This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Ldter to S"(->feM'f Cwt
~ hQ ~ <; 'J ! 1 It-( I ro ( .
~ cUlz (<f) sep~ L~JIT I
F'()NJS r. tAJOvlld ~J2e_I,4i--e jG"vt pest ASAP, C\.QJl\(S A+ -rluz_ Su.p~ ~ ~ Qosl
~ ~:II'_S, ~ IS IjO'1 O~I, ;£ ~"''mil J(W.tJ\V[ ~Jm(_\A+e. l~ peopk J "I
'tv S~-e_ :fuIS ,SO ~1 K~J ~t (S
:Y\~J oN eN \hlS (~. .
December 14th, 2009 William K. Suter, Clerk
Supreme Court of the United states Office of the Clerk
Washington, DC 20543-0001
Martin A. Annstrong #12518~050
FCl Fort Dix Camp PO Box 2000
Fort Dix, NJ 08640
Dear Mr. Suter;
This is the second time I have been compelled to write to you regarding the unprofessional conduct of Danny Bickell and possibly Heather Trant. I have one
of the highest profile cases in the United states. I have been tortured by the Justice Department,' held in civil contempt entirely post-indictment, denied c01.1l1Sel, trial by jury, direct right to appeal. You name it, and I have been denied.
All you have to~ dis put my name into Google and you will seethe public outrage ov..er my tv.:ea. t that ,is now worldwide. I now publish my filings to
courts and many peqple ollow what has been done to me. . .
Regarding the /contempt, I was denied direct appeal and forced into a habeas where the right to [rafae jurisdictional issues was denied. Justice sotomayor was
on that panel and wrote ia separate opinion stating I should not be held indefinitely. She is qui te famil~ar with my case.
This Court inStructed the Government to respond in Annstrong v Guccione, 470 F3d 89 (2nd eir 20d6). To get out of that, they vacated the contempt and drove me directly to Fort Dix that morning and told this Court I was no longer in contempt and no longer in 'the Second Circuit so the case did not warrant review.
Now because of 18 usc §3585 (b), the sentencing court had no jurisdiction
to grant "credit" for the civil contempt of 7-! years against a statutory max sentence of 5 years. There is no statute that controls and no language in §3585(b) that states civil contempt is excluded. This I have been trying to get to this Court and have filed a petition for cert from the 3rd Circuit only to have Ms Tl;"ant return that claiming it is untimely. I resubmitted that with a motion to proceed showing in
the lower courts the time runs from when the mandate issues and it is entered into
the record, which was 1 rronth later making it timely. Mr Bickell grabbed the
mot.ron for bail directed to Justice Sotanayor cl.atminq-noth.inq is pending and so there is no right to proceed. That is dead wrong, for the bail is a separate issue and is appealable independently. I have resutmitted that addressed to Heather Trant.
When I appea.Led the denial of bail in 2nd Circuit to Justice Ginsberg, that was denied on such a memo & I sent a motion for reconsideration to J. stevens in June 2009. I heard nothing & supplemented that in July. 109. Still I heard nothing and I made a motion for counsel being illegally disgorged in direct violation of Grupe Mexicanov Alliance Bond Fund, __ -??_? . .ys_ 308 (1999). Mr Bickell acted like a Justice returning that stating the court does not grant counsel. That was a judicial decision - tVl' __ hi.s l
I resul:rni tted the brief to Justice Stevens as evidence of why then bail should be granted. Mr, Bickell then returns it stating there is no such motion pending
yet where did the previous TWO filings go? I then moved for bail back to Justice Ginsberg explaining what took place and the difficulty I was having with the clerks.
That was addressed and sent certified mail to Ms Heather Trant. It too has gone now
missing. I l::elieve that Mr. Bickell is now deliberately obstnlcting my access to the courts. Far too many filings are just disappearing.
I am FURMALLY now makinq a Freedan of Infonnation Act request that I want the name of the clerk who writes the memo or description of any filing to the Justices explaining the submission. I believe it has been Mr. Bickell who has be deliberately misdescribing the filings to ensure the Court pays no attention.
I am forced to publish this letter on the internet for the whole world to see because I cannot be sure that Mr. Bickell is working alone and may be in a position to intercept this letter as well. I am also copying it personally to each Justice and
to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Each filing has been served upon the Solicitor General. I had also made a motion to proceed by Declaratory Judgment that Congress clearly established and I have an ACI'IVE controversy since the Justice Department has kept me in prison with no statutory authority whatsoever in direct violation of 18 USC§4001 (a) that is
the Non-Detention Act stating it requires exclusively an act of Congress to detain anyone. There is no statute. 18 USC §3621 (c) requires the production of a commitment order, and they refuse to produce anything. 18 USC §3621 (a) prohibits holding a citizen l::eyond the statutory maximum and that is 5 years. I have been held for 10 years and running.
Mr. Bickell sent me an elaborate letter pretending he is a justice once again refusing to submit it to the Court on the grounds that it is not an active controversy. The Rules do . not provide for a Declaratory Judgnr:m.t but rules CANOOI' trump
a statute or the Constitution. "NO rule of court can enlarge or restrict the jurisdiction of the court, nor can it abrogate or modify the substantive law. II Washington So Nav Co v Baltimore & PSB Co, 263 US 629, 635 (1924). If Congress created that Jurisdiction and this Court has entertained appeals fran Declaratory Judgments without question as to Congressional authority to create that right under Article III, see Beacon Theatres Inc v Westover, 359 US 500 (1959), then there is K) excuse that
the llcase analyst" has for refusing access to the Court.
Pro se defendant I s filings are to be construed liberally. Instead, I am unsure
if the treatment I have received is targeted at only myself, or if the "case analysts" are instnlcted to rej ect anything that they can on technical reasons. Failing to
place the in forma pauperis on the front, it is rejected. Misnumbering pages is rejected. Because I placed copies of the statutes referenced in the brief at the
mid section before the brief began, it was rejected stating this exceeded 40 pages.
I had to remove them and put them in an index and cite that before Ms Trant would accept the filing. Every possible technicality is invoked and they know that sending something back to a inmate, the BOP does lUI' recognize anything from this Court to
be legal mail or any other court. That means the delay in receiving the filing can
be 6-8 weeks and they then say you are untimely to refile. Clearly, the experience
I have with these case analysts demonstrates that tcrlayGideon's Trumpet would 1::e silenced for a simple letter to this Court will not be construed as a notion anymore.
I was attacked and left for dead in New York at MCC. I survived, it appears, to the regret of some in Government. I have not received medical attention denied a MRI and numerous requests to see a dentist go ignored. Is this the way Americans are treated by their own government?
When I refused to plead guilty, all my legal defense preparation was taken and I was thrown into solitary confinement. I was told if I insisted upon going to trial this is how it would be with NJl'HING!
I was charged with fraud claiming I failed to disclose trading losses. I had gone to counsel concerning to file suit against Republic National Bank because their staff
were illegally trading in OUR PROPRlEI2\RY account. Republic in 1 week had the company illegally seized, denied counsel ever making an appearance, claiming I conspired with Republic I s own staff to hide trading losses from Japanese noteholders. The problem
was, these were FIXED RATE notes known as the YEN CARRY TRADE and l'D profit or loss flowed to any noteholder. So there was no hiding of any trading from Japanese who
did not receive the benefit or detriment from any such trading. The entire allegation was a hoax upon the entire world and that includes the American people.
They handed me a scripted plea like a hostage held by Iran and told to read it before the world press. They knew their crime, for they had me state that the trading was only for the benefit of a noteholder "generally" since it was never their property. This was a FRAUD UJ?aJ THE a:xJRT and worse, A FRAlJD UJ?aJ 'mE AMERICAN PFDPLE Who all together have a reasonable expectation that government attorneys willl'faithfully" execute the laws and not manipulate them to protect New York Investment Banks who
have destroyed our economy and are placing our nation at a risk of war when it is revealed how seriously they have infiltrated the inner-workings of our government. This makes this issue with Mr. Bickell a serious mTERNATICWAL question to the core integrity of this Court as well.
Each of my filings was SFXVED upon namedpartnes and/or the Solicitor GeneraL There is no reason why 3 filings have disappeared with no trace in the Supreme Court. This does NOT look good for the Institution or for the integrity of the entire Judicial System in the United States.
I request permission to submit a Declaratory Judgment (1) on the nature of contempt, and (2) on the denial of Equal Protection of the Law because Congress has failed to expand this Court and in the absence of a National Appellate Court to guarantee Equal P1:otection of the law to ALL citizens ending this disparity among
the cirCUits, then there can be 00 discretion in this Court to pick and choose and money is no excuse. This Court should direct by mandate Congress provide the fundi.nq either that this Court hires magistrates working in 3 panel groups to ensure that EVERY filing is heard vindicating the First ~t right to Petition and the Substantive Due Pn:lcessright to access the courts. The entire purpose of the courts
--Is-fo allow citizens to be heard. That is part of a Free Democratic Society. By using technicalities and discretion to even be heard, the third branch of government cannot function independent of the Executive.
I further request that my petition for Habeas Corpus 09-7470, be resubmitted for reconsideration directly to Justice Stomayor. Let her staff review the petition and refer it to the whole court. I had sul::mitted it to Justice Scalia, but here too i twas no so presented by Mr. Bickell, who I believe wrote the outline to ensure the Court would not pay attention.
I am publishing this as an open letter on the internet. I have millions of people following this case worldwide because of its implications in covering up corruption among the NY Banks that I was activily publishing and investigating. One of the very. banks under investigation, Goldoan Sacbs, the equity receiver who illegally seized control of foreign corporations and all evidence gathered in that investigation, was then given the job of Head of Global Compliance for Goldnan Sachs. The court appointed counsel David Cooper, it turned out was so conflicted because his wife represented A[G he could not trade the stock. Yet AIG was a prime target and flew to meet me from London to ask me to stop talking about manipulating markets.
It is simply beyond coincidence that in two cases, the two main finns that we at Princeton Economics was investigating were Goldman Sachs and AIG to the point a director at board level flew from AIG to Princeton, NewJersey to ask that I stop this investigation and AIG was the epic center of this economic disaster. How is
it possible that both the court appOinted counsel has ties to AIG in the criminal case and the Head of Compliance for Gol<inan Sachs ends up still remaining to this day the receiver running the very firm that was investigating his current employer? Then, Judge Walker in the Second Circuit, grabbed each appeal and refused to ever allow a direct appeal when in fact 28 USC §47 prohibits a judge from presiding once he has made a controlling decision in the appeal, which he did. He held in 2000 that I had no rights to appeal, bail, or anything afforded by Congress in 28 USC §1826 setting the entire stage for 7! yeaiS of false imprisonment denied even counsel because Judge Richard Owen in the civil case refused to declare the case "comp.lex" which then conflicted with the criminal court to get arround the denial of a trial for nearly 7~ years. BUl' FOR the contempt, I. could not have been thrown in with terrorists to hide me from counsel when the government sought to retroactively disgorge all counsel of even earned fees, which they did, SEC v PEr, 84 FSypp2d 443, 447 (SDNY 2000)
This is why I moved for Counsel being denied counsel of choice in direct violation of US v Gonzalez-lopez, 548 US 140 (2006), yet your Mr. Bickell constantly intercepts any attempt to make my case to the Court ensuring that the policies I believe were instigated by the NY Investment Bankers & AIGto deny me counsel at every point, to increase the odds of not ever having their actions reviewed.
I ask that r be granted a stay; of all filings and that all time be tolled. I ask for permission to present a motion for counsel and to plead this oppression
to the Court, who I cannot believe supports what Mr. Bickell and others seem to be doing. One petition perhaps could get lost. NOT three! I have never lost any filing in the inferior courts so I cannot image it is the Bureau of Prisons selectively picking just filings in this Court. But the obstruction of access to the Courts is
a Federal Crime puni.shabl.e up to 5 years. I believe an investigation is warranted.
CC/INTERNE:I' Inspector General Senate Judiciary Members
various interested members of the world press
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.