My Third Novel's Conclusion, My Heartbreak

My heart begins to break when I think about completing this particular book -- because this narrative has sustained me like no other story I've known. It's both more personal and more universal than my other works. But beyond memory and archetype, it's a cri-de-coeur about needing to become the person one is destined to be. And in the writing, I have met my own life's work, my own fated journey -- having the sense all the while that the pages are suffused with a resonance, an energy, an electrified field that defies explanation. Writers hope and pray to be overtaken by a work in this way -- to be conscripted into passionate service of a profound story. To experience it even once in a lifetime seems a great privilege. I still have several months before this novel is complete, and this constitutes my reprieve. Because I'm not ready for the beauty to end.




Saturday, November 23, 2024

Request for Injunctive Relief Re: The Present Necessity of an Independent Judiciary, Part #31

OIG Hotline, this constitutes my petition for injunctive relief from the Supreme Court regarding the Constitutional provision that the United States shall maintain an independent judiciary.

The FBI is violating the foundations of an independent judiciary at this time by presenting knowingly false evidence to judges, both at the state and federal level; by actively obstructing lawful process serving in certain cases; by controlling the actions of Court Clerks in the timing and technicalities of filings; by attempting to direct judge's rulings, and by extending both threats and bribes in that process; and by accessing and disseminating judge's rulings before they have been made available to plaintiffs and defendants.

These activities are affecting the lowest Courts in the United States just as they are affecting the highest.

When I filed suit in Santa Clara County in 2021 in order to ask through a Writ of Mandamus petition that my Freedom of Information Act request be fulfilled through a local Sheriff's Office, the FBI interfered with every process server I hired.  The FBI defamed me to Court clerks and directed that they file my paperwork late and incorrectly.  The FBI defamed me to Judge Carrie Zepeda, who, rather miraculously, held to her independence in ruling on my case.  And though the FBI invaded her computer to determine that she had ruled in my favor, the agency prevailed upon the Santa Clara County Superior Court not to hear my case within the 25 days of filing required by the California Code of Civil Procedure.

So, in my case a California Superior Court had its independence dessimated by an intrusive and unlawful FBI.  I won the judgment, but I never got the chance to hear it.  Justice was entirely obstructed -- not partially.  Interestingly, at multiple points during that process, the FBI conveyed to me that it would prefer that I file my case in federal court, not state court, given that in federal court, the FBI wielded -- in its own view -- much greater control.

What kind of compensation was the FBI extending to Santa Clara County Court officials for failing to set my Court hearing for a date that complied with the California Code of Civil Procedure?  How much were Court Clerks being paid to make mistakes that would fail a document review, thus disqualifying my case on a technicality?  How much were process servers being paid not to deliver documents to defendants in accordance with the state laws of California?  How much did the FBI extend to Judge Carrie Zepeda in return for the delay of her ruling until I was forced to withdraw?

Were these taxpayers funds?  Infragard funds?  CVE funds? (Countering Violent Extremism funds). 

Judges in every state are required to follow the Constitution and the the laws of the United States of America.  Would the Constitution allow organized crime to be paying off California State judges in this manner regarding a case that could have implicated its members of wrongdoing?  Then should the Constitution allow Tom Lyons to be paying off Carrie Zepeda regarding a case that would have certainly implicated the FBI of wrongdoing?

The Constitution makes clear that State rulings are not subject to federal review unless they conflict with the U.S. Constitution or federal law.

But the Honorable Judge Carrie Zepeda's ruling in my favor conflicted with neither one.  

It would merely have exposed the FBI for crimes of knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting, and it would have done so three years ago, well before the FBI had been authorized to cause countless further harms to my family members and myself.

Does the FBI have a limit with regard to its boldness in presenting knowingly false evidence to various courts?  I highly doubt that.  The FBI has shown a repeated willingness to present knowingly false evidence to the Supreme Court itself, the highest Court in the land, and, when it was further prevented from doing so, colluded with the CIA to fill in immediately with the overwhelming assist of AI-created disinformation about my family members and myself.

And it would be helpful to know whether the FBI offers to compensate higher Justices than those at the State Superior Court level for their support regarding certain cases.  

Again, would the public feel comforted if they knew that organized crime was paying judges for certain outcomes?  Then, would the public feel any better if they knew that Tom Lyons was doling out the monies?  What if the monies were coming from improper harm to a plaintiff on whose case a judge was ruling?  Would there be a concern about the independence of the judiciary in that instance, given the actions of the FBI?

I was harmed by the FBI's payment to Judge Carrie Zepeda, even though she ruled in my favor.  Her judgement was denied to me in its entirety, as a direct result of Tom Lyons' actions.  How can this be justified on the basis of any Constitutional or legal argument?

Beyond this, I ought not to have known that her ruling was written in my favor.  But I did know, because the FBI elected to convey the information to me.

Is it germane to the American public that the FBI alleges it was responsible for the orchestrating the leak of the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade?

Should the FBI be reading judges' opinions as they are being written, before they have reached the public view?  Should the FBI be attempting to alter those decisions in some cases?  What should the role of the FBI be when the upholding of the Constitution, federal or state law, or Federal Rules of Civil Procedure could result in the agency being implicated of wrongdoing toward the law-abiding American public?

Should the FBI be allowed to threaten judges?

Should the FBI be allowed to falsely claims that a plaintiff has threatened a judge or a public official?

If the FBI has been found to be presenting false and defamatory evidence within a court, or extending knowingly false accusations within a court with the hope of justifying the physical harm of a plaintiff, what should happen to agency staff members who have participated in the falsehoods?  What should happen to those who knowingly authorized the falsehoods?

I believe wholeheartedly that the FBI is violating the Constitution in disregarding the fundamental precepts necessary for an independent judiciary.  If the FBI has wrongfully "targeted" a virtuous American, the agency will be presenting volumes of knowingly falsified information in a court of law.  And if that proceeding is secret, a virtuous American may have no means of defending herself whatsoever.

If the FBI or the President obstructs the fulfillment of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, as appears to be happening in this case, then the FBI may succeed in taking her life or her family members' lives before she can ever be notified that she has representation.  

Does that uphold the civil liberties and human rights of a whistleblower advocating for the rights of many?

With this petition, I respectfully request the Supreme Court to rule on whether the FBI should be able to threaten the Honorable Justices, to treat them with contempt in presenting them with knowingly false evidence on a regular basis, to induce them to alter judgements in cases deemed to risk the exposure of the FBI's most corrupt programs, to spy on their judgements while they are still being written, and to disseminate those judgements when the FBI deems it to their political advantage.  Should the FBI be able to wield financial remuneration to any judge at any level within the United States in return for what is considered to be a favorable ruling?  Should the FBI be able to pay Court Clerks or Court Recorders to erase records of state or federal courts?  How about the Supreme Court itself?  Isn't the record of the Supreme Court's rulings critical to its role in defending the Constitution of the United States on behalf of the American people?

If the FBI can hide the facts, presented to the Supreme Court, that President Biden awarded more than 6.5 trillion dollars under my name so that he could defraud the U. S. government, deprive my family and me of our inalienable rights in trying to take our lives repeatedly, commit forgery and perpetrate election fraud, then hasn't the agency violated the foundational requirements of an independent judiciary?

And if the Supreme Court cannot remain independent from the FBI's infiltration, can we really expect that any other court in the United States can remain free from the FBI's control either?

Good people, they cannot.

If the Supreme Court cannot insist on its independence from FBI coercion and control, then other lower courtrooms cannot insist, with lesser resources and scanter support, that they remain independent either.

And do we trust that the FBI possesses sufficient wisdom to determine the fair and impartial outcome of all court cases within the United States at the federal and state level?

Do we think it appropriate that the FBI should pay neighbors to sue neighbors as they often do with "targets of interest" who cannot fathom their neighbors' sudden aggression -- as they did with Mike and Susan Mokelke's unjustified lawsuit against my husband and myself?

Do we think it appropriate that the FBI should stage car accidents in order to impoverish "targets of interest" with follow on lawsuits?  Do we think it appropriate that the FBI should pay vacation renters to stage accidents in order to sue their "target of interest" landlords -- as Tom Lyons did with a vacation renter in my family's Cape Cod home?

Do we all feel comfortable in entering the FBI's legal gamesmanship?  Do we all feel comfortable in allowing the FBI to determine who will be accused of what?  Who will be defamed to their attorneys behind the scenes and who will receive impartial legal representation?  Who will be found guilty and who will be found innocent?  Who will go to prison and who will go free?  Who will die in prison and who will live?

Good people of the OIG Hotline, I don't.

I do not feel comfortable with the manner in which the FBI is violating the Constitutional requirements for an independent judiciary.  And if the American people knew the control over our independent judicial system currently being exerted by the FBI, I don't believe they would be comfortable with it either.

So, I respectfully ask the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court to rule on this issue not merely for themselves.  But I ask the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court to rule on this issue knowing that their determination will define the independence of the judiciary in every court within our nation.  Every single one.

The Supreme Court has a remarkable opportunity in this case to reclaim the sovereignty of American jurisprudence, and to reject the FBI's claim that its influence is necessary for the welfare of the unwitting public.  

The FBI would perhaps claim that critical evidence regarding a complainant or a defendant cannot always be formally presented due to certain requirements of the law.  But I can unequivocally state as someone who has been wrongfully defamed by the FBI with knowingly false material presented to court clerks, process servers, and judges, that there are reasons for those "certain requirements of the law" and, in our quest for a more perfect nation,  we don't want to leave those reasons behind.

On behalf of the American people as a whole, I respectfully ask that the FBI and all of its affiliates, including but not limited to the CIA, the DHS and DoD, be prevented from interfering in court processes, from breaching attorney-client privilege, from violating conflict of interest provisions within all State Bar Associations, from invading the electronic devices of judges and court clerks in order to alter court records or appropriate court rulings in advance of their being made public through normal processes of the Court, from altering or obstructing the work of process servers, from defaming clients to their attorneys, from compensating or otherwise rewarding Americans to file suit against one another, from wielding payments or rewards to process servers, court clerks, attorneys, or judges, from presenting evidence to judges outside of the knowledge of complainants' or plaintiffs' representation, from seeking to harm "targets of interest" on the basis of knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting, from withholding from plaintiffs the knowledge that they have been accused, and from depriving plaintiffs of the right to face their accusers in a court of law, and from depriving "targets of interest" of their rights to representation.

Americans have the right to the ready defense of the sovereignty of jurisprudence within this nation, just as they have the right to due process according to the Constitution of the United States.

I respectfully request that the OIG Hotline provide to my legal representatives, whoever they may be, any and all content previously provided to your Office pertaining to events at the Santa Clara County Superior Court in 2021 and 2022 regarding FBI interference in the cases I filed there; the lawsuit of our neighbors Mike and Susan Mokelke, instigated by the FBI, and the landslide that preceded it, also caused by the FBI; and the staged accident and gratuitous lawsuit of summer tenants at our Cape Cod home, all planned, compensated, and advanced by the FBI.

These abuses will not be exceptions within this country unless the Supreme Court can defend all of America's jurisprudence by showing the FBI and its affiliate agencies the metaphorical door.

On the website of the Santa Clara County Superior Court, the Court describes its mission as the following:

The Superior Court in Santa Clara County serves the public by providing equal justice for all in a fair, accessible, effective, efficient, and courteous manner: by resolving disputes under the law; by applying the law consistently, impartially and independently; and by instilling public trust and confidence in the Court.

With all due respect, that was not my experience.  And the Superior Court was not to blame.  The FBI was.

Do we now possess the wisdom to root out the problem that has infiltrated our court system in the United States?  Do we possess the strength to insist that our courts can serve the public by providing equal justice for all, instilling public trust and confidence?

Please help me in insisting that we do.

Most respectfully,

Lane MacWilliams

P.S. -- Please allow me to once again extend the disclaimer that some threats received by me and extended by the FBI are unsubstantiated by me at this time.  I regret that I am unable to assess the credibility of every threat extended by this agency or its affiliates, and also that I am not in a position to judge the likelihood of manifestation.  Having said that, many of the FBI's threats toward my family in the past have manifested in real-world harms.  As a result, I believe that FBI threats extended to me must be viewed as potentially substantive.

No comments:

Post a Comment