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO ACCESS THE COURTS.

2. Father (Self Represented / Pro Se Litigant) prohibited from meeting with Ombudsman to discuss his concerns.

This order was issued ex-parte with no notice & no hearing to the Father (no due process)

Order was only put in writing after the Father confronted Judge Ronald E. Bookbinder

3. Father (Self Represented / Pro Se Litigant) subjected to illegal court order that violated U.S. Supreme Court Decisions in Haines v. Kerner that permit a pro-se litigant to file pleadings contrary to court rules and procedures.

4. Father (Self Represented / Pro Se Litigant) Prohibited from viewing his own divorce files by court order

5. Judge Bookbinder appears to have committed felony witness tampering in in State v. Syphrett System #03-2950-01 by admitting he consulted privately with a witness in State v. Syphrett about the case prior to the trial. He allowed the witness Judge Mary C. Jacobson to recommend bail conditions and civil restraints against Mr. Syphrett (the case was ultimately dismissed without any trial via highly unusual ex-parte motion by Prosecutor Joseph Bocchini of Mercer County).

===============================================

HOW THE LAW WAS VIOLATED BY JUDGE BOOKBINDER

===============================================

After having my civil and criminal cases transferred to Burlington because Judges in Mercer County violated my rights, the apparent retaliation by judges continued in Burlington County via all manner of strange happenings.

1. Judge Bookbinder Consulted the Mercer County Judges despite the fact that Judge Mary C. Jacobson, Judge Pedro Jimenez, and Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick had been recused from my cases. THIS WAS BIZARRE!

2. Judge Bookbinder issued civil restraints against my access of the court without presenting any evidence to support these restraints. This was a violation of the law of the land per U.S. Supreme Court: Elrod v. Burns (1976)

See here where Elrod v. Burns clearly states that the government can not restrain a citizen’s 1st Amendment free speech without producing a burden of proof… Judge Bookbinder ignored this and acted as a tyrant rather than a Judge – in doing so he acted without subject matter jurisdiction.

=========================================================

LEGAL DECISIONS SUPPORTING MY ALLEGATIONS:

=========================================================

Judge Bookbinder’s Violation of Supreme Courts Law (Elrod v. Burns & Haines v. Kerner) – Click Underlined Links to read:

Elrod v. Burns, 427 US 347 – 1976 – ‎Supreme Court (Click Link)

NOTE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT FINDINGS IN Elrod v. Burns, 427 US 347 – 1976 pursuant Buckley v. Valeo:

“Though First Amendment rights are not absolute, they may be curtailed only by interests of vital importance, the burden of proving the existence of which rests upon the government”

“Though First Amendment rights are not absolute, they may be curtailed only by interests of vital importance, the burden of proving the existence of which rests upon the government”

U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in Haines v. Kerner – 404 U.S. 519, yr: 1972 – (CLICK THIS LINK): Barred Judges from Doing what Judge Bookbinder did in the above referenced / linked Court Orders of 2/6/2014 thru 3/10/2014.

Haines v. Kerner Specifically States the Following:

“We cannot say with assurance that under the allegations of the pro se complaint, which we hold to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers, it appears ‘beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.’ Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41,45 46 (1957). See Dioguardi v. Durning, 139 F.2d 774 (CA2 1944)”

JUDGE BOOKBINDER SHOWED CONTEMPT FOR THE U.S. SUPREME COURT AND DECIDED HIS COUNTY COURT WAS ABOVE THE SUPREME COURT RULING – THIS VIOLATES THE LAW OF THE LAND!

=========================================================

EVIDENCE OF

THE ALLEGED JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT & ALLEGED FELONIES:

=========================================================

Judge Ronald E. Bookbinder issued a court order on 2/6/2014 and others which prohibited a father from appearing in court for the father’s own divorce, custody litigation!

THIS WAS A VIOLATION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 14TH AMENDMENT.

SEE COURT ORDERS HERE:

2014-02-06 and 14-2-19 and 14-3-10 COURT ORDERS BOOKBINDER

List of Illegal Aspects of these Court Orders:

1. Pro Se Defendant prohibited from appearing in court without EXPRESS PERMISSION of a Superior Court Judge (Regardless of whether the Defendant had a trial date)!!

2.Pro Se Defendant prohibited from filing contrary to the court rules, even though U.S. Supreme Court and Third Circuit of Federal Court has issued precedent setting decisions that state a Pro Se Defendant need not follow the court rules or follow court procedures in pleadings or filings. See Decisions in:

U.S. Supreme Court:Haines v. Kerner – 404 U.S. 519 (1972)

Third Circuit Binding Precedents – Clearly Make Judge Bookbinder’s Court orders illegal / Void

Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151, F2d. 240 (Click this Link) , (151 Third Circuit Court of Appeals (1945)

In Picking: the plaintiffs civil rights was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as “inept.” Nevertheless, it was held: Where a plaintiff pleads pro-se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the court should endeavor to construe plaintiffs pleading without regard to technicalities. (

Todaro v. Bowman, 872 F.2d 43, 44 n. 1, 3d Cir. 1989 (Click this Link):

Findings of Todaro Court: As a pro se litigant Todaro is held to less stringent pleading standards and we will afford him a liberal interpretation of our procedural rules. We will, therefore, consider the first amendment claim as properly before us. (iv) McTeague v. Sosnowski, 617 F.2d 1016, 1019 (3d Cir.1980).

===================================================

ABOUT JUDGE RONALD E. BOOKBINDER:

===================================================

Judge Ronald E. Bookbinder has a reputation in Burlington County for being a gregarious, even tempered Judge, with a keen mind for Municipal Ordinances and Laws.

I don’t Dispute that.

However: I have seen Judge Ronald Bookbinder apparently commit crimes of Official Misconduct (a felony) and violate his oath of office and the United States Constitution.

===================================================

CONCLUSION:

===================================================

I am a first person witness to a Superior Court Judge of New Jersey deciding that he is ABOVE THE LAW

I have witnessed Judge Ronald E. Bookbinder show complete disrespect for U.S. Supreme Court rulings, the Constitution, court rules, and “THE LAW”.

Everybody who reads this blog and views these court orders is now also a witness to the fact that Judge Bookbinder has diminished the integrity of the court and violated his oath of Office.

Father’s Rights & Constitution Trampled by NJ Courts in 2011

Standard

Tyrannical New Jersey Family Court Judge Terrorizes Good Father

Posted by Bruce Eden President FCLU.org

… the wife, an Austrian national, came to the US, got her college degree and CPA license. Almost immediately his wife filed a domestic violence restraining order claiming he harassed and threatened her. A copy of her personal diary in July of 2009 shows that she was “going to so f–cking divorce him, that she was going to so f–cking make him suffer for the rest of his life”.

Immediately after filing the restraining order, the children would not go home to the mother and went back to the father. The mother followed them to the father, breaking her own restraining order. Thewife confronted the father’s 73-year old mother and told his motherif she goes near the children again she (wife) would kill her. The children’s grandmother filed for a restraining order against the wife. That’s when the wife began “piling on” the charges against the father. That’s also about the same time the wife was given an attorney by the NJ Battered Womens Services, who the wife went to see for aid and assistance. However, this attorney, Christian Van Pelt, of Cedar Knolls, was ineligible to practice law at the time, because he failed to pay his annual fee for the NJ Clients Protection Trust Fund. Every paper filed by her lawyer was done while the lawyer was practicing law without a license. No matter.

The wife stalked the father in June 2011 because the children went back to the father’s place. When the father put the children in the car to take them back to the mother, the mother hiding her car behind some large bushes pulled out in front of the father’s car at the bottom of the driveway. The father jammed on his brakes and slid into her car. She then charged him with violating a restraining order even though she was stalking the father, and then charged him with assault by auto.

When the father attempted to file for a restraining order against the wife, he went before the same New Jersey domestic violence judge, Thomas Critchley, JSC that granted the wife’s restraining orders and subsequent FRO violations. It goes without saying that Morris County, NJ Judge Critchley was biased against the father and dismissed the father’s domestic violence complaint.

The mother grabbed the children and then began moving into the battered women’s shelters and received taxpayer-funded food stamps, stipends, cash, and even housing. Yet, the father cannot get a restraining order against the mother with valid proof. This is taxpayer fraud where battered women’s services abuse the funding to damage and destroy families, and men cannot get one dime of funding for battered men’s services through government funding. This constitutes a major civil rights violation in New Jersey and the rest of the United States.

The mother filed multiple violations of restraining orders against the father, keeping the children away from the father. The children e-mailed, texted and called the father’s sister and paternal grandmother telling them what shelter they were in, that they weren’t being fed properly, and that they were not going to school. The paternal grandmother would bring food and cellphones to the children because the mother kept taking them away from the children.

Finally the mother alleged that the father had appeared at a shelter and filed for contempt of the restraining order.The wife’s lawyer filed orders to show cause to cut the father completely off from the children, and jail him indefinitely while the wife would be granted her divorce by default and gain sole custody of the children with no visitation. The father got wind of this and filed a Federal Notice of Removal and Petition on September 2, 2011.

He filed the Federal Removal action to remove the entire state case into Federal Court in the morning of the 2nd and deprive the state of further jurisdiction of the cases. Judge Critchley and the matrimonial judge, Catherine Enright, JSC ignored the Federal removal petition, even though they acknowledged its existence in transcripts and in orders. Once the Removal occurred the state court judges were without jurisdiction to proceed.

But proceed they did. They deprived the father of his children. Judge Critchley also put out a fraudulent civil Arrest Warrant for Peter Bresko, who was arrested 4 days later–4 days after the state case had been removed to Federal Court, depriving the state court judges of all jurisdiction. However, Judge Critchley has jailed Bresko on a civil contempt and told Bresko that he would be released when the judge felt like it. The judge told Bresko he was going to allow the mother to leave the state with the children and set up residence in a New England state, where they have a corresponding battered womens shelter. Judge Critchley has called Bresko into court from jail several times demanding all kinds of compliance from Bresko that Bresko cannot comply with while in jail. Critchley has ordered, though not in writing, that he wants Bresko psychiatrically evaluated. He told Bresko to tell him who helped him write legal papers since Bresko is representing himself, after Critchley threatened his former attorney. He wants Bresko to turn over the diary implicating the wife. The diary is evidence of mitigating circumstances that would exonerate Bresko of the bogus domestic violence charges. Bresko has been asserting his Fifth Amendment Rights as explained in Miranda v. Arizona where he can assert those rights even in civil proceedings. He has told Judge Critchley he has no authority and must release him because the Federal Removal occurred prior to the Arrest Warrant issuance and Bresko’s arrest 4 days later.

Judge Critchley is a judge out of control and dangerous to society. He was a former domestic violence prosecutor that is now a domestic violence judge. He has become an ideologue for the radical domestic violence coalitions, which constitutes a conflict of interest since he was promoted because of his assistance to the battered womens services of NJ. Judge Critchley has even filed his own Order to Show Cause against Bresko, stepping down off the bench and becoming Bresko’s adversary and prosecutor. Judges cannot be a judge and prosecutor in a case. It is a serious judicial misconduct violation. But Critchley believes he is above the law and continues to hold Bresko in jail for almost 40 days without Due Process or right to be released on bail.

Bresko’s sister hired an attorney to get him out on the criminal issues, and that attorney is too intimidated by the judge. A new, young attorney was just hired and Critchley threatened to throw that attorney in jail for contempt for defending Bresko vigorously. Judge Critchley is a rogue judge that must be removed from the bench, have his state judicial pension revoked, and be subjected to psychiatric treatment. Anyone who can, they need to call the New Jersey Governor’s Office and also Judge Critchley’s chambers in Morris County Courthouse, Morristown, New Jersey to demand that this fascist judge immediately release Bresko and demand Critchley resign afterwards.

NEW JERSEY MOTHER VICTIMIZED BY COURTS FOR $1.4 MILLION

Standard

STOP LEGAL ABUSE OF A MOTHER

New Jersey Court Defrauds Mother of $1.4M in Legal
Fees & Eliminates All Parenting Rights

Mother Launches $400M Suit Against Judiciary

Demand Judge Sogluizzo Step Down
CONTACT STU RABNER & GLENN GRANT TODAY
stuart.Rabner@judiciary.state.nj.us
glenn.grant@judiciary.state.nj.us

Family Court – The Brilliant Racket (TM)
Remember: It’s Conflict For Cash

Actual Plea Being Ignored By Rabner & Grant:

Messrs. Grant, and Chief Justice Rabner:

On May 2,2014, I filed a civil complaint in the Hudson County Law Division, Civil Part, against Hudson County Family Court Judge, Maureen Sogluizzo, P.J.F.P., Hudson County Vicinage, Superior Court and State of New Jersey. I filed for Jury Demand, Demand for Discovery and Deposition Notice against Maureen Sogluizzo In Official capacity as a Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Maureen Sogluizzo, in “personal” capacity and as employee of Corporation of State of New Jersey (also defined as person”); Hudson County Court Vicinage; Superior Court of New Jersey; State of New Jersey in its corporate “personal” capacity, jointly, severally and,/or in the alternative.

On May 6,2014, I received an Order From Judge Peter F. Bariso Jr., A.J.S.C who is the assignment Judge of Hudson County, stating the following “On motion of this court sua sponte, in order to preserve the appearance unbiased hearing, IT IS ON THIS 6th DAY OF MAY, 2014, ORDERED that venue be transferred to Essex County for disposition by a Superior Court Judge to be designated by the Assignment Judge.”

On May 13,2014, I received a track assignment notice from Essex County – Civil Division notifying me of a new Docket number, ESX L-003415’1,4 (EXHIBI #3) On May L9,2OT4,I filed a motion with Hudson County Assignment Judge Bariso to disqualify/recuse Defendant Judge Maureen Sogluizzo. Judge Bariso clearly stated in his Order, dated May 6, 2074,that there was a conflict of Interest, and in order to show impartiality and lack of bias, the case was transferred to Essex County from Hudson County so I could get a fair hearing.

Judge Maureen Sogluizzo who is now a Defendant in this instant case refuses to disqualify herself from my family court matter, Docket No. FM-09-1722-09, and wants to conduct two (2) hearings in a family court Judge capacity on the 13th of June,2014, where plaintiff ex-husband, (name redacted), wishes to sanction me for no reason other than he and his former attorneys at the Beilan, Miklos & Makrogiannis law firm (whom I sued in an earlier lawsuit and are no longer representing my former husband because of conflict of- interest and lack of impartiality; or so I think) are in concert with Judge Sogluizzo and want to extort money from me.

Defendant Judge Sogluizzo wrongfully ordered the relocation of my minor daughter to North Carolina in direct contravention to six (6) evaluation reports from experts, including psychiatrists and psychologists, three (3) of which were appointed by her who stated that I should have had unsupervised shared parenting at the least and sole custody because the father who had his own agenda to remove the mother from the child’s life through the relocation and parental alienation. My former husband has been in North Carolina since July 2013 and my daughter is suffering severe emotional distress since being removed from my custody, and New Jersey, where all of her friends, school, therapists, and maternal family are. My former husband has no family in the United States.

Defendant Judge Sogluizzo acted improperly and denied my former husband’s motion for relocation, calling it inimical to the child’s “best interests” because of the aforementioned reasons to not allow the child to move because everything for her is in New Jersey. Within 20 days Defendant Sogluizzo changed her mind and sent my daughter to North Carolina with my former husband-without the prerequisite plenary hearing involving a “Baures v. Lewis ” relocation hearing, and without a “best interest” hearing. Defendant Judge Sogluizzo postponed the plenary hearing, because she told me that her mother-in-law died and that if I don’t drop the plenary hearing (at that time), I would have to wait another 3 months to have overnight visitation with my then 7 year-old daughter. Defendant Judge Sogluizzo also has ignored various motions where I have requested equal time with my daughter. This is all supported by all mental health evaluation expert reports but she ignores it and now has set up a hearing on June 23rd, 2013,which is to be for an expansion of my time with my child and the entire summer parenting time with my child.

In light of the law suit which makes her a Defendant, Judge Sogluizzo will now act in a vindictive fashion violating Canon 3 of the NJ Code of Judicial Conduct (Judge must be impartial). As a defendant she is not capable of being impartial and must be disqualified immediately from my case as an acting Judge. Most importantly all parties and the minor child now reside in North Carolina. I am only using the above address in care-of (Under my mother) because I am in and out of the state moving. Also under the UCCJEA, New Jersey’s exclusive, continuing jurisdiction is retained until a court of this State determines that neither the child, or the child and one parent have a significant connection with this state, and that substantial evidence is no longer available in this state concerning the child’s care, protection, training and personal relationships. My former husband and my child moved to North Carolina as of July 1,2013. My former husband has taken up a job working for a large bank there and has married again. The child has been enrolled in school in North Carolina and is completing her Grade 2 in North Carolina. She goes to doctors and therapists in North Carolina and has no further contacts in New Jersey, other than her maternal grandparents and cousins whom she visits when with me. I have now established a residence and driver’s license in North Carolina. The case must be transferred to North Carolina given the two (2) sets of circumstances. I attach case law to support the transfer of Jurisdiction to North Carolina courts where all parties are scheduled for a hearing on June 9,2014 through a complaint that was filed in April 2014.

Defendant Judge Sogluizzo continues to act in a biased fashion and has financially and emotionally ruined me and my family, including ruining the well-being of my daughter. I would strongly request that in the interest of impartiality, and integrity of the courts, that Defendant Judge Sogluizzo no longer hear any of my matters and be removed from my case, because not only is she the defendant in my civil action in Essex County,but under the UCCJEA, she no longer has jurisdiction over any of the parties or the child.

Respectfully:

Monisha Shivani

Hon. Peter Bariso, A.J.S.C. (fax no. (201) 795-0725,
Judge Maureen Sogluizzo, P.J.F.P. (fax no. (201) 795-6199)

Families Civil Liberties Union
www.fclu.org

ALLEGED CRIMES OF: Judge Ronald E. Bookbinder & Judge Mary C. Jacobson

Quote

Introduction to Alleged Crimes:

Below are emails I sent to Mercer County Prosecutors Office and Burlington County Prosecutor’s Offices along with the evidence included in the links below.

I doubt the Prosecutors will prosecute these cases because they are likely fearful of retaliation from the judges’ and the judges’ political allies.

For that reason I have posted this information in public view so that the public can become aware of the unethical self-dealing within the judiciary.

New Jersey Courts are lawless and the judges do not hold themselves accountable to the United States Constitution or their Judicial Oaths (Judicial Canons).

Below I’ve included a summary and actual emails that I sent to the local prosecutor offices, to supplement my complaint to the FBI and Supreme Court of New Jersey.

=====================================

Quick Take Summary of Alleged Crimes

=====================================

1) Judge Bookbinder issued court orders that violated the United States Constitution in order to obstruct or deny me access to the court. He literally prohibited me from appearing at my own trials to face the accusers in both a criminal case and my divorce… OUTRAGEOUS!

2) Judge Bookbinder consulted / conspired with Judge Jacobson as denoted in hearing transcripts of State v. Syphrett on 12/24/2013 and 1/6/2014.

In other Words:

He consulted with a witness in a criminal case via ex-parte communications and he refused to reveal the nature of these communications. This led to my allegations of Official Misconduct and Witness Tampering.

RESULTING ALLEGED CRIMES:

2C: 30-2 – Official Misconduct in the third degree 12/24/2013, 1/6/2014, 3/24/2014, 2/6/2014, 2/19/2014, 3/10/2014

2C: 30-6 – A pattern of Official Misconduct in the third degree 12/24/2013, 1/6/2014, 3/24/2014, 2/6/2014, 2/19/2014, 3/10/2014, AND UNKOWN DATES WHERE EX-PARTE ORDERS FOR ESCORT AND RESTRAINTS OF MY ACCESS TO OMBUDSMAN WERE ISSUED VERBALLY OR VIA EMAIL.

2C: 28-5 – Witness Tampering in the third degree on 12/24/2013, 1/6/2014, and about 3/24/2014

=======================================

ACTUAL EMAILS DETAILING CONCERNS & ALLEGED CRIMES 6/27/2014

=======================================

Subject: Formal REQUEST FOR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION: Specific Charges

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 16:48:24 -0400
From: Derek Syphrett <dsyphrett@gmail.com>
To: prosecutor@co.burlington.nj.us, rbernardi@co.burlington.nj.us, “glenn.grant@judiciary.state.nj.us” <glenn.grant@judiciary.state.nj.us>, ronald.bookbinder@judiciary.state.nj.us, sharyn.sherman@judiciary.state.nj.us, jeanne.covert@judiciary.state.nj.us, jbocchini@mercercounty.org, mnardelli@mercercounty.org, John Call <John.Call@judiciary.state.nj.us>, Divorce – John Rooney <john@rooneyphillylawyer.com>

The record of State v. Syphrett will show that on 12/24/2013 and 1/6/2014 both Judge Covert and Judge Bookbinder referenced Judge Bookbinder’s ex-parte consultation with Mary C. Jacobson a presumed witness in State v. Syphrett.

I have audio transcripts of both of these hearings.

ALLEGED WITNESS TAMPERING:

Further on about 3/24/2014 Judge Bookbinder insisted he might continue to consult Mary C. Jacobson despite my lawyer and my objection to the same during a status conference call held on about that date.

SEE PROOF THAT JUDGE JACOBSON WAS A WITNESS IN STATE V. SYPHRETT HERE:

2014-08-18 – SHERIFFS INVESTIGATIVE REPORT – Redacted

ALLEGED OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT:

Further with regard to Judge Bookbinder’s void court orders of 2/6/2014, 2/19/2014, and 3/10/2014 I believe official Misconduct occurred as those court orders actually prohibited me from appearing in court for my own trials as a self-represented litigant and a real party of interest. Further Judge Bookbinder issued other court orders restraining me from meeting with the Ombudsman and with regard to having me harrassed by sheriff’s escorts via sua sponte orders off the record, which were only put on the record when I discovered such orders had been issued via conversations with Chip Thompson and Sgt. Potts.

SEE ATTACHED VOID COURT ORDERS HERE:

VOID COURT ORDERS BOOKBINDER

These Court Orders Violate the U.S. Constitution in numerous ways, including prohibiting a Defendant from appearing in court at his own trials!

These Court orders are also contrary to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Haines v. Kerner which allow for self-represented litigants to operate contrary to court rules.

I believe criminal charges under the following N.J. Statutes can and should be investigated and pursued in the interest of justice, especially considering the gravity of the allegations and the issues being related to public officials and the public interest in a lawful judiciary and the rule of law:

Alleged Criminal Charges:

2C: 30-2 – Official Misconduct in the third degree 12/24/2013, 1/6/2014, 3/24/2014, 2/6/2014, 2/19/2014, 3/10/2014

2C: 30-6 – A pattern of Official Misconduct in the third degree 12/24/2013, 1/6/2014, 3/24/2014, 2/6/2014, 2/19/2014, 3/10/2014, AND UNKOWN DATES WHERE EX-PARTE ORDERS FOR ESCORT AND RESTRAINTS OF MY ACCESS TO OMBUDSMAN WERE ISSUED VERBALLY OR VIA EMAIL.

2C: 28-5 – Witness Tampering in the third degree on 12/24/2013, 1/6/2014, and about 3/24/2014

=======================================

EMAIL TO BURLINGTON COUNTY PROSECUTORS OFFICE:

=======================================

On 6/27/2014 4:19 PM, Derek Syphrett wrote:
Burlington County Prosecutor’s Office / Robert Bernardi:

Please accept this email as a formal request for investigation of Judge Ronald E. Bookbinder with regard to his role in State v. Syphrett. He admitted to consulting a witness in State v. Syphrett (see attached investigative report) with regard to the handling of State v. Syphrett.

Such actions by Judge Bookbinder appear to be contrary to the Supreme Court Precedent set in the Matter of Stephen Perskie (a former superior court judge), they were also definitely violations of the Judicial Canons.

Please note I had requested Judge Bookbinder to avoid embarassing the court and to uphold the integrity of the court by transferring my legal matters from his court, however, he chose of his own free-will to continue engaging in activities that demeaned the integrity of the court and appear to be contrary to the pillars of our justice system. Sometimes people just can’t handle the privilege and power that comes with their jobs, sadly I believe this is such a case.

SEE BOTH THE ATTACHED INVESTIGATIVE REPORT AND THE INLINE ATTACHMENT BELOW DETAILING MY CONCERNS AND EVIDENCE:

REPORT SHOWING JUDGE JACOBSON WAS A WITNESS IN THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION: 2014-08-18 – SHERIFFS INVESTIGATIVE REPORT – Redacted

INLINE ATTACHMENT BELOW:
> Hi Kathleen,
>
> (To: Judge Grant & Joanne Dietrich please forward this email and my statements below as a verified complaint to the ACJC – I expect action with regard to paragraphs 3 & 4).
>
> 1. Your response to my O.P.R.A. request did not include a couple emails (listed below as inline attachments) can you explain this discrepancy.
>
> 2. My recollection is that both my lawyer and Michael Nardelli (who is btw a great guy, despite being a Dolphins fan… Go Patriots!) were thoroughly confused and irritated by Judge Bookbinder’s refusal to handle the case in a coherent manner and the following email exchange occurred:
>
> 3. My recollection is that the email exchange (ATTACHED BELOW) occurred after a fairly lengthy status hearing with Judge Bookbinder where both my lawyer and I asked him to transfer the case given JUDGE BOOKBINDER’S consultation with Mary C. Jacobson (a witness in the underlying criminal investigation for State v. Syphrett) about State v. Syphrett and the associated bail conditions and restraints.
>
> 4. The concerns my lawyer and I had related to the fact that Judge Bookbinder apparently violated of Judicial Canon 2 an 3 (ex-parte communication and bestowing and creating the appearance of special influence). It also may have been witness tampering (a felony). Additionally my lawyer and I felt that Judge Bookbinder’s civil restraints violated the United States Constitution and the Judicial Canons.

Subject:	Re: Order
Date:	Mon, 24 Mar 2014 15:08:27 -0400
From:	John F. Rooney, V <john@rooneyphillylawyer.com>
To:	Nardelli, Michael <mnardelli@mercercounty.org>, Derek Syph <dsyphrett@gmail.com>

Mike:

I can’t consent to the form, or anything, regarding the case remaining in Burlington County. That being said, you can send it to Judge Bookbinder as it is written, and if Judge Bookbinder sees fit, he can sign it, but i cannot consent to it. Thank you for your understanding.

John
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Nardelli, Michael <mnardelli@mercercounty.org> wrote:

I used “primary witness”. Let me know if this looks ok.

From: johnfrooneyesq@gmail.com [mailto:johnfrooneyesq@gmail.com] On Behalf Of John F. Rooney, V
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 4:58 PM
To: Nardelli, Michael
Subject: Re: Order

sorry to be a pain in the ass. Can we change “victim” to complaining witness?

John

On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Nardelli, Michael <mnardelli@mercercounty.org> wrote:

I removed “entry”.

From: John F. Rooney [mailto:john@rooneyphillylawyer.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 3:51 PM
To: Nardelli, Michael
Subject: Re: Order

not sure. I would just ask that you take out that I consent to the “entry” of the order. I am ok with the “form” of the Order, not its content, or entry. Thanks.

John

On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Nardelli, Michael <mnardelli@mercercounty.org> wrote:

I have no idea if this is even remotely close to what he wants.

Michael A. Nardelli

Assistant Prosecutor

Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office

209 South Broad St.

PO Box 8068

Trenton, NJ 08650

609-989-6360

NOT FOR DISCOVERY NOT FOR DISCOVERY NOT FOR DISCOVERY

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail transmission may contain confidential or legally privileged information that is intended only for the individual or entity named in the e-mail address. Access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance upon the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please reply to the sender so that we can arrange for proper delivery. Please delete the message from your inbox.

Thank you, Prosecutor Joseph L. Bocchini, Jr.

This message has been scanned for malware by Websense. www.websense.com
—

Law Offices of John F. Rooney V
2401 Pennsylvania Avenue – Suite 1C-41
Philadelphia Pa, 19130

Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone.
In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.

Jennifer Weisberg-Millner (Jennifer Millner) of Fox Rothschild – Alleged to be a thief

Standard

Jennifer Weisberg-Millner(Jennifer Millner) of Fox Rothschild, LLP

November 19, 2010 A court order was issued moving my post-marital wages into the escrow account of Jennifer Weisberg-Millner. She was ordered distribute only $1,280.00 per month for an unallocated support order.

INSTEAD SHE VIOLATED THE ORDER AND FAILED TO PROVIDE ME WITH STATEMENTS FOR HER UNAUTHORIZED TAKING OF MY MONEY, UNTIL I MOTIONED JUDGE CATHERINE FITZPATRICK.

WHEN I ASKED FOR THE UNAUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTIONS TO BE PLACED BACK INTO MY ACCOUNT, JENNIFER MILLNER REFUSED, MY WIFE REFUSED, AND THEY CONTINUED TO EFFECTIVELY STEAL MY MONEY.

I CONTACTED THE POLICE, THEY TOLD ME THAT THEFT BY DECEPTION WAS NOT A CRIME… THAT’S NOT TRUE… IT IS:

I alleged that this was theft by deception, because she did not initially provide me with statements for the distributions of my money, which were larger than what was ordered by the court – I reported this to the Lawrenceville Police, who did nothing).

PROOF JENNIFER MILLNER DISTRIBUTED MORE MONEY THAN SHE WAS ALLOWED TO BY LAW:

Note: Despite sloppy / potentially criminal legal work like this Ms. Millner sits on the Mercer County Bar Association Ethics committee.

Note: When I contacted Ms. Millner and demanded she reimburse the money she took in violation of the court order, she initially refused, and stated my wife likewise refused to return the money taken unlawfully.

I certify the forgoing statements are true.

Derek Syphrett

Victim of the Family Court and Unethical Lawyers in New Jersey

Kidnapping of Derek Syphrett & Mercer County Cover-up

Standard

==========================

TAKE NOTICE:

ALL NEW ARTICLES APPEAR BELOW

THIS PERMANENT POST

(Visit Archives for Monthly viewing)

==========================

TAKE NOTICE:

ALL NEW ARTICLES APPEAR BELOW THIS PERMANENT POST

==========================

Introduction to Story:

I was kidnapped by Mercer County Sheriff’s Office on 8/19/2013.

The Sheriff’s Office purported my kidnapping to be an “arrest” BUT:

There was No Warrant, No Probable Cause, No Criminal Charges

When I requested Records and an explanation of my arrest, the Sheriff’s Office Denied they had arrested me.

Ultimately I spent 4 Months in Jail or Hospital and never had a trial

When I was released the Sheriff’s Office Sent a Response to an O.P.R.A. request and THEY SAY HAVE NO RECORD OF MY “ARREST”… OF COURSE NOT, BECAUSE IT WAS A KIDNAPPING.

Ironically Below are links to the Official response from Mercer County’s lawyers stating that they have NO ARREST RECORD. The next link is MY COPY OF A MERCER COUNTY ARREST RECORD FOR 8/19/2013!

DOCUMENT & PROOF – DENIAL OF “ARREST: OPRA Response 6/12/2014

DOCUMENT & PROOF – ARREST RECORD – THE DAY I WAS FAKE ARRESTED

Below I have included the back story including a story of apparent retaliation by a apparently vindictive Family Court Judge (Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick) and all the the facts supporting this claim.

BELOW THE LINKS TO SOURCE DOCUMENTS ARE INCLUDED AND LINKS TO DOCUMENTS THAT SHOW MERCER COUNTY IS COVERING UP AND REFUSING TO RESPOND TO O.P.R.A. REQUESTS.

This post has been published simply to provide proofs of my story to inform the public about the Corruption in Mercer County New Jersey and the ongoing cover-up related to my kidnapping by Mercer County Sheriff’s Officers.

===================================================

Quick Summary – The Punchline:

===================================================

I was arrested 8/18/2013 on a lawfully issued warrant.

The charges for the 8/18/2013 arrest were apparently fabricated by my divorce judge Catherine M. Fitzpatrick, THESE ORIGINAL CHARGES WERE DISMISSED 8 MONTHS LATER (SEE DISMISSAL BELOW).

DOCUMENT & PROOF : COURT ORDER DISMISSED CRIMINAL CASE (2014-04-17 )

(The case was, oddly, dismissed on Prosecutor’s ex-parte motion, they never notified me – the opposing counsel – of the motion as required by law. If they had I’d have countered insisting a trial be heard due to the underlying fraudulent charges)

I posted bail 8/18/2013 and was released from jail

I went to my family court hearing on 8/19/2013 – somehow I was PURPORTEDLY placed under arrest again… EXCEPT THERE WAS:

NO WARRANT;
NO PROBABLE CAUSE;
NO CHARGES WERE EVER FILED;
NO LEGAL BASIS JUSTIFY THIS 8/19/2013 “PURPORTED ARREST”.

PROOF OF PURPORTED ARREST:

DOCUMENT: Prisoner Receipts and Bail Recognizance – 8/19/2013

Cover-up Begins: SHERIFF’S OFFICE LATER DENIES ANY PURPORTED ARREST 8/19/2013.

NOW SEE THE LETTER FROM SHERIFF’S OFFICE WHICH SHOCKINGLY STATES THERE IS “NO ARREST RECORD”

SEE THE ACTUAL LETTER (AN O.P.R.A. RESPONSE) VIA THE LINK BELOW:

DOCUMENT: 2014-06-12 – Mercer County OPRA Response

SO THEN ABSENT AN ARREST RECORD:

THIS WAS NOTHING LESS THAN A KIDNAPPING UNDER FALSE PRETENSES
WHAT I’VE JUST DESCRIBED IS A CRIME

=============================================

THE SET-UP:

=============================================

There is a long back-story about a family court Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick, who tried to violate my constitutional rights and retaliate against me for exposing her for unlawful acts in my divorce…. For now I’ll spare you those details.

What is important to tell you and show you is the fact that Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick apparently fabricated criminal charges against me on 8/14/2013. These Charges were later Dismissed pre-trial for reasons never fully explained by the Mercer County Prosecutor Joseph Bocchini.

SO WITHOUT FURTHER DELAY – HERE IS THE SET-UP:

Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick made allegations / criminal complaint against me on 8/14/2013.

She sat on the bench in my divorce and another matter on 8/16/2013 without me present, but with my court appointed lawyer Stuart Weiner present for my divorce trial. Judge Fitzpatrick never disclosed her conflict of interest (the criminal complaint against me) then she apparently retaliated against me and attempted to issue an order for default in my divorce on 8/16/2013.

DOCUMENT: 2013-08-16 – FM-97-11K – Default Orders

FYI: THIS ORDER FOR DEFAULT WAS NEVER ENFORCED, THE JUDGE WAS RECUSED AND THE ORDER WAS TREATED AS VOID BY JUDGE TOMASELLO.

She ordered I appear in court on 8/19/2013 for a default hearing. This was all very illegal, because there was reason given for the default hearing.

8/18/2013 I was arrested at my home on what appeared to be a lawfully issued warrant for albeit a FRAUDULENT CRIMINAL COMPLAINT BY JUDGE CATHERINE M. FITZPATRICK. The warrant was issued by a friend and colleague of Judge Fitzpatrick, Judge Pedro Jimenez.

The warrant was very odd. My bail was set 150% higher than the state maximum for a third degree terroristic threat.

My bail was set all cash for a third degree charge, even though it is highly unusual and against state practice to have an “ALL CASH BAIL” for a third degree charge.

RegardlesS I POSTED BAIL 8/18/2013

DOCUMENT: 2013-08-18 Bail Recognizance Receipt

RELEASED FROM JAIL AFTER LAWFULLY POSTING BAIL ON 8/18/2013.

…. LITTLE DID I REALIZE I WOULD BE KIDNAPPED THE NEXT DAY!!!

I ARRIVED AT THE FAMILY COURT ON 8/19/2013 WITH MY FRIEND

IMMEDIATELY WE REALIZED SOMETHING WAS STRANGE WHEN MY RELATIVES AND FRIENDS ON THE 4TH FLOOR TOLD US:

My wife and her lawyer were not even in court! I found out later this was because Judge Fitzpatrick’s chambers told THEM (only) not to appear on 8/19/2013. The judge unethically had ex-parte communications (one-party discussions about the case).

WHEN I ARREIVED AT THE COURT ON 8/19/2013:

I was told I was under arrest by sheriff’s officers.

I ASKED THEM WHY I WAS UNDER ARREST – THEY SAID:

“WE’LL TELL YOU LATER”…. THEY NEVER DID.

… EVER SINCE MERCER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE (SHERIFF JACK KEMLER, UNDER-SHERIFF PEDRO MEDINA, AND THEIR MERCER COUNTY OFFICE OF COUNSEL HAVE ATTEMPTED TO OBSTRUCT MY ATTEMPTS TO GET AN EXPLANTION – SEE DOCUMENTS BELOW.

After I was kidnapped by Sheriff’s Officers 8/19/2013. I was handcuffed processed and then sent across town to the criminal courthouse for a first appearance for the 8/18/2013 criminal charges…. this was unlawful as well… because the 8/18/2013 warrant stated that my first appearance was scheduled for 8/20/2013 NOT 8/19/2013… In otherwords I had no legal notice for this “first appearance” / arraignment hearing and no opportunity to have a lawyer

JUDGE PEDRO JIMENEZ – a friend of Judge Fitzpatrick’s presided over my arraignment and immediately amended my arrest warrant without explaining why he was amending it. He presided over the case as a conflicted Judge… 3 months later he was recused from the case after I wrote a letter to the Administrative director of the courts and the Federal Civil Rights Office (DOJ).

During the first appearance hearing Judge Jimenez acted unlawfully and amended my warrant to require me to be sent back to jail, despite the fact the prosecutors office wasn’t present in court. Judge Jimenez acted as the prosecutor and acted without any new evidence being put before the court.

Note: I had posted bail lawfully on 8/18/2013… so there was no justification for amending my bail on 8/19/2013, since I hadn’t violated my bail conditions or committed any new crime!!! Before I could even speak my warrant was “amended” sua sponte on the courts own motion, without any justification given until after I objected. Even then the justification for amending my bail was simply my behavior in court! THAT MAKES NO SENSE… BECAUSE THE AMENDMENT WAS MADE BEFORE I COULD ADDRESS THE COURT – MY BEHAVIOR COULD NOT HAVE BEEN THE REASON FOR AMENDING THE BAIL CONDITIONS.

SEE TRANSCRIPTS HERE:

TRANSCRIPTS OF UNLAWFUL ARRAIGNMENT 2013-08-19 Case #13-2502

JUDGE JIMENEZ VIOLATED HIS OATH AND APPEARS TO HAVE COMMITTED A CRIME BY DENYING ME MY LIBERTY WITHOUT DUE-PROCESS UNDER THE LAW

=============================================

THE FULL STORY & THE EVIDENCE

CLICK THE UNDERLINED DOCUMENTS IN THIS SECTION

TO SEE SOURCE DOCUMENTS

=============================================

(I am only disclosing what I’ve shared with Mercer County I have more evidence than this).

DOCUMENT: 2014-08-18 ARREST WARRANT (REDACTED) ISSUED BY JUDGE PEDRO JIMENEZ

This warrant stated that my first appearance in CRIMINAL COURT would be 8/20/2013… As you’ll see I never had an 8/20/2013 first appearance, instead I was kidnapped by Sheriff’s Officers and denied access to the phone or my lawyer before I was put in front of a criminal court judge on 8/19/2013, without legal notice, or opportunity to have my lawyer present… THIS WAS ILLEGAL.

I lawfully posted a $50,000 ALL CASH bail on 8/18/2013.

Here is my Bail Recognizance Receipt – Showing I lawfully posted bail on 8/18/2013. See that evidence here:

DOCUMENT: 2013-08-18 Bail Recognizance Receipt

8/19/2013 I was ordered to appear in court before Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick. See that court order below.

DOCUMENT: 2013-08-16 – FM-97-11K – ORDER – Default Orders

NOTE: To be clear the appearance before Judge Fitzpatrick was for a Ridiculous Domestic Violence charge by my wife, IT WAS IN NO WAY RELATED TO THE CRIMINAL CHARGES OR MY ARREST ON 8/18/2013.

NOTE: The Domestic Violence case was also a creation of Judge Fitzpatrick and her cronies at court. The case was based on a ridiculous charge by my Wife Margaret Wallace who claimed she was put in fear for her wellbeing because she received that said “Yay I got my Tral Adjourned”. My wife ginned up the charge and it was always ridiculous. Judge Fitzpatrick let the DV charges linger for over 245 days without giving me a hearing. The copies of the text message my wife used for this complaint were covered in white-out – she even whited out the message that said “Happy Birthday Truly” on 12/1/2012… 4 days later my wife claimed i was a domestic violence batterer… I realize now what an idiot I was for even trying to be nice to my wife.

NOTE: The Domestic Violence Charges against me were later dismissed by a different trial judge who said “THIS RESTRAINING ORDER SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ISSUED”.

Proof I was arrested on 8/19/2013 – See the prisoner receipt that indicates I was arrested around 1:35pm on 8/19/2013. See Prisoner Receipt here:

DOCUMENT: Prisoner Receipts and Bail Recognizance – 8/19/2013
SO CLEARLY I WAS “ARRESTED” RIGHT???

WELL NOT ACCORDING TO THE MERCER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE.

SEE THE COUNTY’S OFFICIAL RESPONSE – NO RECORD OF MY ARREST:

DOCUMENT: 2014-06-12 – Mercer County OPRA Response

At this point Mercer County Sheriff’s Office is stuck in a legal quagmire that they created themselves by unlawfully arresting me without a warrant, probable cause, or any criminal charges.

In N.J. a suspect has to be charged and a probable cause determination must be made within 48 hours of an arrest… Mercer County NEVER CHARGED ME WITH ANYTHING… SO THEY ARE NOW TRYING TO PRETEND THEY NEVER ARRESTED ME ON 8/19/2013

EVIDENCE THE CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST ME WERE FRAUDULENT

CASE DISMISSED (SEE LINK BELOW)

After the second unlawful arrest Judge Pedro Jimenez ignored my requests that he explain why I was being arraigned without the prosecutor, my attorney, or legal notice of the 1st appearance… Instead he sent me to Jail and to a Mental Hospital without making any findings supporting the necessity of either. I stayed in Jail OR Hospital for 4 months.

I WAS FOUND TO BE LEGALLY COMPETENT, BUT I NEVER HAD A TRIAL.

I DID EVERYTHING A CONVICT DOES EXCEPT HAVE A TRIAL OR FACE MY ACCUSER.

DOCUMENT: 2014-04-17 – COURT ORDER DISMISSED CRIMINAL CASE

==================================================

NAMES OF MERCER COUNTY OFFICIALS

WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THE ONGOING COVER-UP:

==================================================

PEOPLE APPEAR TO BE TRYING TO COVER UP THE FACT THAT THEY ARRESTED ME AND HELD ME CAPTIVE FOR HOURS WITHOUT A PHONE CALL.

Here is a list of Mercer County Officials & Judiciary Officials who have apparently ignored my over 25 emails, internal affaires complaints, and criminal complaints related to my own kidnapping:

(The officials listed below have knowledge of my kidnapping and/or received letters and emails and confirmed receipt of the same):

Judge Catherine M. Fitzpatrick (Presiding Judge Family Part, who apparently fabricated a criminal complaint against me that was later dismissed. Fitzpatrick also attempted to strip me of my right to represent myself -she did this illegally too and violated court rule 5:3-3 on 6/4/2013 see here:

About (some) Of Judge Fitzpatricks apparent Misconduct:

DOCUMENT: Illegal Court Order Appointing a lawyer for me without my consent, and without a hearing

Reversal of the above referenced order(after I reported Judge Fitzpatrick to appropriate authorities) – SEE BELOW:

DOCUMENT: COURT ORDER REMOVES ILLEGALLY APPOINTED LAWYER – BUT INCLUDES ILLEGAL ORDER FOR A DEFAULT IN MY DIVORCE – THIS ORDER WAS LATER TREATED AS VOID / VACATED

———————————————–

Judge Mary C. Jacobson (Assignment Judge Mercer County).

ABOUT JUDGE JACOBSON’S ALLEGED MISCONDUCT:

(Marry C. Jacobson actually was involved in the criminal investigation for the charges against me in State v. Syphrett, but she continued to act as a Judge handling the case despite this conflict of interest, she continued to consult on my case despite being conflicted through April of 2014)

About Judge Mary C. Jacobson

ACTED AS BOTH JUDGE & WITNESS IN MY CASE!!

DOCUMENT: SHERIFF’S INVESTIGATIVE REPORT – Redacted (2013-08-18)
- MARY C. JACOBSON UNETHICALLY CONTINUED TO ACT AS A JUDGE IN LATER COURT ORDERS – SHE EVEN CONSULTED ON THE CRIMINAL CASE AGAINST ME. SEE COURT ORDERS HERE:

2013-11-22 – ORDER – CASE 13-2502 – Jacobson – Jimenez Recusal2014-01-17 ORDER TRANSFER CIVIL DOCKETS

JUDGE JACOBSON SHOULD HAVE RECUSED HERSELF!!!

MARY JACOBSON NEVER ONCE ADMITTED SHE HAD A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AFTER 8/15/2013, SHE CONTINUED TO HANDLE MY CASES AND CONSULT WHILE OBSCURING THIS INFORMATION FROM ALL PARTIES.

JUDGE JACOBSON ACTED AS JUDGE AND WITNESS IN MY CASE!!!

———————————————–

Judge Pedro Jimenez (Superior Court Judge who held a 1st Appearance without legal notice and violated my constitutional rights)

ABOUT JUDGE JIMENEZ’S ALLEGED OUTRAGEOUS MISCONDUCT:

In Judge Pedro Jimenez fraudulently issues a court order stating I was represented by a public Defender. I wasn’t. See the 8/19/2013 Transcripts & the 8/20/2013 court order below:

DOCUMENT: TRANSCRIPT OF STATE V. SYPHRETT – THE ILLEGAL FIRST APPEARANCE (8/19/2013) – MY RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED, NO MIRANDA, NO PROSECUTOR, NO REASONS FOR HIGH BAIL

DOCUMENT: ILLEGAL & FRAUDULENT COURT ORDER – 8/20/2013

THIS COURT ORDER CONTAINS FALSE INFORMATION – NO PUBLIC DEFENDER HAD BEEN ASSIGNED TO MY CASE IN

JUDGE PEDRO JIMENEZ APPEARS TO HAVE COMMITTED FRAUD – HIS ORDER STATES I HAD A PUBLIC DEFENDER, BUT RECORDS SHOW THAT I NEVER DID (In 2013).

THE TRANSCRIPTS SHOW I REFUSED A PUBLIC DEFENDER!

———————————————–

Det. Paul Toth (Sheriff’s Office)

Sheriff Officer who witnessed my arrest & a cop who was found to have violated an inmates rights in 2012 in State v. Funchess (N.J. Appellate Court).

===================================================

THE REST OF THE SUPPORTING CAST OF DISHONEST/ INCOMPETENT GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES / OFFICIALS:

===================================================

Chief Justice Stuart Rabner (Received Emails & Letters)

Judge Glenn Grant, Acting Director of Courts (Received Emails & Letters)

Judge Ronald E. Bookbinder (Assignment Judge Burlington)
- SEE THE OTHER BLOG POSTS ABOUT JUDGE BOOKBINDER’S UNLAWFUL COURT ORDERS AND COMPLICITY IN COVERING UP THE KIDNAPPING – HE EVEN CONSULTED WITNESSES EX-PARTE ABOUT THE CRIMINAL CASE BEFORE IT WAS DISMISSED.
- JUDGE BOOKBINDER ACTUALLY ISSUED A COURT ORDER BANNING ME FROM ATTENDING MY OWN DIVORCE TRIAL!!!SEE THOSE COURT ORDERS HERE: DOCUMENT: BOOKBINDER – UNLAWFUL COURT ORDERS

I CAN’T RESPECT A JUDGE LIKE BOOKBINDER WHO BREAKS THE LAW AND VIOLATES SUPREME COURT DECISIONS LIKE HAINES V. KERNER (he claimed he wasn’t familiar with it)!

David Merritt, Esq. (Law Clerk to Judge Bookbinder)

NOTES:

David Merritt was initially very courteous when handling my phone calls and he seemed to empathize with the unfair treatment that I was receiving from Judge Bookbinder, which included COURT ORDERS THAT PROHIBITED ME FROM APPEARING IN COURT FOR MY OWN TRIAL DATES (IN MY DIVORCE AN CHILD CUSTODY ACTINS)… but after I posted this blog and reported Judge Bookbinder to the Supreme Court Judicial Conduct Committee, David told me he was instructed to cease taking my phone calls per court order.

7/11/2014 I recorded a call with David, I reminded David that the court order he was citing was NULL & VOID because it violated my due-process rights (my right to be present at my own trial!)… David is a lawyer and should be fully aware that Judge Bookbinder issued a unlawful court order, and that David was effectively participating in a criminal act by enforcing a VOID COURT ORDER. Instead of being ethical and reporting the court’s abuses and damages to myself and my children, David instead decided to knowingly enforce a void court order and ignore the illegal activity that he was enabling.

David seems like a nice guy, but at the end of the day he decided to participate in misconduct rather than stand up for justice. It seems that the Judges likely bullied him into abiding their misconduct

Sheriff Jack Kemler (Mercer County)

Brian Hughes (Mercer County Chief Executive)

Arthur Sypek (Mercer County Office of Counsel)

Kristina Chubenko (Mercer County Office of Counsel)

Anita Ricketts (Mercer County Office of Counsel)

Paul Adezio (Mercer County Office of Counsel)

Joseph Bocchini (Prosecutor)

Michael Nardelli (Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office)

Warden Charles Ellis

Under-sheriff Pedro Medina

Det. Paul Toth (Mercer County Sheriff’s)

Jennifer Weisberg-Millner – (My wife’s Divorce Lawer. She also violated a court order and distributed my money from her escrow account in violation of a court order, I alleged that this was theft by deceiption, because she did not initially provide me with statements for the distributions of my money, which were larger than what was ordered by the court – I reported this to the Lawrenceville Police, who did nothing).

PROOF JENNIFER MILLNER DISTRIBUTED MORE MONEY THAN SHE WAS ALLOWED TO BY LAW:

2011-05-16 – Jennifer Millner Caught Distributing My Money – violates court order

Sharyn Sherman (Burlington County Court)

Laura Oliver, Esq (Law Clerk to Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick) – Laura helped write void court orders / was complicit with the act on 8/16/2013 when Judge Fitzpatrick should have been recused.

Judge John Call (Presiding Judge of Burlington Count Family Part) – He has allowed Judge Tomasello to continue a pattern of retaliation against me for speaking out and reporting judicial Misconduct.

John Munoz, Esq (Law Clerk to Judge Covert) – NICE KID THOUGH SERIOUSLY.

NOTES:

John was extremely professional during phone calls so I feel bad putting him on the Wall of Shame, because he at least said he understood my frustration and that I was simply fighting to enforce my rights.

Still John watched as my criminal case was dismissed in a fashion that should have raised red flags to any competent lawyer interested in Justice.

Again rather than report the Judges or attempt to help me John instead decided that his career aspirations are more important than my rights or my children’s rights, etc.
John is on this list not because he is a bad guy, but because if I were him I would be ashamed…

===============================================

PLEASE SHARE THIS STORY WITH YOUR FRIENDS, THE MEDIA, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

===============================================

THE PUBLIC ATTENTION TO MY KIDNAPPING WILL BE THE ONLY WAY THAT I WILL EVER GET TRUE JUSTICE….

WE CAN NOT ALLOW OUR GOVERNMENT TO BELIEVE THEY CAN KIDNAP US WITHOUT ANY CONSEQUENCES!

MY CURRENT POSITION ON THE MATTER:

==========================

TAKE NOTICE:

ALL NEW ARTICLES APPEAR BELOW THIS PERMANENT POST

==========================

JUDGE RONALD E. BOOKBINDER VIOLATES THE LAW

Standard

MY REASONS FOR FIGHTING FOR MY RIGHTS
CITATIONS OF “THE LAW” SUPPORTING MY POSITION

MY REASONS:

I AM PUSHING THE ISSUE, BECAUSE AT THIS POINT, THE ABUSE HAS GONE WAY TO FAR, AND

IF I DON’T STAND UP FOR MYSELF THEY WILL MOST ASSUREDLY HAVE ME JAILED FOR NOT PAYING (“ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS”) CHILD SUPPORT + ARREARS.

I MAY NEVER SEE MY CHILDREN AGAIN IF I DON’T

MY POINT TO JUDGE BOOKBINDER CONTINUES TO BE:

1. JUDGE BOOKBINDER’S COURT ORDERS ARE _LEGALLY
2. JUDGE TOMASELLO’S FINAL ORDERS ARE NULL AND VOID AS THEY SIT (pursuant “The Law”)

I NEVER HAD A TRIAL THAT “APPEARED FAIR” OR THAT WAS CONSISTENT WITH COURT RULES OR PROCEDURE! As many of you are aware in response to how my divorce “trial” and the civil restraints of Judge Bookbinder I have declared all final orders in my matrimonial and domestic violence matters to be LEGALLY NULL AND VOID, due to the failure of the court to abide by my constitutionally protected rights to due process / litigation privileges / first amendment rights, and right to access the court.

Notably:

1) Ronald E. Bookbinder violated Judicial Canons 2A, 2B, 3A(1), and 3A(6) in his handling of my matters. In fact he continued to violate canon 3A(6) with the sending of the attached letter as he did not copy all the interested parties to the captioned cases the letter purports to address (including Mercer County Prosecutor’s office, and Kathryn Bischoff).

2) *The civil restraints issued on 2/6/2014, 2/11/2014, 2/19/2014, 3/10/2014, and 3/11/2014:*_*restrained me from such activities including (SEE CITATIONS BELOW)

A)*RESTRAINED FROM: Appearing in court, without “express permission of a Superior Court Judge”.

These restraints in the prima facie thereby restrained me from appearing
in court for my own trial dates:

When I didn’t appear ex-parte trial and testimony were permitted, thereby:
creating void court orders in all my legal matters. This portion of the civil restraint order violated:

United States Constitution Bill of Rights, Amendments: 1, 9, and 14

(i) 1st Amendment: congress (sole legislator of the law per constitution), shall pass no law abridging free speech of a citizen

(ii) 9th Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, SHALL NOT be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”

(iii) 14th Amendment: One of the two due process clauses in the bill of rights. (note due process is the only right mentioned twice in the Bill of Rights).
Partial quotation includes

“No State SHALL abridge any privileges or immunities of Citizens of the United States, nor SHALL any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”

B) RESTRAINED FROM: Communicating with the court in any way contrary to the court rules. This restraint violated my constitutional rights, litigation privileges as a citizen, and binding common-law of the U.S. Supreme Court, Federal Courts, 3r circuit & N.J. including:
(a) A SLEW OF BINDING PRECEDENTS PROTECTING THE RIGHTS OF PRO SE LITIGANTS DECIDED BY the U.S. Supreme Court, Federal Courts, 3r circuit & N.J. including:

(i) Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972);

(ii) Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway , (151 F2d. 240) Third Circuit Court of Appeals. In Picking , the plaintiffs civil rights was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as “inept.” Nevertheless, it was held: Where a plaintiff pleads pro-se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the court should endeavor to construe plaintiffs pleading without regard to technicalities.

(ii) Todaro v. Bowman, 872 F.2d 43, 44 n. 1 (3d Cir. 1989);

Findings of Todaro Court: As a pro se litigant Todaro is held to less stringent pleading standards and we will afford him a liberal interpretation of our procedural rules. We will, therefore, consider the first amendment claim as properly before us. (iv) McTeague v. Sosnowski, 617 F.2d 1016, 1019 (3d Cir.1980).

(v) Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365, 102 S.Ct. 700, 70 L.Ed.2d 551 (1982);

 FURTHER THIS RESTRAINT:violated my constitutional rights (1st Amendment Rights), litigation privileges as a citizen, and binding common-law of 
the U.S. Supreme Court, Federal Courts, 3r circuit & N.J. including:

(a) Elrod v. Burns, 427 US 347 – 1976 – ‎Supreme Court (a great first amendment case from 1976)

NOTE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT FINDINGS IN Elrod v. Burns: pursuant Buckley v. Valeo:

(i) Supreme Court Finding:Though First Amendment rights are not absolute, they may be curtailed only byinterests of vital importance, the burden of proving the existence of which rests upon the government
See Also: Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S., 94,1

(ii) Relevance to Judge Bookbinder’s Civil: Judge Bookbinder has shifted the burden of proof from the court to the Defendant, and restrained my first amendment rights without producing any evidence, witnesses, or satisfying a burden of proof prior to restraining my 1^st Amendment rights and litigation privileges during active trials.

(b)Buckley v. Valeo,424 U.S. 94 1 (A Great 1^st Amendment Case)
THIS RESTRAINT FURTHER INTERFERED WITH MY LITIGATION PRIVILEGES AS RECONGNIZED IN THESE BINDING PRECEDENTS IN N.J.:

(k) Loigman v. Township Committee of Tp. of Middletown, 185 N.J. 566, 579–80 (2006).
(l) Rickenbach v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 635 F. Supp. 2d 389 (D.N.J. 2009)

Finding: Noting that litigation privilege has broad application to nearly all tort claims except claims for malicious prosecution). comments from:By Karen Painter Randall – December 11, 2012 – ABA Article

(m) Hawkins v. Harris, 141 N.J. 207 (1995):

With this broad application in hand, New Jersey Courts have firmly established that the privilege applies to “any communication: (1) made in judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings; (2) by litigants or other participants authorized by law; (3) to achieve the objects of the litigation; and (4) that have some connection or logical relation to the action.” (By Karen Painter Randall – December 11, 2012 – ABA

Mercer County Sheriff’s Office KIDNAPPING OF DEREK SYPHRETT 8/19/2013

Standard

BELOW IS A EMAILED LETTER I SENT WITH ATTACHED DOCUMENTS PROVING THAT I WAS KIDNAPPED BY SHERIFF’S OFFICERS ON 8/19/2013.

SOME BACKGROUND FACTS RE: FALSE CHARGES, A ARREST, & A KIDNAPPING:

STATEMENT OF FACT:

1) On 8/9/2013 Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick claimed alleged that her law clerk received a “Terroristic Threat” via an email to her law Clerk Laura Oliver, it is purported but not confirmed that the email was sent by Derek Syphrett for the purposes of threatening Judge Fitzpatrick (the accusation has repeatedly been denied by Derek Syphrett, as the email was not sent to Judge Fitzpatrick, and the prosecutor’s discovery show’s the email is devoid of ANY explicit threat of violence).

2) 8/14/2013 Catherine Fitzpatrick in her individual capacity initiated a criminal investigation and Det. Paul Toth was assigned to investigate the incident.

3) 8/15/2013 Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick, P.J.F.P. met with Paul Toth & Judge Mary C. Jacobson Met with Det. Paul toth as part of his “criminal investigation”

4) Neither Judge Fitzpatrick or Judge Jacobson recused themselves from my civil matters pending in their court – neither would recuse themselves formally for the next 8 months, although my civil cases were eventually transferred out of Mercer County on about 1/17/2014.

5) 8/16/2013 Judge Fitzpatrick sat on the bench in my civil matters FV-11-625-13 AND FM-11-97-13, she then issued orders for default trials to be held in both matters without a basis in the law, and without revealing she was participating in a criminal investigation adverse to my interests. Her orders were later treated as void by Judge Tomasello, he actually orally ordered them vacated.

6) 8/18/2013 I was arrested on a warrant at my house for charges that appeared fraudulent and for charges that ultimately were dismissed pre-trial on 4/17/2014. Note the complaining witness was Judge Fitzpatrick, via a third-party complaintant Paul Toth, and the Warrant was issued by a colleague of the purported victim Pedro Jimenez (a conflict of interest, which later resulted in the recusal of Judge Jimenez from the case, but only after he set my bail at 150% of the state maximum, and his recusal occurred after he fraudulently claimed that a public defender had been assigned to my case on 8/20/2013 – when in fact, this never occurred).

7) 8/18/2013 I posted bail and was released from Mercer County Jail. Notably I posted a $50,000, ALL CASH bail for a third degree charge, despite the state maximum in the state guidelines for a third degree charge being $20,000 with 10% permissable, unless extraordinary circumstances are put on the record (which in my case they were not).

8) There was no warrant for my arrest, no probable cause explanation provided, no bail condition violations, and no criminal charges ever issued with relation to this kidnapping, under the color of law.

9) When I was released from Burlington County Jail (Again note my criminal case State v. Syphrett was transferred from Mercer County after I wrote the court about my concerns of misconduct)… I contacted the Mercer County Sheriff’s Office and Under-Sheriff Pedro Medina, He said he would look into the circumstances around my 8/19/2013 arrest. When I followed up with him in 1/2014, he became notably upset and refused to provide me any information about the circumstances of my arrest.

10) I subpoenaed the the Sheriff’s Office (Jack Kemler), Paul Toth, etc for information and documents related to the circumstances surrounding my 8/19/2013 arrest, The MERCER COUNTY OFFICE OF COUNSEL THEN INFORMED ME THERE IS NO RECORD OF MY ARREST ON 8/19/2013!!!! … NOTABLY UNDER N.J. STATUTE AND O.P.R.A. THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING ANY ARREST ARE PUBLIC RECORDS, IN THIS CASE THERE IS NO RECORD, AND AS A RESULT IT APPEARS I WAS KIDNAPPED BY SHERIFF’S OFFICER WHO MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN HELPING A SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE RETALIATE AGAINST ME BECAUSE I REPORTED HER TO THE A.C.J.C.

ABOUT THE APPARENTLY CORRUPT OFFICIALS

DETAILS:

Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick is/was a subject in numerous state & federal investigations in part because she repeatedly violated my rights during a divorce. She had been retaliating against me for about 2 years prior to my decision to report her to court officials including Judge Glenn Grant, J.A.D. (Acting Director of the Courts). She remains a judge today, despite stripping me of visitation without a plenary hearing, and attempting to silence me by appointing a Guardian Ad Litem and court appointed order without a hearing – a violation of my constitutional rights and court rule 5:3-3.

Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick: had been retaliating against me for about 2 years prior to my decision to report her to court officials including Judge Glenn Grant, J.A.D. (Acting Director of the Courts). She remains a judge today, despite stripping me of visitation without a plenary hearing, and attempting to silence me by appointing a Guardian Ad Litem and court appointed order without a hearing – a violation of my constitutional rights and court rule 5:3-3.

8/14/2013 Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick alleged that I sent an 8/9/2013 email containing a threat against her life / wellbeing. She began participating in a criminal investigation on 8/14/2013. NOTE THESE CHARGES WOULD LATER BE DISMISSED AFTER BEING DOWNGRADED FROM FELONY TO A MISDEMEANOR – I WA.S NEVER PROVIDED A TRIAL, BUT I WAS JAILED FOR 4 MONTHS ON FALSE ALLEGATIONS, AND AFTER BEING KIDNAPP

I NEVER SENT AN EMAIL TO JUDGE FITZPATRICK
THE EMAIL USED IN THE PROSECUTOR’S DISCOVERY – CONTAINED NO DEATH THREAT OR VIOLENT THREAT AT ALL.
NO INVESTIGATOR EVER ASKED ME IF I SENT AN EMAIL OR THREATENED THE JUDGE … EVER
NOBODY EVER AUTHENTICATED THE EMAIL EVIDENCE TO AFFIRM THAT I IN FACT SENT IT

~8/15/2013 Judge Mary C. Jacobson, A.J.S.C. and Judge Fitzpatrick both participated in a criminal investigation. This is notable because neither Judge Recused themselves from my legal matters, and in fact on 8/16/2013 Judge Fitzpatrick issued orders for default in my divorce and a domestic violence case (that was also a fraud – it was later dismissed by a different judge in a Burlington County – That judge (Judge John Tomasello) refused to allow me to be heard in order to cover up for Judge Fitzpatrick).

8/16/2013 Judge Fitzpatrick ACTED AS A JUDGE IN MY DIVORCE AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE STATUS HEARING – WITHOUT MENTIONING THAT SHE HAD BECOME PARTY TO AN OPENED LEGAL MATTER – A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. SHE ISSUED ORDERS FOR DEFAULT IN MY DIVORCE AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HEARING WITHOUT ME PRESENT AND DESPITE THE FACT MY COURT APPOINTED COUNSEL (RECOGNIZING HE’D BEEN APPOINTED ILLEGALLY – ASKED TO WITHDRAW FROM THE CASE DUE TO CONFLICTS OF INTERST) – IN OTHER WORDS I WAS NOT REPRESENTED AT THE HEARING…. AND THE JUDGE WAS A LEGAL ADVERSARY!

8/16/2013 Detective Paul Toth of Mercer County Sheriff’s Office met with the 1st Prosecutor and they decided to charge me with a felony threat to kill, despite the fact that no such threat existed. THIS IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE, BECAUSE THE CHARGES WERE LATER DISMISSED BY THE SAME PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE AND NO INDICTMENT WAS EVER SOUGHT BY Assistant Prosecutor Michael Nardelli (In fact he told my Lawyer John F. Rooney, that he never believed he could get an indictment, yet I sat in Jail or Hospital for 4 Months).DETECTIVE TOTH HAS VIOLATED THE LAW IN THE PAST: See State v. Funchess (2012) A conviction was overturned because of Det. Paul Toth’s conduct.

8/18/2013 I was arrested on a warrant which was issued based upon an apparently false claim made by Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick, P.J.F.P.

THE WARRANT: Was issued by a colleague of Judge Fitzpatrick, Judge Pedro Jimenez. (He was later recused from the case after I was kidnapped).

THE WARRANT STATED: My bail was $50,000 NO 10% (OR ALL CASH) 150% HIGHER THAN STATE GUIDELINES WITH NO FINDINGS SUPPORTING IT, THIS VIOLATED PRECEDENT IN NEW JERSEY (SEE: State v. Johnson, State v. Fajardo-Santos).

THE WARRANT STATED: My first appearance was to be 8/20/2013… I instead was kidnapped 8/19/2013 and denied counsel, the prosecutor wasn’t present, and Judge Jimenez claimed to Amend my warrant – AFTER I HAD PURPORTEDLY BEEN ARRESTED ON 8/19/2013… A JUDGE CAN’T DO THAT. I CAN’T BE ARRESTED ON A WARRANT THAT DIDN’T EXIST / HAD BEEN SATISFIED ALREADY – YET I WAS.

8/18/2013 I POSTED BAIL AND WAS RELEASED FROM MERCER COUNTY CORRECTIONS FACILITY

8/19/2013: I WAS KIDNAPPED / PURPORTEDLY “ARRESTED” WITHOUT ANY WARRANT, CRIMINAL CHARGES, PROBABLE CAUSE FINDING, OR A TRIAL)

8/19/2013: I was detained for over 2 hours without a phone call, handcuffed, read Miranda and told I was under arrest. When I asked why, the Sheriff’s Officers said they’d tell me later… THEY NEVER DID. When I asked to be given a valid warrant for my arrest, they said they’d get me one later -THEY NEVER DID.

8/19/2013: I was transported to another courthouse for a “first appearance” on 8/19/2013. THIS FIRST APPEARANCE OCCURRED WITHOUT ANY LEGAL NOTICE – RECALL THE WARRANT STATED MY FIRST APPEARANCE WOULD BE 8/20/2013. I HAD NO OPPORTUNITY TO GET A LAWYER BEFORE THIS UNSCHEDULED FIRST APPEARANCE

8/19/2013: before Judge Jimenez. When I asked him why I had been arrested a 2nd time he refused to answer. Instead he started the proceeding by saying “I am going to amend your warrant now”… effectively admitting I’d just been arrested without a warrant.

SINCE MY KIDNAPPING: I HAVE GIVEN RECORDS TO THE F.B.I. NON-PROFITS, AND MEDIA – THE SHERIFF’S OFFICE CONTINUES TO DENY I WAS ARRESTED DESPITE THE FACT I HAVE ARREST RECORDS AND SO DOES THE FBI

I HAVE RECORDS THAT CLAIM TO BE ARREST RECORDS: I’ve sent them to the F.B.I. U.S. Attorney’s Office and multiple politicians & the media.

==============================================

BELOW IS A LETTER / EMAIL I SENT

DETAILING MY OUTRAGE AND CONCERN

==============================================

INSERTED COMMENTS – INTRO TO LETTER SENT FOR EXPLANATION OF MY KIDNAPPING.

[ LETTER SENT TO:

Chief Justice Stuart Rabner, Warden Charles Ellis, Judge Ronald Bookbinder, Judge Glenn Grant, Judge John Call, Sharyn Sherman, Arthur Sypek, Kristina Chubenko, Brian Hughes, Prosecutor Joseph Bocchini, Asst. Prosecutor Michael Nardelli, Under-Sheriff Medina, etc. Collectively members of Mercer County Executive Offices, Mercer County Sheriff’s Office, New Jersey Superior Court, New Jersey Supreme Court, Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office, and Mercer County Corrections. SHERIFF JACK KEMLER (A PENSION DOUBLE DIPPER)

I also sent O.P.R.A. requests because the circumstances of all arrests are public information.

They’ve responded to say they have no record of my arrest so: I GUESS THAT MAKES IT A KIDNAPPING & NOT A FALSE ARREST THEN!

THE PUBLIC CAN EMAIL THESE FINE PEOPLE TOO

I’VE INCLUDED THEIR EMAIL ADDRESSES SO THAT YOU MAY MAKE YOUR OWN PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST ]

==============================================

ORIGINAL EMAIL POSTED HERE:

==============================================

To: policeaccountability@njlp.org, “Medina, Pedro” <pmedina@mercercounty.org>, “Toth, Paul” <ptoth@mercercounty.org>, mnardelli@mercercounty.org, jbocchini@mercercounty.org
CC: glenn.grant@judiciary.state.nj.us, Chubenko, Kristina <kchubenko@mercercounty.org>, Kemler, Jack <jkemler@mercercounty.org>, Jennifer Millner <JMillner@foxrothschild.com>, bhughes@mercercounty.org, jeanne.covert@judiciary.state.nj.us, pedro.jimenez@judiciary.state.nj.us [EDITED TO REMOVE EMAILS FOR STATE AND FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS]

Prosecutor Bochini & Police Accountability Project:

I have communicated my concerns and supplied complaints via fax to the prosecutors office from 12/24/2013 to present.

I have yet to receive an official written response from the Mercer County Prosecutors Office.

I respectfully request the Mr. Bocchini follow-up with me in writing with regard to the complaints that I’ve sent to your attention with regard to the unlawfull seizure of my person and property on 8/19/2013. Given that there is no arrest record, but that their are witnesses, including myself to officers telling me that I was under arrest on 8/19/2013, without ever explaining the reason and without presenting a warrant at anytime for an arrest to be executed on 8/19/2013, there is clearly and convincingly an issue of police / sheriff’s office abuse of authority, crimes under the color of law.

In January I called the Prosecutor and was told my complaint was assigned to Michael Nardelli, the same prosecutor handing State v. Syphrett. He later told my lawyer and myself this was not true.

I request a formal written response with regard to the seizure of my person that occurred on 8/19/2013 at around 1:35pm at 175 S. Broad Street. At that time there was no warrant for my arrest and there was no first appearance scheduled with legal notice to myself, yet I was arrested, put in a holding cell at 400 Warren Street, and denied a phone call for over 2 hours, then I was taken to a first appearance on 8/19/2013, without counsel, without notice, and my bail was set above state guidelines without fact finding supporting it. Most incredibly my bail was set at $50,000, despite the fact I’d already lawfully posted bail and met all bail conditions on 8/18/2013.

The bottom line here is that:

The public can accept an aggressive police force, but we can not and should not ever accept a policing agency to disregard the law or a citizens rights.

The Mercer County Sherriff’s had no right to violate my person on 8/19/2013 and create symptoms that my doctors and family have commented are similar to those of rape victims.

I was physically and emotionally violated and I expect a full investigation and findings to be provided to me.

Please accept this as my formal request for the same. I will not relent requesting investigative action or publicity with regard to what is an outrageous abuse of power by Mercer County officials.

A pillar of our justice system is that wrongs SHALL be righted by the administrators of justice. I demand you fulfill this common-law / oath related obligation or be held legally accountable for failing to do so – as complicity with civil rights violations is not covered by qualified immunity under U.S.C. 42 1986 (complicity with interference in civil rights violations).

Further given that I was denied access to my trial at the Family Part on 8/19/2013 because of my false arrest, my constitutional right to access the court was also violated on 8/19/2013.

Kind regards,

Derek Syphrett

ANOTHER EMAIL SENT EARLIER TO SAME PEOPLE:

Dear Police Accountability Project:

I need your help, and your public intervention in a matter that is clearly and convincingly an abuse of the law by the Mercer County Sheriff’s Office and several Sheriff’s Officers, including Det. Paul Toth.

INTRODUCTION:

Please see the attachments related to a “kidnapping” under the color of law that occurred on 8/19/2013 at 175 S. Broad Street New Jersey. I have several civilian witnesses to this kidnapping / false arrest.

I will shortly send you the emails between myself and the Mercer County Sheriff’s Office and the Mercer County Office of Counsel (lawyers representing the Sheriff’s Office).

What you will see is a pattern of evasiveness with regard to a purported kidnapping on 8/19/2013. Notably we can not call my 8/19/2013 kidnapping a purported “arrest”, because the Sheriff’s Office has now claimed there is no arrest record and there was no arrest on 8/19/2013 at about 1:35pm.

The F.B.I. completed an investigation into this matter and has referred the matter to the D.O.J. and U.S. Attorney for further prosecution – which is not assured, but with the appropriate public involvement I believe that the D.O.J. will do take the path less traveled and prosecute this matter as the evidence according the F.B.I. Special Agent is convincing to the F.B.I.

Luckily, the F.B.I. has informed me that I am not “alone” and that they are continuing to pursue prosecution of my claim.

REQUEST: Would you please make a O.P.R.A. request regarding my arrest in this matter. The identifying case number, warrant etc are contained in the attachments to this email.

SUMMARY OF CORE ISSUE:

I appeared in court on 8/19/2013 for a scheduled court date in a civil matter FV-11-625-13 by court order of Judge Fitpatrick

I was told I was “under arrest” in the lobby of the Family Court at 175 S. Broad Street.

I asked why I was under arrest, and the Sheriff’s Officers responded “we’ll tell you later” … THEY NEVER DID

I asked if there was a warrant for my arrest … they said they’d get one to me latter … THEY NEVER DID

I informed them I posted bail on 8/18/2013 for a criminal charge filed by Judge Fitzpatrick and produced my bail receipt

One or more of the officers from my 8/18/2013 arrest, was present at the 8/19/2013 kidnapping / false arrest, I believe it was Paul Toth – a man with dark hair. He did nothing to protect my rights, despite the fact I had lawfully posted bail from the 8/18/2013 arrest.

I was handcuffed and miranda was read, and a miranda form was filled out by one of the 4 Officers that escorted me into the court elevator down to the holding cells below the court

When I arrived inthe Criminal Court at 400 Warren Street, I demanded Judge Pedro Jimenez produce a warrant – he produced only a warrant for my 8/18/2013 arrest – a warrant I’d already fully satisfied by posting bail on 8/18/2013 – when I was released from Merer County Corrections! I was arrested again on 8/19/2013 despite satisfying the attached warrant.

WITNESSES:
The witnesses include A. A., S. C., and D.C. – all of which where present at the Family Part Courthouse (175 S. Broad Street, Trenton) at about 1:35pm on 8/19/2013 where I was kidnapped under the color of law by Mercer County Sheriff’s officers.

I can provide phone numbers and affadavits from the witnesses upon your request.

STATEMENT OF FACT:

2) 8/14/2013 Catherine Fitzpatrick in her individual capacity initiated a criminal investigation and Det. Paul Toth was assigned to investigate the incident.

3) 8/15/2013 Judge Catherine Fitzpatrick, P.J.F.P. met with Paul Toth & Judge Mary C. Jacobson Met with Det. Paul toth as part of his “criminal investigation”

CONCLUSION:

Given that I was arrested by no less than 4 Sheriff’s Officers, and that no less than 7 Officers became involved in the kidnapping, and purported processing of my “arrest” I believe this event represents an act of:

1) official misconduct (N.J.S.A. 2C:30-2)
2) violation of Federal Statutes
3) U.S.C. 18, Section 241, (Deprivation of Civil Rights)
4) U.S.C. 42, Section 1985 (Conspiracy to Interfere with Civil Rights)
5) Federal Civil R.I.C.O. – Notably I or a attorney of my choosing can prosecut Federal R.I.C.O. with assistance from the U.S. Government

Given this email and my prior email, I am sure you can see that I am getting the “Jersey” treatment from local officials and it appears that the only way to get anything resembling justice will be to expose these people to public scrutiny.

I attempted to resolve this matter privately, with private requests for internal investigations, and private requests for the officers to take remedial action, but instead such civil requests have been met with an arrogance and willful disregard for lawful conduct, that I at this point feel that it is time to involve the public and the media.

Thank you for your assistance,

Derek C. Syphrett

cc: F.B.I.
cc: D.O.J.
cc: Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office – Prosecutor Nardelli (Please respond to the criminal complaint I sent to your attention with regard to these concerns).

P.S.

(1) Chief Justice Rabner and Glenn Grant became personally involved in my case as was noted during status hearings in:

[PUBLIC RECORDS:]

Burlington County System# 13-950-01 / Mercer County Case File: 1111-W2013-002897 / Police Case #13-026677 / Mercer County Prosecutor’s File: 13-2502

(2) Notably Judge Jacobson, a witness for the State per the “Investigative Report”, denoted as being for Incident # I-2013-02776. DESPITE BEING A WITNESS FOR THE STATE – JUDGE JACOBSON CONTINUED TO CONSULT ON MY BAIL CONDITIONS AND ISSUE ORDERS IN STATE V. SYPHRETT – WHEN SHE CLEARLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN RECUSED!!!

EARLIER EMAIL SENT TO MERCER COUNTY OFFICES

——– Original Message ——–

Subject: RE: Discovery Follow-up – Derek Syphrett
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 18:52:24 -0500
From: Derek Syphrett <dsyphrett@gmail.com>
To: asypek@mercercounty.org, kchubenko@mercercounty.org, aricketts@mercercounty.org (COUNTY OFFICE OF COUNSEL)

Hello Mr. Sypek, Esq. and Ms. Chubenko, Esq.:

===========================
ATTACHMENTS:
===========================
1. Court Order 1/17/2014 – Recusal of All Mercer County Judges – Transfer Order

2. My Letter Brief / Petition to Chief Justice Rabner, Grant, et. al. – pursuant Court Rule 1:33 (broadly construed per the doctrine of the “civil liberal construct”)

3. Letter / Petition for Relaxation of Petition Format Rules ((broadly construed per the doctrine of the “civil liberal construct” / NJ Constitution Article 1. Par. 18)

===========================

Thank you for sending part of the discovery I requested via email last week.

I need to follow-up again, because as I informed Anita Ricketts via email my Mercer County Civil Matters have been transferred to Burlington County by Assignment Judge Mary C. Jacobson, pursuant to my Court Rule 1:33 petition to her honor, Judge Glenn Grant, J.A.D. – Acting Director of Court Administration, and Chief Justice Stuart J. Rabner – New Jersey Supreme Court.

It now appears my court date in Burlington county will be sooner than later.

More importantly:

I am VERY concerned with regard to what remains lacking from the discovery provided – specifically:

1. The name of the Sheriff’s Officer whom was dispatched to my home does not appear in any of the discovery documents.

Concern: I must presume a record of the same must exist as the Sheriff’s Office is known to have a dispatch log and it would not be prudent to dispatch officers without making a record of the same.

2. I still have not received any new information from regarding my 8/19/2013 at ~1:30pm “ARREST” (Sheriff’s Officers words as my witness will testify to).

Concern: My power(s) of attorney and myself have requested this information directly from the sheriff’s dept, clerk, Under-Sheriff Medina, Sheriff Kemler, Det. Paul Toth, and Sgt. Barton for over 2 months now.

Concern: Given the highly unusual circumstances that I know to exist related to the “ARREST” such as:

(a) There was no valid warrant for that arrest
(b) There was no probable cause provided when requested 8/19/2013, or anytime thereafter
(c) There was no violation of any existing Bail Condition
(d) I had already lawfully posted bail
(e) My arraignment wasn’t scheduled until 8/20/2013
(f) I was arraigned without any legal notice or opportunity to seek counsel before the critical stage of a criminal proceeding that included bail setting / bail modification
(g) I have transcripts that prove the 8/18/2013 arrest warrant WAS NOT amended prior to my arrest on 8/19/2013
(h) There are other details I do not wish to share at this time that I have evidence of.

Concern #2: I am concerned that Your Office has not provided even basic information AND that your office Ms. Chubenko has stated that you need to “review” the basic information regarding my discovery requests (including basic information that I and the public are entitled to pursuant previously cited state statutes).

In other words, given the fact that these issue are being investigated by the federal government, AND given that multiple Judges have now been recused from further involvement due to the appearance of a tainted process, AND given the allusive and evasive responses from the Sheriff’s Department, I have reasonable concerns that there is an attempt to “cover-up”, “mislead”, or obstruct my discovery of the truth (my arrest was a violation of constitutionally protected rights and I was denied due process and my basic dignity by a Sheriff’s Office that has a history of violating my rights / assisting others in violating my rights at the direction, or with the involvement of Judges in Mercer County.

REQUEST FOR FOLLOW-UP:

Please advise me when I can receive discovery of the aforementioned documentation / records.

Please also share any and all discovery with my criminal defense lawyer John F. Rooney, Esq as we’re both trying to obtain this information.

Note:
Obviously IF the prosecutors office decides to prosecute the cr iminal case #2502 or indict it (which they have not done in 5-months), THEN Mr. Rooney will receive discovery from the Prosecutors office. In the meantime your office appears to be the most expedient available option for both my lawyer and myself to receive discovery for the criminal matter (which my lawyer handles) and the civil matter (where I am pro se).

Lastly Please Understand:

I am sorry to be compelled to communicate in a high frequency manner and I hope I am not inconveniencing you or your office.

That said I would hope you can understand I am VERY concerned and upset that it appears I was arrested illegally and that my rights were thoroughly violated by both the Sheriff’s Office and the Judge Jimenez (who has now been recused from this matter).

This has been a very traumatic experience that impacted all aspects of my life, my finances, my family, their finances, and my personal relationships with my children.

I am therefore left with no option but to be persistent and to employ any and all civil and legal means of recourse until the questions / requests I’ve made are appropriately answered.

Thank you kindly for your anticipated prompt response to these issues.

I appreciate that we have an opportunity to resolve this matter amiably and I would greatly appreciate your courtesy in that regard (I assure I will remain courteous and respectful throughout the process, regardless of the ultimate ends).

Kind Regards,

Derek Syphrett

=====================================================

CONCLUSION:

If you would like to contact me for source documents feel free to email me at sd@00060@gmail.com.

I have clear and convincing Evidence I was kidnapped, and the Mercer County Sheriff’s Office is covering it up!.

IF YOU NEED TO REPORT COURT CORRUPTION IN NEW JERSEY VISIT THESE WEBSITES:

http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/acjc/how_to_file_complaint.htm

http://www.fclu.org

http://www.fbi.gov

http://newjersey.watchdog.org/

@BobIngle99 (Twitter: Author of the “Soprano State”)

#FamilyCourt (Twitter)

	William O’Malley on THE FAMILY COURT REVOLUTION WI…
	courtreformer4change on THE FAMILY COURT REVOLUTION WI…
	courtreformer4change on THE FAMILY COURT REVOLUTION WI…
	courtreformer4change on THE FAMILY COURT REVOLUTION WI…
	Marc Weber on THE FAMILY COURT REVOLUTION WI…

MEDIA TAKES NOTICE:

NJ PARENTS PLAN PROTEST AT THEIR BILLBOARD IN TRENTON RESCHEDULED TO OCT. 22 NEAR FEDERAL COURT HOUSE (State & Canal Street)

SEE TRENTONIAN NEWSPAPER ARTICLE BELOW FOR DETAILS:

REPRINTED ARTICLE FROM THE TRENTONIAN NEWSPAPER

AFTER AWAKENING FROM

BENIGN ACCEPTANCE OF CORRUPTION

IN NJ:

I REPORTED THE FOLLOWING CRIMES

TO THE FBI

SEE THE LETTER COMPLAINTS HERE:

WHEN A MAN IS STRIPPED OF HIS RIGHTS& CHOICE

…HE WILL MAKE THE ONLY CHOICE AVAILABLE

…HE WILL FIGHT

“I am ashamed to say it, but I am still optimistically (without good cause) hoping for justice and the right to my pursuit of happiness, liberty, and freedom…. with my beloved Children.”

LETTER TO THE SUPREME COURT HERE

COPY OF VOID COURT ORDERS BY

ASSIGNMENT JUDGE RONALD E. BOOKBINDER HERE

COPY OF JUDGE JIMENEZ FRAUDULENT COURT ORDERS & TRANSCRIPTS HERE

COPY OF PROOFS THAT JUDGE MARY C. JACOBSON ISSUED TRANSFER ORDERS WITHOUT FACT FINDING IN ORDERS, AND DESPITE THE FACT SHE WAS A PARTICIPANT IN THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION RELATED TO ONE OF THE CASES

HERE:

JOHN TOMASELLO ISSUES FALSE FACTS IN OPINION

JOHN TOMASELLO ISSUES FINAL ORDER FOR CUSTODY BASED ON STATEMENTS ATTRIBUTED TO PEOPLE WHO WERE NEVER WITNESSES NOR APPEARED IN COURT

HERE:

JUDGE DEBELLO

INAPPROPRIATE SEXUAL OVERTURES , REPRIMAND BY SUPREME COURT &

ALLEGED OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT:

HEY LADIES, DEBELLO SPECIALIZES IN SEXUALLY INAPPROPRIATE ACTIVITY:

YOU SHOULD PROBABLY ASK FOR RECUSAL IF YOU ARE A WOMAN!’

SEE FULL PETITION TO SUPREME COURT, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURT, COURT CLERK

WITH EXHIBITS DETAILING SOME OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS HERE:

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE

(Pursuant: New Jersey State Constitution Article I, Par. 18;

Pursuant: Haines v. Kerner U.S. Supreme Court 1972; &

Binding Common-Law within this Jurisdiction)

PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES,

PURSUANT: NEW JERSEY STATE CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE I, et seq.

&

WRIT OF MANDAMUS, IN LIEU OF WRIT, LEGAL BRIEF

WRIT OF HAEBEAS CORPUS, FOR BENJAMIN AND VANESSA SYPHRETT

I demand by operation of the Common-Law of this Jurisdiction, and pursuant timely and properly filed Writ of Coram Nobis, in Lieu of Writ, and papers submitted by right pursuant Court Rule 4:50, that my legal matters in Vincinage 3 be immediately relocated to an appropriate court.

I DEMAND THE COURT TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE CASE FILES IN FM-03-790-14, FV-03-1154-14, FV-03-1162-14, AND PROSECUTOR’S CASE # 13-2502, in toto, and inclusive of the Transcripts for the Same.

I DEMAND THE COURT TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS FROM (dsyphrett@gmail.com) TO EMPLOYEES OF THE COURT AND EMPLOYEES OF THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT FROM (1/2013 to 10/12/2014):

I RESERVE THE RIGHT TO FURTHER PROSECUTE THIS MATTER AND ALL RELATED PERSONS, IN THE EVENT THAT MY GRIEVANCES ARE NOT FULLY ADDRESSED BY THE ADDRESSED PERSONS AND GOVERNMENTAL BODIES.

I DEMAND RESTORATION OF MY PARENTAL RIGHTS, MY CUSTODY RIGHTS, AND MY LEGAL RIGHTS WITH REGARD TO MY CHILDREN BENJAMIN AND VANESSA SYPHRETT. I DEMAND THIS SUA SPONTE, AND IMMEDIATELY

iii. AS A PRESUMED FIT PARENT, WITH ONLY POSITIVE PARENTING TIME SUPERVISOR REPORTS THE DEFENDANT IS ENTITLED TO RELIEF PURSUANT:

– In Parham v. J.R. et al 442 U.S. 584 (1979) in toto, inclusive of cited cases, and specifically with regard to its findings that:

I ADVISE THAT: I WILL ONLY CONSENT TO THE PERMENANT SEALING OF MY FILES IN THE EVENT:THAT MY CUSTODY IS RESTORED AND THIS COURT WAIVE ALL FUTURE JURISDICTION OR RIGHTS TO INTERFERE IN THE RIGHTS OF MY PARENTAL RIGHTS SO LONG AS MY CHILDREN REMAIN CITIZENS OF A FOREIGN STATE

CONCLUSION:

YOU WILL OBEY THE SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY /PARTY,

MEANING: ME (in parte / in toto)

VERY TRULY:

Derek C. Syphrett, Esq.

Attorney-in-Fact

Citizen of New Jersey

Citizen of the United States of America

Permanently Disabled Person, pursuant the ADA

Witnesss-of-Fact

Real-Party-of-Interest

The Sovereign-Power, in parte / in toto, in iure civili, et in carne

Naturalis Homo in Carne

Legally Competent Person, Pursuant:the findings and Precedential Law in Kyle v. Verona Green Acres, and its progency in New Jersey Courts

The Putative Pro Se

SEE THE TRANSCRIPTS OF JUDGE PEDRO JIMENEZ

ACTING AS JUDGE, WITNESS-OF-FACT, PROSECUTOR,

IN JUST ONE EPISODE OF THIS UNMITIGATED DISASTER

THIS WAS AN UNLAWFUL KIDNAPPING OF AN ATTORNEY,

JUDGE PEDRO JIMENEZ ACTED BEYOND ALL AUTHORITY AND MAY NOW BE

ARRESTED AND PROSECUTED CIVILLY AND CRIMINALLY FOR THIS!

THE ABOVE PROVIDED TO:

REMIND NEW JERSEY PUBLIC OFFICIALS THAT:

SOME OF US HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN THE REASONS

THIS STATE IS “SELF-GOVERNED”

LETTER TO ASSIGNMENT JUDGE RONALD E. BOOKBINDER

SENT AFTER HE ATTEMPTED TO PROHIBIT A DEFENDANT FROM:

APPEARING IN COURT FOR HIS OWN TRIAL, VIA

UNLAWFUL COURT ORDERS

Docket No.: FV-03-1154-14 – DIQUALIFICATION OF TRIAL JUDGES

SEE SOME OF THE UNLAWFUL, NULL & VOID COURT ORDERS HERE: