Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
6Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Barbara Morse known as (PSSA, 4) on the court dockets is a corrupt public servant who thinks nothing of violating your constitutional rights.

Barbara Morse known as (PSSA, 4) on the court dockets is a corrupt public servant who thinks nothing of violating your constitutional rights.

Ratings: (0)|Views: 156 |Likes:
Published by tired_of_corruption
Unbelievable--constitutional rights denied!!! Pro Se Staff Attorneys are hired by the USDC of Massachusetts for the sole purpose of VIOLATING YOUR RIGHT TO BRING A GRIEVANCE BEFORE THE COURT. These pro se staff attorneys also draft and file for Habeas Corpus and other prisoner cases as well as in forma pauperis civil cases. If you file pro se and especially if you file in forma pauperis which means you are in financial dire straits and had an approved motion to file without paying the fee your case will be in the hands of this corrupt public servant and others just like her; your case in all probability will not go before a judge. THIS SICK BITCH destroys evidence and writes opinions under no approval of a US District Judge that favor the corrupt attorneys you will be up against. If your case has an employment issue, you will not be provided a pro bono attorney no matter how much you qualify; the exception is you may have an appointed attorney if you go to ADR but most likely the assigned attorney will be actually working to benefit the opposition. The document you see in this read shows how Barbara Morse wrote the opinion where the motion was that she be removed from the case; collusion with the corrupt Jackson Lewis Attorneys was proven. Note her order includes that I am prohibited from making reference to docketing information. NO JUDGE IS GOING TO PROHIBIT YOU FROM MAKING REFERENCE TO DOCKETING INFORMATION! I caught them switching files in the electronic filing system and the proof is on the docket!!!! The end result was when I filed contempt because she answered the motion that requested she be removed from the case she also answered the contempt motion and signed the Magistrate Judge's name who then helped them get my case dismissed with prejudice. THEY ALL BELONG IN PRISON but instead YOU the tax payer get to support them, the corrupt FBI and DOJ who do nothing and the corrupt circuit executive office and the corrupt administrative offices of the US Courts ALL CORRUPT and living off the tax payer!
Unbelievable--constitutional rights denied!!! Pro Se Staff Attorneys are hired by the USDC of Massachusetts for the sole purpose of VIOLATING YOUR RIGHT TO BRING A GRIEVANCE BEFORE THE COURT. These pro se staff attorneys also draft and file for Habeas Corpus and other prisoner cases as well as in forma pauperis civil cases. If you file pro se and especially if you file in forma pauperis which means you are in financial dire straits and had an approved motion to file without paying the fee your case will be in the hands of this corrupt public servant and others just like her; your case in all probability will not go before a judge. THIS SICK BITCH destroys evidence and writes opinions under no approval of a US District Judge that favor the corrupt attorneys you will be up against. If your case has an employment issue, you will not be provided a pro bono attorney no matter how much you qualify; the exception is you may have an appointed attorney if you go to ADR but most likely the assigned attorney will be actually working to benefit the opposition. The document you see in this read shows how Barbara Morse wrote the opinion where the motion was that she be removed from the case; collusion with the corrupt Jackson Lewis Attorneys was proven. Note her order includes that I am prohibited from making reference to docketing information. NO JUDGE IS GOING TO PROHIBIT YOU FROM MAKING REFERENCE TO DOCKETING INFORMATION! I caught them switching files in the electronic filing system and the proof is on the docket!!!! The end result was when I filed contempt because she answered the motion that requested she be removed from the case she also answered the contempt motion and signed the Magistrate Judge's name who then helped them get my case dismissed with prejudice. THEY ALL BELONG IN PRISON but instead YOU the tax payer get to support them, the corrupt FBI and DOJ who do nothing and the corrupt circuit executive office and the corrupt administrative offices of the US Courts ALL CORRUPT and living off the tax payer!

More info:

Published by: tired_of_corruption on Feb 04, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/09/2014

pdf

text

original

 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
ATTACHMENT 58
_______________________________Plaintiff, ))
MOTION CONTEMPT-PSSA & Defense Counsel
)
REQUESTING REMOVAL OF
 
v.
)
DOCKET NO. 20, 53, and 57
 )
CASE MANAGEMENT BY ARTICLE III JUDGE
 
)
DECLARATION THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO
 )
LEGITIMATE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
 GERIATRIC FACILITIES )
PROCEDURE SINCE THE FILING OF THIS CASE
 Of CAPE COD INC., et al ) CIVIL ACTION_______________________________) NO. 10 CA 11343 GAO
See attached exhibits
Laura J. McGarry, the Plaintiff in this action, filed her valid, well supported Complaint{Document 1) on August 2, 2010 as a pro se litigant and received approval to file In FormaPauperis
. Plaintiff’s income is SSDI.
Plaintiff is asserting her constitutional rights with a requestto the court for an order that Documents 20, 53, & 57 be removed from the docket; Plaintiff 
also request that the notice of “terminated” on the Docket for DOCUM
ENTS 17, 27, 28, 43, 46,48, 51, and 52 be removed. The pleadings, motions, addendums and oppositions of this actionhave not been ruled on by an Article III Judge or a Magistrate Judge; essentially this case hasnot legally progressed passed being filed and Defendants served. This case is out of control; seeexhibit 1 to this document for a consolidated look at the reality of the situation.Barbara Morse, PSSA has had charge over this action.
Having no knowledge of the court’s
procedure
regarding consent or refusal to the Magistrate Judge’s jurisdiction, Plaintiff did not
execute and complete a mandatory general order (10-1) because Barbara Morse, did not sendPlaintiff the order or form see Docket 8/19/2010. Barbara Morse has intentionally kept this
 
action from the oversight of a Judge.
Please read Plaintiff’s Motion (Document 51)
REQUESTTHAT BARBARA MORSE BE ENJOINED FROM DUTY ON THIS ACTION
incorporated by referenceherein. Barbara Morse has filed a memorandum and order (Document 57) that she wrote and
signed off with a US District Court Judge’s name addressing the Motion (Document 51) to
enjoin her from this action. The bizarre content of that document speaks for itself; Morse isattempting to further deprive this Plaintiff of her Constitutional Rights and access to the court;
emails to the clerk and Plaintiff’s Motion for Notice of Scheduling Conference (Document 48
incorporated by reference herein) were ignored as the scheduling order due date of January 11,2011 approached and passed. Morse is most certainly does not want any part of this case orher actions as documented to be viewed by a U S District Court Judge.
Memorandum and Order (Document 53) was written by Barbara Morse PSSA after she sawthe Motion to enjoin her from any involvement in this action (Document 51). The fraudulentorders Barbara Morse wrote signing off by typing the /s/ of a U S District Court Judge is beyondegregious. Defense Counsel has submitted an unsupported meritless defense and followed withbaseless motions with erroneous authorities, purportedly in support of their position. See
DISQUALIFY DEFENSE COUNSEL THIRD REQUEST (
Document 52)
incorporated byreference herein.
Morse is in collusion with the defense
; Morse’s
inappropriate actions andbizarre memorandums that are void of fact and law with unwarranted threats of sanctions againstPlaintiff and a case that has had no legitimate court action since filed six months ago validates
this allegation. Morse’s last two filings with the court (Document 53 & 57) have essentially
took what Plaintiff has been saying regarding
Defendants’
meritless defense and baselessunsupported motions submitted to the court by the Defendants
’ Counsel
and projected thisegregious behavior by the defense onto the Plaintiff with absolutely nothing to support her
 
statements in said documents. Her (Document 53 & 57) are patently dishonest regarding whatPlaintiff has presented to this court. The fact that for the past six months Plaintiff has had to stayon top of fraud by the defense, write multiple documents to combat said fraud to only now bethreatened with unwarranted sanctions and dismissal of the case, a case that has had nolegitimate court action since filed is harassment and abuse of this disabled litigant. This is thesame treatment Plaintiff received from the EEOC when they finally took action.
Morse’s actions
have deprived this litigant of her Constitutional right to access to the courts and she has been inconcert with the Defendants and their Counsel in further depriving this Plaintiff of her First andFourteenth amendment rights. There has been significant active oppression of this Plaintiff eversince she met the Defendants and now they have resorted to intimidation. Plaintiff is a strokevictim and her having to continually make submissions to the court to combat fraudulent anddeceptive documents by the defense is extremely burdensome and exhausting. This case shouldhave been decided on the merits with the answer from defense after they presented a meritlessdefense and ignored 47 exhibits that were submitted with a 41 page complaint; Defendants havecarried the fraud that they presented to the EEOC to the Court. There was a Title 18 Sec 1001violation and a high probability of inappropriate money exchange which is why great effort hasbeen made to keep this action from the view of a judge (see paragraph 186 of document 29)
Plaintiff wrote a Response to Defenses’ Answer to the
Complaint that continued with rule 9
 pleadings of particularity to demonstrate the fraud. Plaintiff’s
exhibits have been presented in aform that meet rules of evidence and support all factual statements and allegations.
REQUEST FOR RELIEFFor the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff, Laura J. McGarry, respectfully request that the Court:

Activity (6)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
puretrust liked this
tired_of_corruption added this note
United States v. Blixt, __ F.3d __, 2008 WL 5003239 (9th Cir. Nov. 26, 2008) Finding no prior authority on the issue, we hold as a matter of first impression that forging another's signature constitutes the use of that person's name and thus qualifies as a “means of identification” under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A.” Id.
tired_of_corruption added this note
The purpose of § 505 is to protect the reputation and integrity of the federal courts, their official documents and proceedings, rather than simply to outlaw a narrow category of fraud. The statute applies whenever someone attempts to impugn this integrity by forging a federal judge's signature onto a document in order to make that document appear authentic.
ddllaa liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->