OIG Hotline, this document is to request injunctive relief from the Supreme Court in requiring that Court proceedings pertaining to my conduct and that of my husband be rendered known to us.
The OIG Hotline has previously established the falsity of claims by the FBI and its affiliates allegedly pertaining to "espionage," "terrorism," "child abuse," "serial killing," threats to a judge, court or public official, and yet more allegations.
And the reason for secret Court proceedings is, according to the Patriot Act and the Espionage Act, so that federal authorities have the opportunity to prioritize the defense of the nation over and above the rights of an individual or group which may be threatening the public safety.
While secret court proceedings stand directly opposed to the Constitution of the United States, the Patriot Act and the Espionage Act seek to grant rights to federal law enforcement personnel that supersede individual liberties under extraordinary circumstances when the nation as a whole may suffer from Constitutional rights possessed by the individual.
Yet, the Espionage Act and the Patriot Act, I posit, have been abused by our national security personnel in order to further systems of knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting for anti-democratic objectives.
Secret court proceedings, in excluding the accused, function with a presumption of guilt, not the presumption of innocence required by our Constitutional guarantees.
False evidence, once revealed, results in no penalty for federal authorities who have directed, purchased, aggregated, submitted to a court of law, and often disseminated knowingly falsified information regarding law-abiding American citizens.
Instead, FBI personnel and their affiliates are free to try again another day, with another set of false witness statements, false communications, misattributed DNA, falsified location data, AI-generated photos, video and audio tapes, on and on.
The innocent "target of interest" in subsequent proceedings will once again be excluded from the Constitutional privilege of facing her accusers, of learning what crimes she is alleged to have committed and when, and of mounting a vigorous defense with the assistance of able legal representation free from conflict of interest.
Clearly, this pattern represents a flagrant challenge to Constitutional and statutory law, requiring that American citizens retain the right to access government records through the Freedom of Information Act, as well as the right to a jury trial, fair representation, the right to face their accusers, the right to examine the evidence presented, the right to a vigorous and capable defense of their honor and their innocence.
I have been deprived of my Constitutional rights in this regard, and I am still being deprived of my Constitutional rights in this realm. My attempts to retain representation through my individual queries to civil rights attorneys and the ACLU have rapidly been scuttled by FBI interference. My consultation with attorney Christopher Bou-Saeed, my short-lived hiring of Peter Schlueter, and my appeals to the ACLU were all allegedly compromised by communication from attorneys Nick Heimlich and Lior Zorea at FBI directive and for pay from the FBI.
While these FBI claims remain unsubstantiated by me, they do match my experience of obstruction of representation and due process.
When I filed suit against the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office in October of 2021 in an effort to mandate the fulfillment of my FOIA request, the FBI ensured that my Writ of Mandamus Petition was not heard within the 25 days of filing required by the California Code of Civil Procedure.
So, I require injunctive relief in this matter.
I respectfully request of the Supreme Court that concealed Court proceedings regarding me now be mandated as open Court proceedings, which are to involve me in direct consultation with my representation as I address whatever false allegations the FBI and its affiliates may be presenting.
I ask that the Supreme Court insist on the full restoration of my Constitutional rights regarding this matter.
As a law-abiding and honorable United States citizen, I request the return of my Constitutional rights before the Supreme Court not only on my own behalf, but on behalf of all law-abiding "targets of interest" who are prosecuted, and, indeed punished, in secret, without their access to open court proceedings and proper defense as guaranteed by our nation's founding documents.
If FBI personnel have been proven to have lied about my conduct even once through the presentation of false evidence, and I believe they have, the Supreme Court may justifiably assume that the agency may be planning, purchasing, aggregating and presenting evidence regarding other accusations which are knowingly false.
At the state level, lying by law enforcement officers is a fire-able offense, at least in California.
This crime is taken so seriously because of the fact that the state of California recognizes the entire progress of a civil society can be undone by law enforcement officers who choose to lie about the honorable public.
Why, then, is a lying FBI exempt from accountability regarding its crimes against the law-abiding citizenry?
I do realize that the FBI wishes to define itself as a national security agency alongside its role as a federal law enforcement agency. But there is nothing secure about a lying FBI, a lying CIA, a lying DHS, or lying local affiliates -- nothing at all.
If we cannot have confidence that the FBI is ethical and truthful about its accusations, then the agency forfeits its elevated position of public trust.
Under such circumstances, it is no longer exempt from transparency and accountability to the public at large, but rather must answer to them in an open court proceeding.
So this is the injunctive relief I now respectfully request of the Supreme Court, on behalf of myself, and on behalf of all Americans wrongfully targeted by knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting perpetrated by this agency and by its many affiliates.
Please insist that all new criminal allegations against my family members and/or myself be mandated to be heard within open court proceedings, not secret hearings. I would stipulate that our defense against prior allegations and our appeal of any prior convictions in absentia should be able to proceed expeditiously through any and all means in the interests of preserving our health and safety.
Please assist the nation in requiring that the Constitution be upheld in insisting that any and all new criminal allegations be litigated through open court proceedings, that the Constitution be reclaimed in this matter, that its provisions be reasserted in this matter in every regard.
Thank you for your ethical engagement in this serious concern, so central to the ability of our democracy to endure.
Most sincerely,
Lane MacWilliams
No comments:
Post a Comment