Monday, June 25, 2007

Pro se Litigant sues 764 judges, Federal and State, in their personal capacity

1. Beverly Naves, an unstoppable Molly Brown, has filed a series of
civil RICO (Racketeered, Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) civil
law suits naming every Federal and State Judge (764 of them) in
Oklahoma, in their personal capacity.

2. Beverly Naves has filed the actions as a Private Attorney
General, ex rel, meaning that she has filed "on relation of" the
United States.

3. To date Beverly Naves has filed 4 civil RICO actions, each
chained to the next law suit. Each law suit has a number of John
Doe's as defendants, so that if someone is overlooked they can be
added to the civil suit, including someone in another state.

4. In the event that the DOJ, Department of Justice, decides to
enter the action, and since Beverly Naves is a Private Attorney
General, ex rel, the DOJ can ONLY enter the action in support of
Beverly Naves, since United States is already represented by Beverly
Naves as a Private Attorney General (See the Clayton Act).

5. The DOJ has published an order appointing a special attorney that
is charged with completing "an on information (investigation), with
authority to prosecute both civilly and criminally, including
authority to conduct Grand Jury Investigations."

6. One of the judges named as Defendant in one of the Civil RICO
actions, has ruled and has dismissed Beverly Naves' case. Yet, no
Order has been issued. Once an Order is written and signed that
judge will be subject to immediate termination, firing. On the other
hand, if no order is written and signed before the Term of Court
expires, then the ruling becomes void. Either way the case will move

7. Judges will not be able to avail themselves of 12(b) Judicial
Immunity since they are being sued in their personal capacity by a
Private Attorney General as provided in the Clayton Act.

For those readers who are old enough to remember the Spencer Tracey
movie "Judgment at Nuremburg" you will remember that you were told
within the movie that the first thing Adolph Hitler did when he was
elected Chancellor was to take control of the Courts. With control
of the courts, it didn't matter what laws the Parliament passed, the
judges would interpret the laws and rule the way Chancellor Hitler
wanted. Death to all those who opposed him.

That same fascism is alive and well right here in River City, USA.

The courts that were created by our Federal and State Constitutions
were intended to support the citizens in achieving justice. Lady
Justice was intended to be blind to influence, to seek only the
truth and meet out justice accordingly. Any resemblance of today's
courts to the intentions of the Founding Fathers is purely

The Bar, a TRADE UNION, issues recommendations to practice law for
Attorneys (there is no such thing as a license to practice law)
which are approved by the State Supreme Court. Those Judges are also
members of the Bar. Both Attorneys and Judges are members of the
same trade union.

Judges are appointed or elected upon the recommendation of the Bar,
while Attorneys are allowed to practice at the discretion of the
Bar. So, we have a trade union in charge of or in control of the
entire Judiciary. No Conflict of interest here, is there? Did you
ever have the feeling that you were lying face up looking at the
undercarriage of a bus?

Beverly Naves has filed her civil RICO suits because of
perpetrations by some judges and actions not taken by other judges.
That is to say, those who have perpetrated crimes against "the
people" and those who stood by and did nothing, making themselves
complicit in the crimes.

Some of those crimes include:

· Denial of access to court,
· Denial of both procedural and substantive due process,
· Judgments absent "subject matter jurisdiction,"
· Destruction of evidence,
· Fabrication of evidence,
· Bribery,
· Abuse of pro se / pro per litigants through threat, coercion or
· Ignoring U.S. Supreme Court ruling,
· Ignoring precedents,
· Ex parte meetings, some times on a golf course or in a bar,
· Suborning perjury,
· Fraud on the Court by the Court,
· Mail fraud,
· Wire fraud,
· And unfortunately, much more.

Beverly Naves is one person who has had her fill and has decided to
do something about it. There are those who'd say you can't fight
city hall, but don't tell that to Beverly. She can't hear it.

What this case could mean to those named as defendants is it that
they will have to pay, from their own pocket, legal retainers that
could start at $20,000 to $50,000 and require even more money as the
case moves forward.

When Beverly Naves' suit is successful:

· it would mean that all of those judges ruled against will
immediately be removed from the bench,
· they will have to pay back ALL of the wages they have received,
· and loose their pensions.

It could also mean that the judges ruled against will be
investigated to determine:

· how much money they have accepted as bribes,
· or defrauded and extorted from litigants,
· and a Grand Jury indictment resulting in criminal trials and jail
sentences for the perpetrators along with those who were complicit.

Back in the 1960's Ralph Nader, an attorney, took General Motors to
their knees, twice. A monumental feat, no doubt. Beverly Naves is
not an attorney and has taken on an even bigger adversary, the 10th
Federal Circuit and all of the judges for the state of Oklahoma.

Can you imagine the looks on the faces of those judges when Federal
Marshals appeared to serve papers on them? Can you imagine that
happening in open court?

Who says you can't make a difference? Who says you can't fight city
hall? Not Beverly Naves, not those who supporter her.

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

What a flippin Joke!

Court Today, What A Joke!

As you can tell from the name of this blog, I had court today, start of a divorce newvenue based on where I live, get the custody case away from apparent judicial misconduct- the whole panepinto coincedence-connection whatever...

It turned out to be a flippin joke- shocker?

Nah expected- I dont have the energy to get into it but Allan does, check out his blog on the latest episode of as the stomach turns and corruption rules!

Allan's Blog page >

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Breaking News!

A must read!

Breaking News: Supreme Court Upends Family Court.

June 18, 2007San Diego

With the U.S. Supreme Court considering applying the Confrontation Clause in Crawford retro-actively and all courts being equal - marks a new day for family court attorneys. Bringing in out-of-court statements without the speaker testifying in person "is fundamentally at odds with the right of confrontation," U.S. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in Crawford vs. Washington 124 S.Ct. 1354 (2004).

Requiring children testify will happily turn the current custody process in family court upside down, according to Bonnie Russell of

Should the Court decides to apply Crawford retroactively, thousands of child custody cases might be completely retried as parents and attorneys realize they can pro-actively end parental alienation, false accusations and preserve the relationship between parent and child."Within a short period of time custody cases will resolve," Russell said.

"The standards of one court would not be any less in another, especially in criminal abuse of a child Family Court judges routinely address.

The Crawford ruling is a sudden ravine through the foundation that has held families hostage to a divorce and custody industry," Russell said while en route to a speaking engagement at a American College of Trial Lawyers 10th Regional meeting in Oklahoma City.

Traditionally Family Court judges eschewed listening to children, preferring instead to grant a full employment act to therapeutic experts and Guardian Ad Litems to act as intermediaries, and report directly to the courts without the children themselves ever testifying.

These third parties would not relay complaints, but report their interpretations of the child's words, and opinions of cases as fact.This resulted with thousands of parents losing custody rights to their children without the court ever directly hearing of experiences from a child.

Such conditions stoked parental alienation cases, in which parent with custody emotionally isolate children and effectively convince them of problems and situations that never existed."What has happened in family courts has been criminal in an ironic way, Russell says.

"Families have been torn apart, children turned against loving parents, because too many professionals had a financial interest in preventing children from speaking for themselves."The Court applying Crawford retro-actively, means attorneys will be able to reopen previously settled cases.

"This might be painful for some" says Russell, but family court has needed this clean wind to dry so many unnecessary tears.

Things will have to be different going forward. The only question is whether those who have already been through the system might finally see justice as well. Who knows with retro-applicability in the future, maybe some parents will just decide to stop fighting and on their own decide a fifty-fifty split."

Misguided Standards Of Care

Boston Globe:

Misguided standards of care
By Lawrence Diller
June 19,2007

As a doctor, I did the nearly unthinkable at a recent conference on bipoloar disorder in children. I charged another doctor with moral responsibility in the death last December of Rebecca Riley, a 4 -year-old girl from Hull.

Naming names in medicine is just not done very often -- and I knew the personal and professional risks I was taking. Yet I felt compelled to name Joseph Biederman, head of the Massachusetts General Hospital's Pediatric Psychopharmacology clinic, as morally culpable in providing the "science" that allowed Rebecca to die.Rebecca's parents have been jailed and charged in her death.

They are accused of intentionally overdosing her with clonidine, an anti hypertensive and sedative drug -- one of three psychiatric medications prescribed by a Tufts-New England Medical Center child psychiatrist. Rebecca had been treated with these medications since the age of 2 1/2 for the purported diagnosis of bipolar disorder -- the new name for manic-depression.

While the psychiatrist involved has withheld comment on the case, both her lawyer and the medical center have defended her actions as "within the standards of care."

Biederman and his colleagues at Harvard are the professionals most responsible for developing and promoting those standards of care -- which include diagnosing preschool children as young as 2 with bipolar disorder and treating them with multiple medications.Biederman shocked the child psychiatric world in 1996 by announcing that nearly a quarter of the children he was treating for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder also met his criteria for bipolar disorder. Up until then bipolar disorder was rarely diagnosed in teenagers and unheard of in prepubertal children.

Biederman could justify his findings by simply broadening the semantic definitions of a previously more circumscribed condition contained within American psychiatry's bible -- the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders."Biederman has produced a number of studies and papers purporting to demonstrate the validity of his diagnosis and treatment.

His research has always epitomized the best of what the DSM model of psychiatry could expect. But the diagnoses in the manual, in concept, are closely linked to the medical model of biologically based psychiatric disorders and focus exclusively on the individual.While the manual provides helpful clinical guidance in adults, it begins to unravel with its assumptions about discrete and specific disorders in children and ignores the families and environments in which children live.

The ultimate absurdity of this scientific model is diagnosing bipolar disorder in 2 year olds and linking it to the adult disorder with the same name -- in the process saddling young children as chronic mental patients condemned to a lifetime of psychiatric drugs.

Even the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry -- in its recent parameters on the diagnosis in children -- eschews the bipolar diagnosis and its consequent medical treatment in children under 6. Still there are thousands of potential Rebecca Rileys being treated with multiple psychiatric drugs because Biederman has said it's OK and necessary.

Supported by millions of dollars of drug industry promotional funding, Biederman and his colleagues circle the globe offering professional medical "education" for their singular point of view.Finally, it's sad but true -- the field of child psychiatry is afraid of Biederman. One can hear the worries and fears whispered in the academic halls and clinics over where Biederman has taken the profession.

Yet to politely challenge Biederman in public is to risk public retribution and ridicule from him and his team. Also academic researchers in child psychiatry risk losing their funding if they criticize this darling of the pharmaceutical industry, which provides most of the money these days for psychiatric research.

The silence was deafening -- and Rebecca's death pushed me over the edge -- because for over a decade I've have been uncomfortable about these practices in young children. I am not against psychiatric drugs for children. I've written prescriptions for children for 30 years in a clinical practice not tied to the drug industry.

I risk personal censure and loss of credibility in an advocacy for a broader concept and treatment for children with behavior problems in naming this doctor. But this time, Dr. Biederman, you have gone far.Dr. Lawrence Diller practices behavioral/developmental pediatrics in Walnut Creek, Calif., and is the author of "The Last Normal Child: Essays on the Intersection of Kids, Culture and Psychiatric Drugs."

What a sick twisted woman!

What a sick twisted woman! - and as for Stephanie Jones' comment below.

(In Red)

There is NO EXCUSE - Many people are going thru divorce, some uglier than others both men and women suffer inconcieviable stress and truma, how many of them have killed their own inocent children!

There is NO EXCUSE for this barbaric behaviour NONE!

HOUSTON, June 14:

A mother was charged with capital murder, accused of beating her baby to death, KPRC Local 2 reported Tuesday.

Harris County sheriff's deputies said Jessica Hoosier, 26, told them she beat the child because she was going through a divorce.

Hoosier is accused of leaving the 2-month-old baby in a car seat at her northeast Houston apartment while she went shopping on Saturday.

The father discovered the baby's body later that day, according to authorities.

Investigators said the baby had multiple fractures and was severely underweight.

"He weighed only about 7 pounds, appeared malnourished at the time, has numerous skull fractures, rib fractures, a broken arm," Assistant District Attorney Sylvia Escobedo Newman said. "His injuries were at various stages of healing."

Hoosier originally denied knowing how her son died but later confessed, investigators said.
"She demonstrated to the officers how she hit the child in the head and chest with the hard portion of the palm of her hand," Newman said.

Detectives said Hoosier's two young daughters were not abused. They have been placed in foster care.

The child's father told investigators he did not know anything about the abuse.
Neighbors said they were shocked.

"That's awful. I mean, how could you do that to a baby someone who can't even take care of them own self?

You're taking care of the baby, so she must have been going through something terrible for that to happen," Stephanie Jones said.

Hoosier is being held in the Harris County Jail without bond. If convicted of capital murder, she could face the death penalty.


Mom Beat Baby To Death Over - Mangalore,IndiaHarris County sheriff's deputies said Jessica Hoosier, 26, told them she beat the child because she was going through a divorce. ...See all stories on this topic

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Be Part Of the Solution

I have placed an Ad on Craigs list.. won't you do the same?
D.C. Family Rights Rally

Has your Family been destroyed by the current "System"?

Have you been torn from your Child/Children's lives by a vindictive ex, or the money driven Divorce Machine?

Perhaps it was the Government funding/incentives to State run "Child Protective Services" agencies that's at the root of your "founded" case that tore your family apart?

We are meeting in Washington DC on August 18, 2007, please join us!
(Link to Rally

We are also looking for more Main Stream Media to cover these events, hopefully we can bring awareness, which will cause change in the current "System" and save the future of America- OUR CHILDREN!

Two dedicated Fathers chose to bring awareness to the event by trecking 600+ miles by bicycle to attend!
(Link to story and info on this amazing effort by two Dads

My contribution today is this Ad as well as my daily blogs which can be found at..

Get involved, these are innocent children, being torn from their Families because of dollar signs on thier forheads! By working together we pray to get those dollar signs erased!

Sunday, June 10, 2007

What is it going to take?


What is it going to take to get the government funding to stop (Title IV-D)!!

Children are dying, futures are being destroyed and the average U.S. citizen is on prozac to deal with the results of this!

I'm OUTRAGED- every day there's another story of a family DESTROYED because of this evil funding - WHEN IS IT GOING TO STOP!!!!!!!!!

People open your eyes these children are the future !!!!!!!!


Toddler dies in foster care a day before returning to dad - Houston Chronicle

Toddler dies in foster care one day before returning to father

A 2-year-old girl died in foster care in Brazoria County the day before she and her little brother were to return to the custody of their biological father.

A foster parent called for help about 6 p.m. Friday evening when Lydia Alday did not wake up from a nap, said Gwen Carter, spokeswoman for Child Protective Services. Attempts to revive her were unsuccessful, Carter said.

The cause of death will be determined by the Galveston Medical Examiner's Office, she said. CPS and Residential Child Care Licensing officials are investigating.

Lydia and her 1-year-old brother were placed in foster case in July 2006 "because mom and dad were having difficult issues at home," Carter said. The siblings had been living in the latest home for four months, she said.

The boy was returned to his father's custody Saturday morning, Carter said.

"He had completed all the services and training we asked him to do," she said. "It's just a very sad story."

Thursday, June 7, 2007


Ready their jail cells

Judge sentenced to 3-to-10; Brooklyn big sent to Rikers

Wednesday, June 6th 2007, 4:00 AM

Two former Brooklyn powerhouses - a Democratic leader and a judge - were led out of court in handcuffs yesterday in a corruption scandal that has prompted calls for sweeping changes in picking jurists.

"I am profoundly sorry," cried ex-Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Gerald Garson, 74, who broke into sobs before being sentenced to three to 10 years behind bars for accepting bribes.

Garson was convicted of taking cash, cigars, dinners and drinks from a crooked lawyer - all caught on tape - in return for favors.

"As I watched the tapes, I was embarrassed and appalled at my demeanor," he sobbed.

Just a few hours earlier in the same courtroom, Clarence Norman, the former Brooklyn Democratic Party chairman and 11-term assemblyman, was shackled and ordered to begin a two-to-six-year sentence for campaign corruption. His appeal was rejected last week.

"God is good," Norman said, hugging relatives before being shipped off to Rikers Island.

The courtroom drama yesterday closed the circle on a four-year probe into judicial corruption by Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes, who began going after Norman when Garson told investigators at his March 2003 arrest that the bench could be bought. No hard evidence has emerged of that yet, but the probe is continuing.

Yesterday, in a courtroom packed with family and Brooklyn residents who believed Garson had done them wrong, Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey Berry slammed Garson for tainting the judiciary by allowing crooked lawyer Paul Siminovsky to "sucker him into" giving him lucrative appointments and fixing a case in exchange for thousands of dollars in free meals, drinks, cigars and cash.

"What you brought upon yourself is terrible. ... The perception you gave is that justice was being bought," Berry said in an hour-long speech before announcing the sentence. "You should be as pure as the driven snow. You abdicated your judicial responsibility, your moral fiber."

Sigal Levi said she no longer has a relationship with her two oldest sons because Garson gave custody to her ex.

"Mr. Garson, you sold my children for a very cheap price," said Levi, whose husband pleaded guilty to paying $10,000 to a middleman to gain custody. "You had a moral obligation to protect the welfare of my children. You abused the system and ruined all our lives."

Defense attorney Michael Washor asked Berry for leniency, citing Garson's battle with cancer and heart disease, personal tragedies and his bout with alcoholism.

But prosecutor Michael Vecchione shot back, branding Garson's courtroom a "vile, corrupt place" that he treated as a personal "piggy bank."

Garson does not have to head straight to jail, however. An Appellate Division judge allowed him to stay out of jail on bail pending his appeal. Garson declined to comment.

A federal judge ruled in August that the process for selecting state Supreme Court justices - where party bosses pick the candidates - is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to back-room wheeling and dealing.

More on this story..

From the Daily News Opinions

Jailbirds of a feather
Wednesday, June 6th 2007

The mighty have fallen. Hard and far. Sentenced to prison yesterday were: a) Clarence Norman, once the undisputed boss of the most powerful Democratic Party organization east of Chicago; and b) Gerald Garson, ex-judge who had served on the state's highest trial court. Theirs were separate crimes, yet of a kind, in that they violated the public trust they swore to uphold. Good riddance to both of them - maybe they can share a ride to Dannemora or sit next to each other in the license plate workshop.

Norman (photo) was for years kingpin of the Brooklyn Democrats, a dealmaker and judgemaker who filled the borough bench with hacks and pals and relatives of hacks and pals, many lacking even the fundamentals of being a judge. A lawyer and assemblyman before his conviction, he went down for a number of crimes, the most serious being grand larceny for coercing a judicial candidate to use a favored vendor. He'll do two to six years.

Garson was a lawyer whom Norman transformed into a state Supreme Court justice in 1997. His chief qualification: party loyalty. Garson had long toiled as a party man and served as party treasurer. He also had kin on the courts. His cousin preceded him as a Brooklyn state Supreme Court justice and his wife would later become a Brooklyn Civil Court judge.

Garson was busted in spring 2003 after being caught on video in his chambers pocketing cash and expensive cigars from a lawyer with cases before him. Convicted of taking bribes and rewards for official misconduct, he'll do three to 10 years.

Garson's arrest prompted District Attorney Joe Hynes to commence a probe to find out whether the party was selling judgeships. Hynes hasn't made that case, but he did get Norman, who was indicted in the fall of 2003.

Norman and Garson are gone. There is a new leader, Vito Lopez, and new judges, like his girlfriend's brother, Jack Battaglia, whom Lopez put on Brooklyn Supreme Court last year. Thus it is ever until New York changes the way judges are picked.

Friday, June 1, 2007

Westchester Divorce Courts Under Federal Scrutiny

REFRESH - Go to Home-Page

Westchester Divorce Courts
Under Federal Scrutiny

FBI Looking Into Allegations of Steering and Fraud in Westchester Supreme Court, Matrimonial Part !!

It's increasingly obvious that New York State's Chief Judge, Judith Kaye is more than "a day late and a dollar short," in her professed desire to retain her position on the Court Of Appeals, supposedly to clean up and reorganize the State Court System, at least with regard to the Westchester Courthouse. Reliable confidential sources have informed The Westchester Guardian that numerous individuals involved in divorce litigation in Westchester Supreme Court, mostly women, and male, non-monied spouses, have gone to the FBI to report a long-standing pattern of behavior between certain attorneys, from influential law firms, and judges sitting in the Matrimonial Part. Allegations of Gender Bias, and Case Fixing, by steering and fraud, similar to those lodged in June, that brought about the so-called "Historic Rotation" of four sitting judges, are reportedly under federal investigation, with possible RICO Charges forthcoming.

Additionally, The Guardian has learned that within the past several days Judge Kaye, as well as Sherrill Spatz, Special Inspector General, Office of Court Administration, each received a complaint implicating Administrative Judge Francis Nicolai, and alleging steering and case fixing, and that, "all Hell has broken loose on the 16th floor of the County Courthouse." Not long ago Judge Donovan, one of the judges removed in June, was severely criticized by the Appellate Division, Second Department, State Supreme Court, for having forced a female non-monied party in a divorce action to use an attorney who he knew had been suspended from practice for appearing in court under the influence of illegal drugs.

Under 18 U.S.C.A. Section 1961 both criminal and civil actions may be brought under RICO statutes. Those who have brought their complaints to federal investigators have maintained that there exists a particular, and distinguishable, group of attorneys engaged in matrimonial litigation in Westchester, who, for some time, acting in concert with certain Supreme Court Judges, have engaged in a business enterprise against the interests of a particular class of individuals, resulting in an exchange of funds from said attorneys to said judges. It's important to note that a number of aggrieved parties who recently elected to bring their complaints to Federal authorities, had
previously complained to Westchester District Attorney Janet DiFiore without result.

For several years the Westchester Supreme Court, Matrimonial Part, has been the subject of severe scorn and criticism by overwhelming numbers of litigants who have charged blatant Due Process violations, disappearance of documents, forgery, and fraud in the distribution of marital assets, in addition to severe personal, and financial injury, and emotional distress to children and adult parties to custody actions prejudicially administered. It has been well known, for as many years, that certain law firms have wielded overreaching, and in some instances, unlawful, influence over the outcome of numerous matrimonial disputes, with tentacles reaching up into the Appellate Division.

It would now appear that the charges and countercharges that emerged last summer between Jim Montagnino and Frank Nicolai are continuing to reverberate. Furthermore, it does not appear that the mere removal of four judges by Nicolai is going to quell the years of anger and discontentment that have been the hallmark of far too many divorce cases adjudicated in the Westchester County Courthouse. No "band-aid solution" is going to make this problem go away. There's been a "good old boys" environment around that building for so long, it's going to take some serious surgery to finally purge the infection. Perhaps, " Doctor" Michael Garcia, and his team of surgeons will
be needed to perform the operation.