The Michigan Supreme Court is chipping away at our Constitution while aiding and abetting the inferior courts through the creation and implementation of Unconstitutional Michigan Court Rules that allow the inferior courts to intentionally deprive We the People of our inalienable natural rights. See MCR 3.920(H)

Our laws, along with the Michigan Court Rules, are “presumed” to be Constitutional by the courts without a second thought. This “presumption” is completely insane!

In 2009, the Michigan Supreme Court completely redefined a Michigan Court Rule with the specific intent to diminish the 1st Amendment. This court rule was MCR 8.115 and was originally titled, Courtroom Decorum and covered…

(A) Display of Flags. The flags of the United States and of the State of Michigan must be displayed in a conspicuous place adjacent to the bench at all times when court is in session.
(B) Judicial Robe. When acting in his or her official capacity in the courtroom, a judge shall wear a black robe.

In the 2009 rewrite, the Michigan Supreme Court changed the title of the court rule to “Courtroom Decorum; Policy Regarding Use of Cell Phones or Other Electronic Communication Devices and added

(C) Establishment of a Policy Regarding Portable Electronic Communication Devices.
(1) A facility that contains a courtroom may determine use of electronic equipment in nonjudicial areas of the facility.
(2) The chief judge may establish a policy regarding the use of cell phones or other portable electronic communication devices within the court, except that no photographs may be taken of any jurors or witnesses, and no photographs may be taken inside any courtroom without permission of the court. The policy regarding the use of cell phones or other portable electronic communication devices shall be posted in a conspicuous location outside and inside each courtroom. Failure to comply with this section or with the policy established by the chief judge may result in a fine, including confiscation of the device, incarceration, or both for contempt of court.

Today, this court rule is being used to pervert the state and federal constitutions and the people’s 1st Amendment right by banning the free press from our courthouses and our courtrooms.

Although our courts and our judges have no duty to enforce acts and rules that are unconstitutional, the Supreme Court mandates that all acts, codes, statutes and court rules to be presumed constitutional when “Court Rules” do not have ANY legislative oversight for their constitutionality.

The supreme court was never intended to create legislation and therefore has no duty to test it’s new legislation for it’s constitutionality before it is adopted and implemented. Interestingly enough, the supreme court has observed that it has full control over the creation and maintenance of the Michigan Court Rules and that some of the people seem willing to accept these court rules as if they were actual law. Knowing this, the supreme court is converting the Michigan Court Rules into it’s own brand of legislation over the people which is not only a perversion of the separation of powers provisions of the state and federal Constitutions, it is an intentional act of treason by the supreme court.

The unlawful creation of new legislation by the supreme court is very clever but it is Treason, none the less.

Even though the 2009 changes to MCR 8.115 only talk about “portable electronic communication devices” as a single phrase with limited meaning, any intentional misread obviously changes it’s meaning completely.

The news paper announces chief judicial terrorist Paul Chamberlain’s new policy/law as a “ban on cell phones” when Paul Chamberlain’s new policy/law covers everything that is specifically not a “communication device” nor “cell phone”. Even the news articles are intentionally misleading as the intent of Paul Chamberlain’s new policy/law is meant to actually target recording devices.

Paul Chamberlain’s new policy/law, if it were actually intended to stop courtroom distractions such as ringing or otherwise having audible distracting features, could have been written to prohibit things that make noise.

Paul Chamberlain’s new Administrative Order is more accurately described as “Ban On The First Amendment”.

Additionally, Chief Judge made Administrative Rules are only to govern the administration of the court staff and not the people. Paul Chamberlain claims, in his same policy/law that he intends to enforce his new policy/law upon the people with the threat of confiscation, incarceration and fines of up to $7,500 in direct violation of another court rule MCR 8.112(B)(1) which reads as follows:

MCR 8.112(B)(1) A trial court may issue an administrative order governing only internal court management.

Chief Judicial Terrorist Paul Chamberlain created his new policy/law through his ability as a “chief judge”, to create an “Administrative Order” and is now enforcing it upon the people knowing that his administrative authority is limited to “internal court management”. This is an intentional act of TREASON and is also judicial terrorism.

Paul’s presumed friend and co-conspirator in this Judicial Terrorism was fingered in Paul’s own”news” announcement/press release on or about February 27, 2015 in Federal Court Judge Thomas Ludington. As a “Federal Court Judge” Thomas Ludington recently made a ruling that banning cell phones from courtroom was not unconstitutional when it is completely unconstitutional. Ludington placed the emphasis on “cell phones” but went on to expand on that by including recording devices which was his aim in the first place. This was a simple judicial “bait & switch” tactic carried out by a Federal judge!

If it were truly the intent of the Michigan Supreme Court to reduce or eliminate the audible distractions in the courtroom, wouldn’t this be effectively done by fining the holder of the distracting device $100 dollars per occurrence?

Paul Chamberlain announced his new policy/law banning not only cell phones but every form and type of electronic device by citing the alleged inappropriate acts of one man, Ted Visner.  Ted Visner, (ME), is alleged to have recorded Paul Chamberlain’s judge friend and coworker Mark Duthie lying in court. As the “Chief Judge” of Isabella County, Paul Chamberlain was required to ACT upon the judicial misconduct allegations but instead created policy/law to prevent the further capture of judicial and prosecutorial misconduct, instead electing to perform an act of treason by and through the intentional conspired deprivation of rights under color of law. A Federal Crime as defined in Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 & 242.

If it were truly the intent of the Michigan Supreme Court to maintain the integrity of the judiciary, it is failing miserably. So miserably in fact, that our constitutions perversion seems to be it’s specific intent.

Here is where we come full circle w/ Michigan Supreme Court complicity…

The Michigan Supreme Court is obviously aware of Michigan Court Rule MCR 8.112(B)(1) because the Michigan Supreme Court made this rule. MCR 8.112(B)(1) A trial court may issue an administrative order governing only internal court management.

So then, why would the Michigan Supreme Court add the following text to the bottom of the newly created 2009 Court Rule MCR 8.115 (C) that states as follows…

“The policy regarding the use of cell phones or other portable electronic communication devices shall be posted in a conspicuous location outside and inside each courtroom. Failure to comply with this section or with the policy established by the chief judge may result in a fine, including confiscation of the device, incarceration, or both for contempt of court.”

Since Chief Judge made policy “Administrative Orders” are only for the internal management of the court, why plaster this “Policy Notice” all over the courthouse at additional taxpayer expense when a memo could have been circulated within the court staff to whom the “policy” only applies? It is here that the specific intent of the Michigan Supreme Court is to make it appear that the creation of court policy, through chief judge made Administrative Orders are intended to govern the people in addition to court staff in direct intentional violation and contradiction of MCR 8.112(B)(1).

This is complete and utter bullshit and WILL NOT BE TOLERATED by the people! 

Paul Chamberlain and the likes of Thomas Ludington seem to think that at this point our only option is to file a federal suit to challenge the constitutionality of these conspired bullshit games mascaraing as legitimate judicial authorities.

This “only option” notion could not be further from the truth.

Judicial Terrorism and open acts of Treason perpetrated by the judiciary itself will not be fought in corrupt courts that have shown themselves to be complicate in the intentional perversion of our state and federal Constitutions!

Paul Chamberlain is supposed to be the Chief Judge in Isabella County. Are acts of treason against the people of Michigan part of the job description of a “Chief Judge”? Our current alleged judicial system allows judges do do what ever the hell they want without fear of reprisal because they have created for themselves “Absolute Immunity” placing themselves conveniently “Above the Law”. The only thing absolute about this is the “Bullshit”.

Immunity was created to limit the exposure a judge might have for making “honest” mistakes. Intentional acts of treason do not fit into any honest and honorable category and are crimes against the people of our state and our country.

 

 

11044560_10204634413072716_5508578336170258964_n

 

The system as defined to this point is only a glimpse into the criminal nature of what purports to be our “judicial system”.

The Michigan Child Protection Laws, in conjunction with the Michigan Court Rules have been tailored to streamline the kidnapping of our children to maximize federal and other financial returns to members of the BAR and to the parasitic corporations that have sprouted up around this self perpetuating criminal system of child trafficking.

CPS and the county courts of Michigan have built this empire through the exploitation of Michigan Court Rule MCR 3.920(H) which seemingly allows the courts and the prosecutors to skip the Adjudicative Phase of the proceedings against Michigan parents whom have had their children stolen by CPS.

MCR 3.920(H) allows the courts to proceed even though it failed to assume lawful jurisdiction!

This alleged court rule does the following things.

FIRST: And most important, this rule is being relied upon before proceedings are initiated against a respondent parent.

SECOND: This rule forgives the prosecution for depriving a respondent parent of their due process rights. Due Process is a right that can NOT be given away nor taken away. This right is inalienable.

THIRD: This rule allegedly removes a respondent parent’s ability to Object to terminal Notice Defects simply by their appearance and participation.

FORTH: This rule allows the court and the prosecution to merge the adjudicative phase and the dispositional phase into a single phase proceeding against a respondent parent absent due process.

With the court, the prosecution and CPS having developed a reliance upon this all encompassing “Forgiveness Clause” built into the court rules, they have become dependent and reliant upon it even though they all know it to be a Constitutional Due Process violation.

Our courts have become addicted to the deprivation of the People’s Due Process Rights because they are more quickly able to generate revenue for themselves.

Irrespective of the nature and the truth of the allegations against the respondent parent, the current system is setup for the state to WIN EVERY TIME!

The state’s specific reliance on this alleged Michigan Court Rule is an “Exigent Fraud” as it sets up the people to fail before the proceedings even begin and this is obviously outside any parent’s ability to combat.

Another functional component of this “criminal system” can be found in the court’s TAKING the liberty of assigning complicate lawyers to represent the alleged respondent parents. I say “Alleged Respondent Parents” because the parent was NEVER served and is therefore SPECIFICALLY NOT A “RESPONDENT PARENT” but rather a fly caught in the judicial web of deceit!

But it gets better!

MCR 3.915(B)(1)(b) states that the court shall appoint an attorney if the respondent parent requests the court to do so and can not financially afford to pay for one themselves.

Alleged Respondent Parents in Michigan are being assigned court appointed lawyers before they are even aware that they may need a lawyer and specifically in the absence of a request by them for a court appointed lawyer!

Michigan Courts and specifically alleged judge Mark Duthie will “order” you to have a lawyer if you want one or not.

If you think that the court is doing you a favor by appointing you a bottom feeding attorney like Tony Moses of Mount Pleasant Michigan, you are sorely mistaken. A quick look at his client “win” record should clue you in. 

The important question to ask is… If the assignment of a court appointed lawyer were actually helpful in a system created and maintained to make parents lose every time, why would a judge take away the right to refuse court appointed counsel in violation of MCR 3.915(B)(1)(b) and in violation of the Michigan Constitution’s Article 1 § 13?

It is because if the court can make you have a “lawyer” complicate in the system’s goals, to take children in the absence of due process without objection, these people get paid more faster!

I AM a simple carpenter and have figured this out all on my own using only the laws, rules and codes that I have been exposed to and I am positive that these same issues can be found in a great many other areas that I have not taken the time to dissect.  I also realize that having made my finding public has created motive for these criminal actors to dispose of me to cover their criminal acts.

Hear what Melody Lake has to say about Ted Visner without using my name specifically.

I don’t know what Melody Lake was told about me specifically but it is clear in this recording of her ranting about me that she has been told that I am “not appropriate” to ever be around her children EVER even though I have never been charged nor convicted of any crimes yet I am being classified by her as if I were Al Capone. Also here her talk about the “Rest Of Society” and to whom she is referring…

I am “Not Appropriate” because I can see what they are doing and how their acts are completely and intentionally criminal?

Pointing out the crimes of these people has been social suicide for me personally as you should be able to deduce from Melody Lake’s statements. After making this audio track public on YouTube, Melody had to follow up and make an unsubstantiated and false police report against me for allegedly threatening her.

The simplicity of the examples here in this article needs to be shared far and wide.

I never threatened Melody Lake. I did offer her a firm caution regarding her involvement with the criminal actions against Danielle Austin.

Also from this recording you can hear Melody lake state that Danielle Austin, at that time. was to have “Unsupervised Visitation” with all three of her children. This has since been taken away for no reason other than Dani getting help from me in this matter. Dani and her children are being punished by the kidnappers of her children for raising an objection with regard to the Notice Defects in her case and is now not allowed to see her children.

Shaun Hutchins has replaced Melody Lake after Melody allegedly resigned form CPS. Shaun, although ordered by the court to provide visitation, has scheduled visitation at a time her two oldest children are in school thus denying visitation with them all together. Additionally, the two older children are reported to being subjected to “counseling” four times a week.

Shaun Hutchins and the state have set out to alienate Dani and her children as if to make it appear that her children are not interested in seeing their mother.

shaunH

Danielle Austin is now allowed to see her youngest son Michael on Monday and Wednesday form 3:00 – 4:00 pm… and is intentionally disallowed to see her oldest two children at all despite a court order to the contrary. Although DHS has been ordered by the court to provide parenting time to Danielle, Shaun Hutchins is and has been placing the fulfillment of that court order on Danielle telling her that she needs to “work it out” with the father of the children herself.

Additionally, the state has also become the driving force behind the divorce of Danielle and her husband that seeks to initiate another court and another set of proceedings against Danielle that are aimed at awarding the father of the children full custody of the three Austin children. Keep in mind that Danielle left that relationship with possession of her children in hopes to start a better life for herself and her children and would have been the plaintiff in the divorce. Coincidentally, the alleged judge in the divorce proceedings is none other than Mark Duthie! Go figure!

The father of the children, the man that insisted Danielle not seek state aid for herself and her children because the state would come after him for child support (before CPS stepped in), is now the direct beneficiary of the actions of the state.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s