ACCESS TO THE COURTS

A Fundamental Right and Necessity

Warning: Unwritten Rules by attorneys and judges use prejudice to subvert the law and violate the constitutional rights of citizens!

CONTACT info@accesstothecourts.org to share your story of treachery and tyranny in the US justice system - a "monoply", in the opinion of Access To The Courts, with respect to the domination of attorneys in both the practice and (lack of) oversight of conduct in the system, leading the abuses against rightful pro se litigants.

Martin Luther King Jr. had a Dream, but the Players in our legal system have a Nightmare.
(The Lynch Opinion in the You Have A Nightmare speech refers to that of First Circuit appellate judge Sandra Lynch, along with Jeffrey Howard, and Norman Stahl.  Lynch first involved herself in the matters of the subject of this website when she failed to properly address the unethical conduct of attorney Stephen C. Pfaff and District Court judge William G. Young, and when she allowed the further misconduct of attorney Pfaff during a civil appeal, and when she dismissed the civil appeal after egregious misconduct, allowing a legitimate civil complaint to be dismissed with prejudice yet not on the merits; she effectively assisted in a criminal prosecution of a civil litigant alleging serious official misconduct, in a role to BLOCK ACCESS TO THE COURTS!)

"A man is facing increasing and intentionally prejudiced proceedings in the US legal system upon reporting ongoing official misconduct, a situation presenting opportunities for continued misconduct by police, attorneys, and judges for the sake of covering up of official misconduct spawned and incited by the prejudiced record." - Founder, Access To The Courts (.org)

WARNING: Unwritten Rules by attorneys and judges use prejudice to subvert the law and violate the constitutional rights of citizens!  Our rights are not merely to protect "us" (as they do not inherently do that), but they allow us to challenge the abuses by those to whom we the people give power.  As Lord Acton reminds us, power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  You might be familiar with these Twelve Incarnates of the Unwritten Rules.

"Let monopolies and all kinds and degrees of oppression be carefully guarded against." - Samuel Webster, 1777

"The citizen who stands by his legal rights in the face of lawless government misconduct upholds the law and renders a service not only to himself but the public generally."

Justice Sanders (defending the right to forceably resist false arrest), writing in dissent,
State v. Valentine, 935 P.2d 1294.  WA Supreme Court, 1997
[1997 is the year a key incident set the person highlighted herein (Jeffrey L. Clemens) on a devasting path, basically because he did NOT forceably resist a false [citizen] arrest by Gavin Debecker & Associates employee William D. Michaelis, who had actually carried out an assault, but was never charged. What followed is simply a coverup.  Then, prejudicial coverup upon coverup, and ultimately to a grand (unnecessary, excessive, vindictive, injurious) assault on the same man by US Marshals, from which Access To The Courts lost most of its respect for the US Marshal Service.]

“The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crises maintain their neutrality.”  [Dante]

A partial list of THOSE possibly going to hell’s hottest places:

US House Committee on the Judiciary

For over ten years, the Committee on the Judiciary has literally ignored petitions  of judicial misconduct, while not informing petitioners of the prerequisite to first submit complaints to the Judicial Counsels (of the Circuit Courts of Appeals).  Their conduct is derelict and disingenuous, but consistent with the utter disregard for maintaining integrity in the judicial system.  One petitioner, Jeffrey L. Clemens, suffered avoidable abuse by derelicts, IF ONLY the Committee had the decency to acknowledge submittals and direct petitioners to a simple process.

Board of Bar Overseers (Massachusetts)

The BBO, in concert with the OBC, ignored and confounded numerous complaints against attorneys, making sure to keep submitters in the dark.  Such attorney misconduct involved public servants and their derelictions.  The BBO entertained a report by newly appointed Elisabeth DiTomassi (a long term former Massachusetts public servant) to exonerate a misconducting attorney (Stephen C. Pfaff) to aid such so-called victim in a criminal prosecution against the complaint submitter, thus supporting a malicious prosecution of an innocent man alleging official misconduct of which Mr. Pfaff was paid to defend in a civil lawsuit.  It seems that IT IS WHO YOU KNOW that decides the winners in the court litigation game.  Unwritten Rules and Dishonesty – in plain view – make it happen.   About everyone in the system wins, but the public loses.

Office of Bar Counsel (Massachusetts)

The OBC ignored and confounded numerous complaints against attorneys, making sure to keep submitters in the dark.  Such attorney misconduct involved public servants and their derelictions.

US DOJ Office of Inspector General

The DOJ OIG ignored, and falsely defended such ignoring acts, several complaints submitted to the Hotline against FBI agents, where evidence of perjury and false reporting were provided.  The OIG is a sickening mockery of an oversight agency, allowing the continued criminal conduct of the FBI.

Town of Scituate (Massachusetts) Board of Selectmen

The Scituate Board of Selectmen (BOS) ignored written complaints of police misconduct and hired a law firm to specifically subvert ethics and conduct rules to maliciously prosecute a defendant who had cause to be protected against police abuses, abuses of which meant a potential liability to the town.  The BOS members are public servants and their conduct is derelict and technically criminal, with respect to the suborning of perjury by their attorney Stephen C. Pfaff.  Dishonesty and dereliction gets you continued benefits in that town, in that state, in our US of A.

Are these Derelicts enough to sense a problem, a system problem, or a cultural problem?  These people should be feeling the heat NOW.

1:07-cv-10845-RGS

Clemens v. TOS et al

5/3/07

Default/No Answer/Dismissed

1:09-cv-11821-WGY

Clemens v. TOS et al

10/27/09

Default/No Answer/Dismissed

1:13-cv-11598-FDS

Clemens v. TOS et al

7/8/13

Default/No Answer/Dismissed

1:13-cv-13084-WGY

Clemens v. TOS et al

12/3/13

No Answer/Show Cause/Dismissed

 

Why are the prosecutions by AUSA Phillip E. Porter (Matthew Richard Walker case in Missouri Western District Court Case 5:14-cr-06002-DGK) and AUSA David Tobin (Clemens case in Boston Massachusetts District Court Case 1:10-cr-10124-DPW) - both are prosecutions for alleged violations of 18 USC 875(c) - so divergent, with explicit threats detailing torture leading to no prison, while merely an email declaring a mere wish lead to an assault by Marshals and 5 years in prison?  Walker had no Scituate Police Department cover up, involving the very same Massachusetts DA office where AUSA Tobin worked as an Assistant DA.  And so on, as the intentional prejudicing of an innocent Mr. Clemens has left us a shell of a legal system, a fraud upon the people of the US, with Douglas P. Woodlock and William G. Young chiefly responsible for the misconduct in the lower ranks of the legal system, namely police.  One wonders if the police fatal shooting of an unarmed man in Ferguson, MO is not really a result of a culture of dishonesty and prejudice in our police forces (and on up the chain of lawyers – the “handlers”).  Ask Judge Woodlock or Young, for if they continue their derelictions and self-serving behavior, the aforementioned culture will undoubtedly catch up to them.  Let us hope the US Congress catches up to them first.  [READ MORE about the Scituate Cases]  Click on these two links for a disturbing look at police and justice in the USA:

Summary of the How and Why behind the Intentional Prejudicing of a Victim of Police Misconduct

5 Incidents and 15 Lawsuits and NO Police Accountability

20 Year Cycle of Prejudice against The White Guy & we get Ferguson MO, Cleveland OH, NYC ... 

And, the latest prejudicing as of April 13, 2016...The Medford Matter (Are "we" done, yet?)
"I'm a police officer. I don't care what you have to say." - Medford Police Detective Shawn Norton to ATTC Founder on 4/13/2016
In February 2015, Medford Police Officer Shawn Norton was put on administrative leave for his arrest for DUI and Hit & Run.


And now - May 12, 2017 - the promised update to The Medford Matter...
                           The Medford Incident
where ATTC informs the latest witness of police misconduct (by Detective Shawn Norton).

What if you were FBI agent S. Cody Abram and you were asked to investigate a crime?

Read our DISCLAIMER
- the included list of injuries -sprains, bruises, lacerations, swelling, soreness, bumps, and shooting pains - to the person highlighted on this website are a result of a viscious, muliple attack noted below.  View the first attack.  Video of the second more violent attack was withheld despite a FOIA request.  ATTC has found Mental Health Issues, and a vague, often unfounded, pre-textual belief in what someone might do (leading to false criminal accusations), are the new deal in modern law enforcement...protection by pre-emption, mirroring US foreign policies with which we are now familiar, a la Iraq - the fake pretexted war.  It is ironic that the highlighted person herein participated in the March 2003 peace vigil "protest" of the invasion of Iraq, as documented in a front page pictorial posted elsewhere on this site. 
Peninsula Daily News
                     Jeffrey L. Clemens - front and center

Perhaps, this person's over seven year odyssey of prejudice and imprisonment with vested security state entities is no coincidence.  "They" demonize (criminalize) the enemy (i.e., civil plaintiff against official misconduct) through the "justice" department of the security state (US).

If they imprison you (and they will lie, cheat, and steal to do just that - take Massachusetts attorney Stephen C. Pfaff, and his law school classmate David G. Tobin, and his associate FBI agent Rachel Boisselle, for instance), they will have players (like defense attorneys) reframe issues (at hearings, trials, and appeals) AWAY from your access to the courts right and TO an issue of first amendment right to free speech, thus burying all that lying, cheating, and stealing in an apparent difference of opinion about what your words mean!

We have a president that publicly believes it ok to kill people with drones WITHOUT judicial due process, while having a Justice department publicly prosecute and imprison, WITHOUT proper and ethical judicial due process, a man for reacting to the criminal actions of fellow citizens with some words (during the attempted exercise of his right to access to the courts during a civil lawsuit)...and the last time this founder checked, words never killed anybody. 

The War on Terror to protect our citizenry is really a War OF Terror on the citizenry.  Will your right to free speech protect you?  [Maybe, but likely with a lot of delay, as "they" first abuse it and you then have to defend and fight for it].  OR, will your right to access to the courts protect you?  [Only if it is respected and acknowledged, something that the federal courts do not do when they choose to perceive you as an enemy or a criminal.]  Consider this possibility, that if the Tsarnaev brothers had known of their right to take their grievance of state violence to the courts, then those killed and maimed in Boston in April 2013 would not have a sorrowful grievance today.

         
         ATTC founder visits with Mr. Constitutional Rights and visits the First Amendment Center


CLICK on image above for printable PDF version...and then imagine what the circling hordes of SOPS were thinking when they reflexively (to the intentionally built up prejudice) went after Jeffrey, while ignoring radical extremists wanting to blow up Americans.

Unlike FBI-neglected Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the FBI-targeted Jeffrey Clemens went to the US legal system for help.  Of course, the FBI knew that radical extremists tended to ignore the legal system as a means for redress.  To call the Attorney Stephen C. PFAFF - FBI collusion a "sting" to nab Clemens would be a huge understatement, though you can still wonder why the FBI hung with Mr. Pfaff during the civil litigation Jeffrey Clemens brought against errant cops and their town...?

ANSWER: Those errant cops in Scituate Massachusetts had previously colluded with the FBI for mutual illicit benefit from 2005 through 2008, beginning with the sharing of the now famous (and false) OHARA Report. 

The Accusers (of Mental Health Issues)

(The following 12 persons ALL have ties to the legal system and ALL have accused Jeffrey L. Clemens of having Mental Health Issues…)

Chris Alverson                   Threat Manager
Michael OHara                  Police Officer
Thomas Weldon               Assistant US Attorney
Brent Tabacchi                  Assistant US Attorney
Jane Randall                       Attorney (CJA)
Bruce Yanofsky                 Forensic Psychologist
Ruth Granberry                 US Probation Officer
Charlene Cassel                 Forensic Psychologist
Ron Nieberding                  Forensic Psychologist
Anne McDonough            Attorney
Ian Gold                               Attorney (CJA)
Paul Camarena                   Attorney (CJA) 

The Accusers (of Crimes)

(The following 10 persons have ALL made provably false claims of criminal conduct against Jeffrey L. Clemens…not one claim has derived from a private citizen complaint…) 

Bob Thompson                 Police Detective [The man who planted the seed of intentional prejudicing in a cover up.]
William Michaelis             Security Pseudo Police Officer
Jeffrey Roberts (MSP)   Police Officer
Brian Pearl                          Police Officer
Michael OHara                  Police Officer
Tim Goyette                       Police Officer
John Rooney                      Police Officer
Ingerd Sotelo                     FBI Police Officer
Rachel Boisselle                FBI Police Officer
Douglas P. Woodlock      US District Judge 

The very first mental evaluation of Mr. Clemens, by a professional psychologist in August and September 2005, found no mental health issues.  Federal defender Shereen Charlick found a more “compliant” professional accomplice, a Dr. Bruce Yanofsky (of Chula Vista, CA), finding Mr. Clemens delusional, without actually verifying anything true or not.  Mr. Yanofsky has ties to Boston and Saint Petersburg, as does Paul Camarena, who in his appellate brief basically attempts to support the hack job by a self-interested forensic psychologist - actually several of them, whose paychecks essentially come from the courts. 

Most of the aforementioned persons have been proximate to the 6 physical assaults upon Jeffrey L. Clemens…1 by a Security Officer (working for an associate of the FBI and other agencies), 3 by Police Officers, and 2 by inmates where Jeffrey had been forced to be with on account of the accusations.  Physical injuries resulted from four of the assaults and are documented by medical records. 

Chris Alverson, covering up the assault by his associate William Michaelis at the security and THREAT management firm Gavin Debecker & Associates (an FBI associate), was the first ever to accuse Jeffrey L. Clemens of having Mental Health Issues, a written accusation of which was successful in turning municipal prosecutors to filing a trespass charge against Mr. Clemens, rather than an assault charge against Mr. Michealis...trespassing in a public lobby! [laugh, then cry] 

Judge Woodlock allowed a prolonged and double assault upon Mr. Clemens on January 13, 2012 in US District Court, both assaults of which are documented on video recordings.  Without a factual basis – including no written sworn statements from the assaulting US Marshals – Woodlock made a finding that there had been No Excessive Force.  He also found, in open court, that Mr. Clemens was in Criminal Contempt of Court.  The witness Access To The Courts founder and two video recordings say otherwise.  Judge Woodlock is the ultimate in public servant betrayal and professional pretension, and he participated in a criminal cover up.  We can see now how judicial misconduct is the Enabler and Root Cause of all misconduct in the legal system, and THAT is a big problem for democracy, peace, and justice.

Judge Woodlock mentioned a Mr. Camarena in a Fall 2011 court hearing – amounting to a slip, months before a Notice of Appeal was filed by Mr. Clemens and BEFORE the initial assignment of Mr. Camarena to Mr. Clemens as appellate counsel.  Mr. Camarena ignored every error in a trial proceeding and alleged one issue for appeal, whether or not the (Woodlock) court erred in allowing Mr. Clemens to represent himself when he is unable to control himself in court.  Mr. Paul Camarena – CPA and licensed attorney – is a derelict of a high order, who has chosen to help Judge Woodlock out of his professional conundrum of phony professionalism, dishonesty, and criminal conduct, if not gross negligence.  By the way, Mr. Clemens did NOT represent himself at trial, as another young, inexperienced, mental health issue touting Ian Gold – NYU Law School classmate of Paul Camarena – did.  We should mention that so-called threat victim Stephen Pfaff and Assistant US Attorney David Tobin were Suffolk Law 1988 classmates. 

Systemic intentional prejudice and an irresponsible lack of oversight and discipline by oversight authorities, including bar associations, judicial counsels, and legislative commissions, have allowed the justice system to be more aptly named the Judicially Unprofessional Seriously Tainted Injustice System, or Just Is.  No, it won’t.  Not for long.

READ THIS SUMMATION... Juror Number Twelve
if you do not read anything else on this website!  We present an interesting Parallels of Prejudice.

READ ON - Bur first, these headlines in March 2013...

Former US Senator (and Judiciary Committee chair) and current Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine seeks indictments of those who allowed the Steubenville gang rape last year

This would have been the headline in  2004, when the individual highlighted herein had sought help...

US Senator (and Judiciary Committee chair) Mike DeWine sicks Capitol Police on victim of gang rape by those in the federal judicial system

Indeed, Senator DeWine used Capitol Police to instruct Jeffrey L. Clemens not to contact his office (about his complaint against US District Judges Tevrizian, Keller, and others).  What has happened to Jeffrey L. Clemens since, from 2004 through 2012, at the hands of errant public servants, is nothing short of a gang rape.  Access To Courts has faced opposition trying to document the abuses, even encountering a website shutdown and expungement of all (hundreds of) files in 2008, at a time very beneficial to parties still actively engaged in raping Mr. Clemens.  Some of the rapists (accusers) are listed above.


The Open Letter to the residents of Scituate, Massachusetts calls for demanding the firing of Scituate Police officers Tim Goyette, Michael OHara, and John Rooney - for crimes committed and crimes covered up.  The Open Letter has these clarifying attachments:

Attachment A - The Scituate Scandal
Attachment B - The Hingham Horror
Attachment C - The LA Lies
Attachment D - The Boston Brainwash

The Case for Demonstrating Kidnapping is the latest project of Access To The Courts and will be the factual and theoretical basis for disciplining those engaging in undue force and frauds, a prelude to the reform that is on the horizon.

The Oversight and Government Reform Committee, including US Representative Elijah E. Cummings of Maryland, will be helping to address the systemic dishonesty and prejudice.

These documents (letters) are filed on the public docket of USDC MAD Boston Case 10-cr-10124-DPW.  Read them for insight, pleasure, or simple awareness of systemic prejudice spanning 17 years...
Attorney Misconduct
Office of Bar Counsel
US Marshals Visit
Administrative Offfice of the US Courts
CJA Attorney
DOJ Office of Inspector General
Derelictions - Call for an Impeachment

ATTC calls for the Impeachment of USDC Judge Douglas P. Woodlock.  The ethical lapses and corrupt practices are certainly on par with the recently impeached and removed USDC Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr., in the Fall of 2010.  Mr. Woodlock spent most of his time on the federal bench in the time since the last two impeachments and removals in 1989, of Judge Alcee L. Hastings and Judge Walter M. Nixon.  Judge Woodlock would be the 9th federal judge removed from the bench.

"The Independent OBSERVER" returns with a series of Reports to the Massachusetts Attorney General Office (MAGO). Attachments to the Reports are included elsewhere on the website.  Report 1 in an Introduction to the Lifelong Prejudicing against Jeffrey L. Clemens.

MAGO Report 1 re Introduction to the Life Long Prejudicing
MAGO Report 1A re The Role of Charm in the Judicial Faux Police Force
MAGO Report 2 re The Scituate Matter
MAGO Report 3 re The Los Angeles Matter
MAGO Report 3A re The LA Matter - Details
MAGO Report 4 re The Boston Matter (Revealing the Real Crimes)
MAGO Report 5 re The Beverly Hills Matter (Setting the Stage for Prejudice)
MAGO Report 6 re The Bellevue Matter (Planting the Seed of Prejudice)

January 2012 - The parents weigh in as they submit their first ever letter to a judge, Woodlock in this Boston case.  The ATTC founder weighs in to the District Court's own police force, proving that the Third Time's a Charm...the Pre-Trial Services and Probation Department has the stain of prejudice on its hands, three times over!

As of Friday the 13th of January 2012, a civil-plaintiff-turned-criminal-defendant matter is before the Judge Douglas P. Woodlock of the US District Court in Boston.  The case – U.S. v. Jeffrey L. Clemens – is born out of disrespect for US Constitutional rights and disregard for the rule of law by errant, self-serving public servants who have intentionally prejudiced an innocent man denied access to the courts and undermined in his pursuit of the truth.

THE VISCOUS ATTACK...

A big question arose on Friday the 13th when Mr. Clemens stood up at a hearing to object (as he was representing himself)– Why did a band of US Marshals corral, handcuff, THEN throw down and violently abuse Mr. Clemens in open court, leading to minutes of screams in pain?  The US Marshals moved Mr. Clemens to a side room where screams continued for several more minutes.  Needless to say, the hearing was continued.

The matter is now a criminal matter.  The victim is Jeffrey L. Clemens.  The perpetrators are the US Marshals, heretofore respected by Access To The Courts, but doubtful from here out.  The conduct of US Marshals on Friday the 13th was horrific and brutal.  But the “why” question remains, and Access To The Courts is committed to answering it.

A culture of prejudice pervades our US legal system, at both the state and federal levels.  Egregious state-federal intermingling – unethical and illegal – have plagued Jeffrey L. Clemens since May 12, 2005, because Jeffrey’s pursuit of truth crossed paths with an ill-informed, dishonest, and prejudicing Sergeant Michael O’Hara of the Scituate Police Department in Scituate, Massachusetts.

We were to find that a significant portion of the legal system was to engage in a cover up of perjury and false reporting by Sergeant O’Hara, including his attorney Stephen C. Pfaff, aided by his 20 years as a lawyer and experience defending FBI agents.  In turn, the misconduct of Mr. Pfaff has been covered up and/or ignored by a host of derelict public servants in the state and federal Courts, Office of Bar Counsel, Massachusetts Attorney General Office, Massachusetts State Police, and others.

Aided by his Suffolk Law School classmate - and Assistant US Attorney and former Plymouth County Assistant DA David G. Tobin (whose DA’s office pursued 3 baseless criminal charges against Jeffrey L. Clemens stemming from a May 12, 2005 incident with Sergeant O’Hara, whose provably perjured report was forwarded to the FBI in May 2005) - attorney Stephen C. Pfaff is portrayed as a victim of a threatening email from Jeffrey L. Clemens in ongoing litigation with the Town of Scituate.

Attorney Pfaff presented an email Ex Parte (an ethical violation) to the US District Court and minutes later informed the Court, Ex Parte again, that he had contacted the FBI.  Within hours, US District Court Judge William G. Young had dismissed the Clemens suit against the Town of Scituate (for Malicious Prosecution of the Unlicensed Private Investigator and Criminal Harassment charges) AND co-defendant Stephen C. Pfaff, and had made a criminal allegation (in a show cause order) against Mr. Clemens, an impetus to a subsequent arrest by the FBI (also recipient of the O’Hara Report in May 2005) and prosecution by Pfaff’s classmate Tobin.  Judge Young had given the FBI a green light to pursue Clemens.

Mr. Tobin used provably false statements and intentional prejudicing at a grand jury in order to obtain an indictment in April 2010.  The Assistant US Attorney withheld transcripts of the grand jury for over 10 months.  Despite Judge Woodlock’s documented admission of a level of prejudice at the grand jury, the indictment was allowed to stand.  The proceedings, including a joke trial that followed this series of unethical behavior, is subject of another still unfolding chapter.

Where did this journey for Jeffrey L. Clemens begin?  Bellevue, Washington 1994, when Jeffrey was issued a provably false speeding ticket, was assaulted (bruised), and threatened by Bellevue police officer Dennis L. Richards.  The department retaliated against Jeffrey for making a complaint, by detaining him during a discussion of the complaint and forwarding status to the FBI that Jeffrey had been arrested for Criminal Harassment.  That was Jeffrey’s first item in his evolving Criminal History.  What followed in the years to come – questionable charges, police assaults, shady public defender deals - is incredible, yet fully and truly a reflection of the culture of prejudice amongst our police, attorneys, and courts, like that which played out on Friday the 13th.

CRIMINAL HISTORY – whatever THAT means…

Access To The Courts finds that Jeffrey has never committed a crime in his life – traffic infractions yes, crimes no, as he is a documented victim of police, attorney, and judicial misconduct through a series of extremely prejudicial acts and omissions designed to propel Jeffrey toward the label of “Career Criminal” and away from very unprofessional, unethical, and often criminal police misconduct.

1)      Criminal Harassment arrest by Bellevue Police retaliating for a complaint of police misconduct.  The arrest was actually a detention and an act of harassment against Mr. Clemens.  That first item on his criminal history report from the FBI swayed a prosecutor (who showed the report to Jeffrey) in Beverly Hills to charge Mr. Clemens (who had pleaded for weeks for a charge against his attacker) with trespassing instead of charging William Michaelis with an assault, where he knocked Jeffrey down to the floor of a public lobby and citizen arrested him.  We were to find out - after Mr. Michaelis had given a false name - that he was a security guard with Gavin Debecker & Associates, a security and THREAT MANAGEMENT firm with known professional associations with the FBI, US Secret Service (especially via its own liaison Jeffrey Marquart, who has relatives in Massachusetts), and US Marshals - the instigators in a viscious attack on Mr. Clemens on Friday the 13th of January 2012.  Jeffrey was to be entrenched in civil litigation with Gavin Debecker & Associates for the next decade, interupted only by the falsified criminal complaints and arrests by its associate, the FBI.

2)      Police as witnesses.  All criminal allegations have come from Police as witnesses.

3)      No guilty pleas to any charge.  Often, the police withheld discovery and video tape evidence.

4)      No trials (and no guilty verdicts), except the joke trial of May 11, 2011, where discovery, witnesses, and a competent defense counsel were withheld by Judge Woodlock, himself an involved party in the brutal melee in his courtroom on Friday the 13th of January 2012:  The Judge sat for minutes through screams by Clemens without “calling off the dogs”, instead calling for more dogs (US Marshals and security personnel).  Therefore, criminal allegations have not been countered, defended against, or faced the scrutiny of (legitimate) trials.

5)      Traffic Stops by Police.  All criminal allegations have stemmed from Police pullovers in a vehicle, except the first two (Bellevue 1995 – never charged; Beverly Hills – exonerated –not reported!).

6)      Out of State License Plates.  The vehicles involved in all the traffic stops all had out of state plates, common targets of profiling by police agencies for being pulled over.

7)      Majority of criminal allegations made by the Massachusetts State Police (MSP).

8)      Criminal Harassment threat made by the MSP to the ATTC founder attempting to lodge a criminal complaint against officer O’Hara and attorney Pfaff in January 2011, months before the only trial against the accused Mr. Clemens.  Neither MAGO nor MSP conducted investigations.

The big Question - do Mental Health issues explain the Criminal History, or does the legal system’s own Mental Disorder – PREJUDICE – explain where we are at today?  Tobin, Pfaff, Woodlock, care to answer?

ONCE UPON A TIME IN A TOWN IN AMERICA, a woman driver slides and spins her car - 225 degrees - in 8 inches of snow and stops off the berm.  Rather than offer help, the nearby resident calls 9-1-1, as he is more concerned with his lawn and making an insurance claim.  Two police officers arrive, snap pictures, talk to the driver, and talk to the resident.  The woman driver is arrested for DUI, on a Sunday evening in a snow storm.  To substantiate the arrest, police falsify their report (to the court the next morning - Monday)...
Police: Document a drift (conflicting with their own sketches), rather than a spin, to imply an influence; fabricate a BAC printout; destroy the pictures (which exonerate the driver); file a falsified report to the court; send a "corrected" incident report to the resident (as he had requested a report).
Public Defender: Fails to file a Notice of Appearance; meets the driver for the first time after 16 days in jail; uses a plea agreement, without prior notice to the driver, to get her out of jail - the plea agreement contains no facts supporting a charge; driver is not informed of any facts of the case and is not informed of the missing pictures or of a BAC printout.
Court: Reads no facts into the court record nor acknowledges any facts supporting a charge, even at arraignment before sending her to jail (with bail she could not afford); to date, the Court refuses to produce the probable cause and failed to produce the police report presumably used for probable cause; in the mean time, the public defender office destroys the driver's case file.  Efforts through motions and appeals and civil lawsuits are persistently undermined in derelict, dishonest, and disingenuous ways...by those holding JD degrees.

Officer John Nutter:  Pathetic Liar and Derelict Police Officer
Publice Defender Alex Stalker:  Pathetic Derelict Attorney
Judge Rick Porter:  Derelict Jurist and active agent in perpetuating a culture of dishonesty and prejudice in the legal system. What is his agenda? Does wanting to be sworn in as judge with a priest imply anything...?  Does running a court like a corporation, with non-transparency and emphasis on the bottom line and profits, suggest anything?

The driver is now caught in a viscous cycle of fines (nearly $3000), suspended driver license episodes due to missing fine payments, and difficulties getting around and getting over the pyschological burden of being a perpetual innocent victim and facing an unaccountable legal system headed by misguided, cheating judges.  The driver in this story has no relation or association whatsoever with Jeffrey L. Clemens of this website.  [Story presented by the observing ATTC founder]

[Clallam County (Washington) District Court One case PCR 15008, open as of 2/22/2013]

SURVEY - Released November 3, 2011 at 2:15 pm EDT

Would you...
A) File a criminal charge if a man tried to run a Massachusetts State Police officer over with his car?
OR
B) File a criminal charge if a man resists getting out of his car for an unspecified traffic stop in Massachusetts?

Most would answer A, but the Massachusetts State Police chose B in 2002, and the subject herein - Jeffrey Clemens - with that choice has had to live a prejudiced legal nightmare ever since!  Makes you think.  Actually it makes the legal profession think of incredible ways to conceal the matter, thus one of the many reasons for this organization!

"Their Lies, The Problem" - July 16, 2011
(a two-page summary of prejudice, submitted by our founder)

ATTENTION (for a one page summary telling it all - or foretelling...)
Cycle Of Prejudices (COPs) against Jeffrey L. Clemens - 17 Years
(coincidentally the same as the 17 year cycle of the "Living [US] Constitution") 

NEWS - May 11, 2011 in US District Court - Boston 

Jeffrey L. Clemens is found NOT GUILTY by a reasonable jury upon a fair trial by an impartial judge, non-malicious prosecutor, and effective assistance of counsel, but guilty by a fear-induced jury, after derelictions of a partial judge, the malice of a US Attorney prosecutor involved in a criminal coverup of police and attorney misconduct, and the utter almost criminal and certainly intentional dereliction of a court-appointed counsel, whom the defendant was forced to use, despite a motion to remove the counselor, a 17-page motion identifying a mountain of derelictions, including helping the delay of discovery needed for trial preparation and the failure to request relevant information from the FBI; trial derelictions include not allowing the defendant to testify and not including ex culpatory exhibits for the jury to see, including the communications with parties in a related lawsuit wherein the defendant identified ethical violations of the soon to be victim-attorney (for Scituate) in the current prosecution!  More details to come.

The Real Story was presented to The Patriot Ledger before the trial.

ALERT - April 29, 2011 re Misconduct of Attorney David G. Tobin
The actions of this attorney amount to criminal behavior, so the public is warned herein.  A complaint is now lodged with the Massachusetts BBO...Complaint of Attorney Misconduct [DRAFT]

ANNOUNCEMENT - For Lawyers, Judges (and Citizens to know)

Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct apply to lawyers practicing in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, including the United States District Court.  Similar rules apply in all states and in all courts.  Per RPC rule 8.4

It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:

(a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;

(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation;

(d) engage in contact that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;

(f) knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law;
 

The ATTC Founder's DECLARATION filed in USDC Boston in Case 10-10124-DPW reveals the depth the Massachusetts Attorney General Office goes to avoid investigating (criminal) conduct and reveals the utter dereliction of the Board of Bar Overseers to even investigate attorney misconduct, some of which is plainly criminal.  The BBO has (irresponsibly) insisted that Courts first address attorney misconduct before the Board will investigate, even though the Board is assigned O-V-E-R-S-I-G-H-T responsibility.

RPC (Mass.) Rule 8.3(a) states "A lawyer having knowledge that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the Bar Counsel's office of the Board of Bar Overseers. 

AUSA David G. Tobin violated RPC Rule 8.3(a) when he failed to report the unethical conduct of attorney Stephen C. Pfaff, an attorney of interest herein.  Instead of reporting misconduct, Tobin used Pfaff as a witness against Jeffrey L. Clemens in a prosecution originating in early 2010.  Tobin, as well as Pfaff, had a lot to gain from a prosecution against Mr. Clemens.  ATTC takes full responsibility for any accusations against these men, and the one women in the mix, FBI Special Agent Rachel R. Boisselle.  They have all betrayed their sworn oaths to uphold the law and follow professional conduct rules, relying on the usual cover offered by a monopolistic, and often corrupt, legal system.  The system design is fine, as it is the CONDUCT CONDUCT CONDUCT and the associated lack of accountability that is the root of the problem.  ATTC is now moving to repopulate this website with the documents, numbering over a 100, which were unscrupulously expunged in August 2008, just prior to an ambush trial.  As another ambush trial in the USDC-Boston is under way, ATTC is taking precautions and will be willing and able to trace the culprits if they do it again.  Here begins a growing list of documents that will be located here for public inspection.  First, a few definitions are in order:

THREAT - A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done [Meriam-Webster]

PREJUDICE - Preconceived opinion not based on reason or experience [Meriam-Webster]
(A corrollary to this definition is the verb version - using prejudice to obtain an intended outcome in legal proceedings, typically through the disrespect of rights - Mr. Clemens can tell you about that sad fact.)

Access To The Courts will pay $100 to anyone who finds an intention to harm stated anywhere in these documents.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS (an in-work upload process)

FBI Boisselle Complaint (March 2010)
Clemens Motion to Dismiss Complaint (April 2010)
Clemens Motion to Dismiss Indictment (April 2010)
Clemens Requests Court Order to Obtain Grand Jury Transcripts (April 2010...ignored)
ATTC Founder Petition for First Circuit Review of Complaint Against Judge William G. Young
ATTC Founder Petition for Review of Attorney Misconduct - DOC 59 in 1-10-cr-10124 Boston
Petition to US House of Representatives re Judges Tevrizian, Snyder, and Trott - Sensenbrenner
Petition to US House of Representatives re Judges Tevrizian, Snyder, and Trott Page 1 of 2
Petition to US House of Representatives re Judges Tevrizian, Snyder, and Trott Page 2 of 2
Analysis of Bellevue (WA) Speeding Ticket Page 1 of 3 [see pic below]
Analysis of Bellevue (WA) Speeding Ticket Page 2 of 3 [see pic below]
Analysis of Bellevue (WA) Speeding Ticket Page 3 of 3 [see pic below]
Analysis of Bellevue (WA) Speeding Ticket Proof of a Spoof 
    

The following analysis relates to a fraudulent speeding ticket (itself an act of retaliation by police), which led to further retaliation upon a complaint against the police officer, Dennis L. Richards, wherein fellow Bellevue Police officer (detective) Bob Thompson deceptively held the victim during a discussion at the police station about the victim's complaint and reported the contrived incident as an "arrest" to the FBI - the seed of prejudice planted 15 years ago, which grew to haunt the victim, Jeffrey L. Clemens.  What started in Bellevue WA will finish in Scituate MA.  The prejudicial arrest in 1995 led to a life of prejudice from police, attorneys, and judges, the subject of this Access To The Courts website.






TBD (more to come)

Jeffrey L. Clemens was taken into federal custody on December 2, 2010, on a bench warrant from Magistrate Judge Judith G. Dein (6 weeks after her former associate's Ditomassi Report at the BBO blocked an investigation into the misconduct of victim-attorney Stephen C. Pfaff, following a complaint submittal predating this current prosecution).  ATTC has statistics on the total detention of Mr. Clemens by those covering for Scituate Police Officer Michael OHara and the time can now be counted in years!  To characterize this matter as a kidnapping would be an understatement, as there is no ransom but the civil and constitutional rights of every US citizen.


ATTC Founder files a PETITION for the release of an innocent man...

An AFFIDAVIT in Support of PETITION is also filed with the court, along with an important Exhibit re Summary (the Case for Police Misconduct).

We see what can result from years of successful Pro Se litigation...

Here is the summary of Phase 1 of the Litigation History of Jeffrey L. Clemens (the innocent man to whom the Petition relates):

Incident: October 25, 1994 re False Speeding Ticket, Assault, and Threat by Police Officer Richards Jeffrey L Clemens sues the City of Bellevue, WA (USDC Seattle) in September 1997 [CASE #1] Plaintiff Attorney Paul H. King SABOTAGES the case by not updating the filed complaint and serving it NOTE: Paul H. King was to later be suspended from the practice of law for a separate matter 
Incident: September 23, 1997 re Assault upon Mr. Clemens (falsely citizen arrested for Trespass) at CAA Jeffrey L. Clemens sues Gavin Debecker & Associates (USDC Los Angeles) in September 1998 [CASE #2]PRO SEUSDC Judge William Keller DISMISSES the case upon Summary Judgment, despite a defendant default NOTE: Judge Keller ignored the tolling of statutes on a malicious prosecution claim.The 9th Circuit dismissed the civil appeal and the US Supreme Court denied Mr. Clemens’s Petition 
Incident: 1987 through 1995 re CAA and MGM borrowed work product of Mr. Clemens between 1987 and 1995 and obtained financial gain from it, in particular, from the movie “Rain Man” Jeffrey L. Clemens sues Creative Artists Agency, MGM, Gavin Debecker & Associates, et al [CASE #3]PRO SESETTLES with three of the defendants for over $20,000 in December 2002 NOTE: USDC Judge Christina Snyder (former attorney for defendant MGM) dismissed the case upon Rule 12 Motion by one of the parties; no party answered the complaint; motions and appeals to the 9th Circuit followed; Mr. Clemens becomes interested in how various judges came to be assigned to the case…Dickran Tevrizian (an MGM investor), George King (who should have ruled on the Rule 12 motion), and Consuelo Marshall (who dismissed the first filing upon an erroneous technical pretext, having nothing to do with the merits) 
Incident: November 12, 1999 (during litigation in Los Angeles) Mr. Clemens is stopped by Douglas County Deputies, for no other reason than the fact that the CHP wanted him stopped but allowed Jeffrey to cross into his home state of Nevada, yet filed no charges; Douglas County files charges for Eluding/Fail to Stop on Signal from Police and Resisting Arrest; prosecutor misleads Jeffrey into (uncounseled) pleading to a traffic violation, but failed to disclose the potential for jail time. Jeffrey L. Clemens sues Douglas County (NV) in the 2000 to 2002 timeframe [CASE #4]PRO SE SETTLES with Douglas County for $5,000 NOTE: Douglas County was very uncooperative during the attempted depositions of county witnesses; there is a sinister connection to the California Highway Patrol and Mono County California that Douglas County did not want the world to know about, apparently.  CHP and Mono County filed false reports. 
 Jeffrey L. Clemens survived 8 years of official misconduct and tortious acts by police and private firms, including a security and threat management firm, and 4 lawsuits, resulting in settlements of $25,000.
Phase 2 of the Litigation History of Jeffrey L. Clemens is still in progress and tells the tale of the dark interminglings of an errant Town of Scituate (MA) and errant federal public servants, from the FBI to US Attorneys, who turn to criminalization of the Plaintiff Clemens in order to conceal their misconduct.  They are VERY GOOD at it!

News Release - December 21, 2010  Access To The Courts releases Statistics that illustrate systemic prejudice against Jeffrey L. Clemens

For a summary, read
Statistics.  These stats are derived from the initial release of The Player List, an ongoing list of those involved in the prejudicing of an innocent man. 



News Release - November 15, 2010  Court of Appeals earns an "F" for judicial dementia and an "A" for inventing a new white paint

On November 10, 2010, the US First Circuit Court of Appeals entered the Twilight Zone, in entering the following JUDGMENT (in No. 10-1536, by Judges Lynch, Howard and Thompson):

Plaintiff-Appellant Jeffrey L. Clemens appeals from the district court's dismissal of his claims with prejudice following an order to show cause and hearing concerning Clemens's authoring and sending an allegedly threatening email to a defendant and attorney in this case.  Clemens contends that the district court committed prodedural and legal error in issuing the order to show cause and that it lacked authority to dismiss his case with prejudice.

We have carefully reviewed the record in this case and the briefs of the parties, and we discern no error, legal or otherwise, or abuse of discretion in the district court's dismissal of Clemens's claims.  Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115,1117 (1st Cir. 1989).  The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

By the Court:  /s/ Margaret Carter, Clerk.

ATTC commentary:  The opposing counsel (who is also a named defendant in the case, accused of suborning perjury in a related court case) makes Ex Parte contact with the court, the judge issues a show cause order (already dismissing the case), the opposing counsel makes further contact with the FBI in a years-long attempt to surreptitiously obtain a criminal charge against Mr. Clemens - accomplished! [see Note below] - then the case is dismissed by Judge William G. Young!  Never was a threatening communication ever identified by the court in this show cause matter.  In fact, Judge Young refused a written request to identify the communication and how he saw it...for the alleged presumed email was not a part of court proceedings.  Not a single authority was cited for the dismissal.  No open court motion or pleading of any kind - with any allegation of improper communication or threats - was ever filed in court nor served on Mr. Clemens so he could openly and fairly respond to the secret allegations.  Judge Young even stated in open court on April 1 (an April Fool's joke?) that the merits were NOT considered in the dismissal.  And what do we get?  An empty Judgment from the 1st Circuit that cites a lone civil case (Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp.) having absolutely nothing to do with the nature or substance of the instant case!  The Plaintiff in the Aoude case committed a fraud upon the court with admittedly faked documents in court filings, AND parties were able to deal in open court and with pleadings - not a single comparable aspect to the Clemens case.  If this editor were not stone cold sober right now, he would think that the 1st Circuit is assassinating the character of Mr. Jeffrey Clemens.

We would like to wish Jeffrey Clemens luck in his Petition for Rehearing in this important civil case, though there is nothing civil about how federal judges Young, Lynch, Howard, and Thompson handled the matter.  Rules were broken by attorneys and a judge and fundamental principles of jurisprudence - like open proceedings and allowance for responses to allegations - were violated.  Hmm.  Can we promote these judges?  [Sort of like the Peter Pan Principle applied to judges that have long passed their level of competence.]

NOTE:  The Complaint submitted on March 16, 2010 in US District Court by FBI Agent Rachel R. [Scire] Boisselle to obtain an arrest warrant flowed over with innuendo and numerous false statements designed to prejudice the proceedings.  Agent Boisselle's several false statements are statistically significant, as one presumably investigating and reporting on the matter could not have made that many (over 5) factual statements falsely about information in the public realm (and well documented) without doing it willingly and knowingly.  Here are some of the false statements:

Agent Boisselle said that Clemens had filed the lawsuit on August 18, 2009.
ACTUALLY, the case was filed on October 27, 2009.

Agent Boisselle said that the instant suit was based on the same events of an earlier suit.
ACTUALLY, the first case was for false arrest in a Disorderly Conduct matter and the second case was for malicious prosecution of charges of Criminal Harassment and Unlicensed Private Investigator.  NOT at all the same.

Agent Boisselle said the earlier case cause was for an arrest and conviction for disorderly conduct AND impersonating a private investigator.
ACTUALLY, the earlier case could not have been for a conviction...because the trial was still 16 months into the future!  As for the "impersonating a private investigator'?  No such statute in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and no such cause for the said lawsuit.

Agent Boisselle said that the "email" was produced in its entirety as an attachment A to the complaint.
ACTUALLY, the attachment was incomplete, as the agent had left out the email header, which stated "For Your Information".  No threat.  Just an iteration of Attorney Stephen C. Pfaff's suborning of perjury, his culpability in the perjury that achieved a conviction on September 18, 2008 (later reversed on appeal, but pending at the time of the "email"), and a wish that the [crooked] attorney were dead.  Since when is a 1st Amendment protected free speech wish for something a crime!

And it goes on and on like that, in a court document submitted by an errant FBI agent.  Sad.
Sadder still?  Is the fact that the Motion to Dismiss Complaint, submitted to the court on or about April 14, 2010, is no where to be seen on the public Court Docket.  Hmm.  A great coat of white paint, wud ya not agree, Tom Sawyer?

News Release - November 5, 2010  Plymouth County D.A. recharges Clemens in controversial "D.O." matter!  [An act requiring audacity and no modest or conceit-free will to snuff out the truth and protect systemic corruption]

An October 26, 2010 Notice of Summons was issued by the Hingham District Court (in Hingham, Massachusetts), ordering Jeffrey Clemens to appear in court on December 1, 2010 at 9 am.  Judge Hurley witnessed it, and clerk Joseph Ligotti signed it.  Jeffrey, you know what you have to do!

ATTC commentary: Jeffrey Clemens knows too well the want of propriety in dealings with Judge Hurley.  Against the on the record protests of Jeffrey Clemens, in February 2008, Judge Hurley granted a self-recusal motion to relatively young defense counsel Ann McDonough (who cites some phoney idea of incompatibility or disagreements with the defendant...the truth, Ann did not want to perform her duties in the defense of Jeffrey, especially in the acquiring of 911 tapes, radio logs, officer logs, etc., NONE of which she sought or obtained)...then gave Jeffrey an old [other descriptions deleted] attorney Robert Greenspan, who proceeded to lead Jeffrey down a path of delayed and withheld discovery, poor communication, and commiseration with the crooks that lied to get Jeffrey convicted on September 18, 2008 for disorderly conduct!  Yes, when Jeffrey was told he was free to leave (a pulled over stop point), Jeffrey supposedly (as alleged by the perjuring Officer Michael Ohara) got enraged and lunged at him.  Ask yourself, does an urge to lunge happen to you when an officer says that you are free to go?  This editor must say, "Hey, Mr. Ohara, YOU are free to leave!  And, don't let the door hit you on the way out."

Back to Judge Hurley, as his involvement in the original prosecution begs the question of why he let three related charges - Disorderly Conduct, Criminal Harassment, and Unlicensed Private Investigator - all stemming from the same incident and Police Officer (Ohara) Report, proceed along separately in court proceedings and be tried separately!  Such economy!  The answer...the court allowed the defendant to face the unchecked accusations of two police officers (with which attorney and threat victim of late Stephen C. Pfaff helped suborn the perjury of officers Ohara and Goyette), away from other related witnesses in the matter, like Shelly Laveroni Dell, Sandra Frankman, Susan Smith, Scituate Police Officer Eric Steverman, Lt. John Rooney, Secret Service Agent Ralph Sozio, and even Jerry Laveroni.  Hmm.  Judge Hurly allowed an ambush.  Someone should show him the door, too.

UPDATE:Letter to the Attorney General of Massachusetts on October 7, 2010 reveals that the Plymouth County D.A.'s boss (Attorney General Martha Coakley) KNEW about the police and prosecutorial misconduct two weeks BEFORE the Plymouth County D.A. refiled the charge of Disorderly Conduct on October 26 - despite a pending open investigation into the matter!

Martha Coakley, PLEASE clean house, for you have dishonest and law-disregarding prosecutors within your ranks.  ATTC has already confirmed that the Attorney General's Criminal Division had already been assigned the matter.  Delivery of the October 7 dated letter on October 9, 2010 can be confirmed at www.usps.com with tracking number 0310 0480 0002 0769 5876 - try it.

News Release - July 8, 2010  Court of Appeals Overturns "D.O."

July 8, 2010 came over 50 days late, as the Massachusetts Court of Appeals took about 180 days to decide the appeal of the September 18, 2008 conviction for Disorderly Conduct (an atrocious trial highlighted herein), instead of the usual maximum of 130 days after Oral Argument of January 10, 2010.  During that period of excess delay, folks like AUSA David Tobin found it handy to mislead a grand jury and withhold discovery in a related federal matter.  That related federal matter basically closed down the civil litigation related to the state prosecution of September 18, 2008 for D.O. and two other misguided and unfounded charges.  Indeed, the D.O. (Disorderly Conduct) conviction is overturned - "Judgment reversed."  In fact, there are no convictions related to the farcical charges the Police of Scituate, MA embarked on May 12, 2005.  The associated Opinion, written by Judge Francis Fecteau (as part of a panel including Judges Mark Green and James McHugh), addresses the lack of counsel and the otherwise forced self-representation by the Defendant.  A visit to the www.MassReports.com website will find an 11 page Opinion.  The Opinion essentially ignores the issues surrounding the police, attorney, and judicial misconduct and prejudice, and rambles on legalistically about the issue of counsel.  Suffice it to say, the Defendant knew well the risks and consequences of allowing his counsel to proceed with a trial with no preparation, no witnesses, and open pre-trial motions, and that is the reason the attorney was fired.  Judge Moynahan decided to force the Defendant to defend himself.  It took a year and a half to finally begin to reverse the damage of such extreme prejudice.  A full analysis of the Opinion is forthcoming.  JAC

News Release - May 5, 2010  Time has come for prejudice to end

May 5, 2010 marks the beginning of the long-awaited reconstruction of this site, necessitated when the June 2005 inaugurated site was mysteriously expunged in August 2008.

Mark Twain said "When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time for reform."  The years long look at what the "majority" in the judicial system are doing, and specifically what "they" are now doing to the subject of this site - in furthering the criminalization of an innocent critic of the system -  means that it is time for reform.

Basically, when police, lawyers, or judges misconduct themselves, do not expect the oversight authorities to do anything about it, but expect criminalization of anyone reporting misconduct, or simply working for justice, public awareness, or reform.

We have now a 15 year record of escalating abuses by self-interested parties making their prejudicial mark on one citizen - the very innocent Jeffrey Clemens - now peaking with absurd, illogical, and illegal actions by such people as witness-tampering-and -perjury-suborning lawyers such as Stephen C. Pfaff, derelict FBI agents such as Eric Toole and Rachel Boisselle (joining the ranks of fellow FBI agent Ingerd Sotelo), US Attorneys such as David G. Tobin (joining the self-serving Steven Clymer), and US District Judges William G. Young and Richard G. Stearns (dishonest to say the least, but keeping up appearances very well, but not quite as well as David A. Katz).  All with the support of past derelictions of US probation officers such as Ruth Granberry (who played the part of Judge Katz' cop very well), or crooked cops like Michael O'Hara and John Rooney of the Scituate (MA) police department .  Every one of these self-serving individuals have played a part in the life-long prejudicing of an innocent person.  What remains is a record, a court record, a record that will be shown and analyzed on this site in the coming months.

Mark Twain also said something to this effect "The writings of history are inked with liquid prejudice."  Such insight is now proven with hindsight and a look back on the record.

The people shall finally have their indictment against these errant public servants, who turned subtle unconscious prejudice into very intentional prejudice.  And we know the power of intention!

News Release - June 9, 2010  ATTC commemorates 5 years

June 11, 2010 marks the 5th anniversary of the founding of the Access To The Courts organization and this website.  In commemoration, we have initiated a top Peak Prejudice professional prize, with the anniversary honor going to:

                    Assistant US Attorney David G. Tobin
                    Boston, Massachusetts

His clear understanding of the concept and implementation of prejudice indicates his qualification for this honor.  For those of you who do not know him, he is currently prosecuting a case against the subject of this website, a prosecution initiated with the first runner up (and probable next winner of the PP prize), US District Court Judge William G. Young.

The public is free to peruse the court records in USDC (Boston) case #1:2010-mj-01016 and #1:2010-cr-10124.  Hopefully, the court will get around to posting a Motion to Dismiss Complaint filed in April 2010 and outlining several grounds, including the false statements by FBI Agent Rachel R. Boisselle.  That criminal proceeding was preceded by the initiation of criminal accusations by Judge Young in civil case #1:2009-cv-11821, which the judge handily dismissed with prejudice later, despite ignoring the merits of the civil case and failing to disclose ex parte communications.  The civil case was dismissed because it really had merit, merit that old timers like Judge Young hate to acknowledge.

Here is our Peak Prejudice memo to Mr. Tobin bestowing the PP prize and associated honor.  The memo also doubles as a complaint to the DOJ OIG Hotline of misconduct on the part of FBI Agent Rachel R. Boisselle.

We are bringing back the prejudice citing Independent OBSERVER.
You will be seeing a most incredible Timeline of the decades long prejudicing of an innocent man.
You will be seeing the first of many Case Studies along the timeline (more like a crimeline):

            The Case for Perjury (on the part of Michael OHara, Scituate police officer)
            The Case for Suborning Perjury (on the part of Stephen C. Pfaff, attorney)
            The Case for Coverup (on the part of the US DOJ OIG and FBI)
            The False Mandate - Case for Perjury (on the part of FBI Agent Ingerd Sotelo)
            Judge as Prosecutor  - William G. Young
            A History of Police Violence (against Jeffrey L. Clemens)
            The Mental Health Pretext
            The Vexatious Litigant? (Prelude to an update to The Real Crime report)
            A Culture of Dishonesty - An Injustice in Port Angeles is an Injustice Everywhere
            (Nothing to do with the subject herein, but illustrates the scope of the prejudice problem.)

            Jonathan A. Clemens v. Town of Scituate and Gavin Debecker & Associates
            USDC (Boston) case #1:2008-cv-12147
            Dismissed without Prejudice on March 18, 2010, one day after a Complaint-induced 
            Arrest Warrant-initiated arrest of Jeffrey L. Clemens, whose own case against the Town of 
            Scituate was dismissed on April 1, 2010 - no joke - at a hearing in which the judge cited 
            criminal proceedings against Jeffrey and cited that the merits of the case were specifically
            not the basis for dismissal...criminal proceedings that the same judge actually initiated
            with his unusual, pre-Complaint, pre-Arrest March 9, 2010 Order
            (see USDC (Boston) case #1:2009-cv-11821).

TIMELINES (Starting in 1997...)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following Timeline reveals just how much collaboration our Public Servants are capable of, as the delayed (NOV 18) response by the Massachusetts Attorney General Office of an OCT 7 inquiry/complaint allowed:

The Board of Bar Overseers to dismiss a complaint against the attorney Stephen C. Pfaff (one of two objects of said inquiry) [November 15],

The 1st Circuit to dismiss a civil appeal involving the said attorney Stephen C. Pfaff and co-defendant Town of Scituate [November 10] - in that case Mr. Pfaff communicated Ex Parte with the court (after suborning perjury in an earlier Disorderly Conduct case), and

The Plymouth County DA to refile (reset for trial) [on October 26] a Disorderly Conduct charge against Jeffrey Clemens (appellant above), the county of which is the subject of the OCT 7 inquiry to the Massachusetts Attorney General.  Hmm, it makes you think.


The reader is encouraged to inspect the on-line/electronic PACER dockets at the US District Court in Los Angeles, Toledo [Ohio], and Boston for correlation to these Timelines.  Civil litigation began in 1998 following a false CITIZEN arrest in 1997 by a Gavin Debecker employee and has only continued because of ongoing misconduct by Gavin Debecker & Associates, the Police, Attorneys, and even some Judges - all of whom have an interest in the prejudicing of an innocent man.... 

You can run but you can not hide.


This website is under reconstruction.  Breaking News below!!!


To the surprise of the organization founder, the Access To The Courts website was deleted on August 31, 2008.  The site debut on June 11, 2005 was followed by no fewer than 80 updates tracking the abuses of the police and courts in a matter concerning a pro se litigant.  The premise of the organization is the subtle yet pervasive use of Unwritten Rules, whereby attorneys and judges work to prejudice legal proceedings for their own benefit and often counter to the rights of citizens.  Pro Se Litigants are often the first to fall victim to the Unwritten Rules.

Access to the courts in the United States is a serious problem.  At a time when the pro se litigant's access to legal proceedings was again seriously impaired (in 2008), this site went missing, possibly losing three years of effort toward documenting a growing host of misconduct in the courts.

This site is an important tool for documenting the abuses of the courts, namely the US District Court in Los Angeles, California and Toledo, Ohio.  These courts and certain judges are subject of a report submitted to the US Congress on June 11, 2007.

The Citizens REACT Report

An update is pending, and it will confirm the accuracy of the original allegations of misconduct against certain US Judges, Gavin Debecker & Associates (a threat management and security firm who falsely arrested the subsequent and subject of this website civil litigant in 1997), and numerous professional associates and public servants, including FBI agents.  What started as a complaint against an offending police officer in Bellevue, Washington in 1994 - an officer accused of false reporting (of a provably false speeding ticket), assault, and threatening an innocent person - has turned into a life-debilitating, sick journey through the courts heaped with the intentional abuses by police, attorneys, and judges in covering up the misconduct of that originating police officer and many since.  How can the absurdity of criminalizing innocent people be a reality in our courts?  Because the courts have allowed prejudice to run amuck.  An now, more accurately, the US Congress, lacking in their judicial oversight duties, has allowed the prejudice to run amuck.

The most egregious example of judicial misconduct was undertaken by US District Court Judge David A. Katz, in the timeframe of August 2006 through 2007, as he undertook to demonstrate a complete disregard for truth, constitutional rights, and even the appearance of propriety in the courts.  This judge, accused of essentially kidnapping (through unlawful detention of) an innocent person through deep subversion of the facts, law, and truth in 2006, has become the main subject of The Citizens REACT Report.

Here is the Abstract published in the 110-Page Congressional Version of The REACT Report:

When prejudice in the legal system becomes the norm and unwritten rules allow the implementation of prejudice in an intentional, rights-violating way, then it is time for citizens to react.  Prejudice is basically the undue influence of the outcome of legal proceedings, intentional or unintentional.  That undue influence comes mainly through errors of omission, creative writing in reports and legal briefs, subversion of rules, verbal manipulation, and careful construction of the public record.  Criminal defense counsel and attorneys in general are in a position with the most potential for prejudicial acts and omissions, while also in a position to do the most to prevent prejudice from occurring.

Intentional prejudice relies on the basic tenets of our legal system to secure intended (and often unjust) outcomes that are immune to discovery, appeal, or timely resolution.  The tenets hold that defendants have rights and thus are protected, that the adversarial process results in truth and thus justice (assuming the judge is a disinterested, independent part of the process), that judicial errors are a basis for appeal, that finality is an absolute goal of legal proceedings, and so on.  Apply these tenets to proceedings that only appear to have respected rights, allowed adversaries to battle, and generated no apparent errors and you have outcomes immune to collateral attack or appeal.  Attorneys are guardians of this careful process of obfuscation.

Prejudice – such as intentionally leaving ex culpatory evidence out of a proceeding, intentionally leaving erroneous evidence in a proceeding, misdocumenting a pleading, or failing to inform a defendant of an adverse court order - does not necessarily result in identifiable judicial errors per se, but can create circumstances that undermine the rights of aggrieved parties to even identify the prejudice, let alone appeal the injustice resulting from prejudice.  Intentional prejudice is a catch-up game, whereby the defendant (or intentionally aggrieved party) is kept ignorant, in the dark, and stuck in a morass of increasing legal complexity and decreasing viable legal options for remedy.

Five years of civil litigation by Plaintiff Jeffrey L. Clemens, related to a false citizen arrest (by a professional associate of the FBI) for trespassing in 1997, for which he was exonerated mid-trial by the court, resulted in cash settlements with Defendants.  Two years of post settlement research by the Plaintiff Clemens resulted in evidence of judicial misconduct, with related motions, petitions to Congress, and contact with the FBI either deflected, rejected, or ignored.  A letter to an alleged offending judge requesting explanation for apparent misconduct resulted in the arrest of the Civil Plaintiff (by the FBI) on May 25, 2005, followed by the recent two years of deeply prejudiced proceedings, with some court actions bordering on the absurd.  The prejudicial acts on the part of police, FBI agents, judges, court-appointed counsel, and probation officers – with newly discovered evidence continuing to be found – is indicative of a judicial system gone awry, with abuses of power and excessive self-interests preempting the rights of citizens to face fair, impartial, and independent proceedings in the courts.

Plaintiff Clemens, through his successful pro se civil litigation, research, and published allegations of misconduct, posed a fundamental threat to the continuance of the status quo in the legal system, a status quo of working to unwritten rules that favor the vested interests of lawyers, judges, and corporations.  Justice has not been served in the past two years (2005 – 2007), but those with a stake at concealing their misdeeds have been inappropriately served – and that is the basic problem and peril to democracy addressed in this report.  US District Court Judge David A. Katz of Northern Ohio has done the most to circumvent the rules of the court and the law of the land, using the pseudo-police powers of the court’s probation department to achieve illegal and fraud covering outcomes.

The Citizens REACT Report intends to provide a basis for the Congressional investigation of the failed workings and systemic prejudice of the US Courts and the corrupted relationship of US Judges with the US Probation Office.  The US Probation (and Pre-Trial Services) Department of the US Courts has apparently evolved into a secretive police agency of the judges, for the purpose of continuing the unchecked and unmonitored prejudicial activities of the courts, activities which can all too easily be confused with independence.  This report seriously questions the appropriateness of continuing the investigating (policing) role of probation officers while being subordinate employees of the judges dictating the terms and conditions of probation that are investigated (policed) for compliance, a formula for conflict of interest and abuse. 

As the integrity and independence of the US Courts are at question in the matter reported herein, the US Congress is being asked to perform its US Constitutional duty to oversee the courts and hold judges accountable to their duties and sworn oaths.  The appearance of impropriety in the cited proceedings stands in stark contrast to the code of judicial conduct.

   _________________________________________________________________

Breaking News!  September 18, 2008...Was an innocent man convicted? 

Review the DENIED Motion For Mistrial.

The Motion For Mistrial asserts four grounds for relief:

1) Denied right to defense counsel
2) Judicial prejudicing of the jury
3) Cumulative errors amounting to manifest injustice (extreme prejudice)
4) Insufficient Probable Cause for the charge of Disorderly Conduct

Review the subsequently filed PENDING Motion For Injunctive Relief.

The Motion For Injunctive Relief analyzes four documents existing PRE-TRIAL, proving a lack of probable cause for going to trial:

Police Officer's Formal Report, dated May 12, 2005
Transcripts of 911 Phone Call of May 12, 2005
Police Radio Logs of May 12, 2005
Deposition of Officer Michael O'Hara, occuring on July 23, 2008


The Motion requests a reversal of the verdict on two grounds:

1) Sole Prosecution Witness Misconduct
2) Lack of Probable Cause in Criminal Charge of Disorderly Conduct
(due to Sole Prosecution Witness Misconduct)

The Motion identifies several Issues for Injunctive Relief:

Contestable Facts (not allowed challenge by the Defendant)
Deliberate Omissions (of ostensibly collaborative or potentially countering evidence)
Inconsistencies & Discrepancies (existing prior to trial)
Hearsay Evidence (used extensively by the reporting police officer)
Comparative Analysis (revealing questionable, missing, or prejudicial information)
Reasonable Inferences (that differ from false impressions constructed by police)

Simply put, the police officer had no grounds to arrest or charge the Defendant, so he falesly reported a Disorderly Conduct charge.  The officer - Scituate (Massachusetts) Police Sergeant Michael O'Hara - knew it.  The officer's boss - Lt. John Rooney - knew it.  The court-appointed defense attorneys - McDonnough and Greenspan - knew it.  The Assistant District Attorney - Mr. Linehan - knew it.  The judges - especially Ronald Moynahan of Hingham District Court - knew it.  Public servants in this matter are derelict in their duty, as they all have intentionally violated the rights of an accused innocent person and subverted and prejudiced the proceedings in order to achieve a conviction.  They cheated.

Hingham District Court Judge Moynahan does not appear to have the integrity or good sense to do the right thing in this matter.  He is deeply prejudiced himself.  He perhaps has played the prejudice - and deceive the jury - game too long.  As the mental health of Mr. Clemens had been forceably questioned by the courts, so should the mental health of Judge Moynahan.  Why would a 60 year old District Court judge exhibit so much prejudice at a misdemeanor trial?  Is he mentally handicapped since the loss of his son, Gregory, in a traffic accident in 2004?  Is he biased toward police as a result of the accident - or does he believe police hold the key to preventing accidents by being tyrannical?  Does Judge Moynahan care about the impacts of his impaired judgment on people in his courtroom?  Does Judge Moynahan realize the implication of the prejudicial legal system in allowing over 42,000 American to die in traffic accidents every year - by condoning, facilitating, and promoting dishonesty amongst the ranks of police officers?  Does he see the potential damage he is continuing to unleash on EVERY AMERICAN?
Our US Constitutional rights are there for a reason, to protect us against the tyranny of privileged public servants who opt to serve themselves first.


GO to the About Us (Post-8/31/08) page for news on
The Hingham Matter

The Hingham Matter
is a scandal that underscores what is desperately wrong with the legal system in the United States, and prejudice plays no small part.


Further breaking news, an analysis revealing police officer perjury!  Press Release October 15, 2008

NEW RELEASE!  The Real Crime - Prejudice in the US Judicial System
(January 23, 2009 - Revision A)

STUDY this document (shown below) - The Bellevue Matter - before reading The Real Crime, as you will see where all the prejudice started, and you will see how The Hingham Matter is the end product.

Date The Bellevue Matter Date A Related Matter
6/94 JAC files Civil Lawsuit(cites attorney misconduct)   JLC = Jeffrey L. ClemensJAC = Jonathan A. Clemens
    8/94 JAC attempts to obtain Public Information from WSP
9/94 WSP Officer issues AHRO against JAC upon phone calls to v-mail (served by BPD)   WSP = Washington State Patrol 
  AHRO = Anti-Harassment Restraining Order; BPD = Bellevue Police Department 10/21/94 JAC attempts to schedule appointment with supervisor at WSP, allowed by AHRO; denied
10/21/94 10/22/94 BPD seen doing surveillance of JAC apartment in Bellevue    
10/25/94 JAC’s brother JLC issued a 60 in a 35 speeding citation by BPD; assaulted in car when leaving; threatened by WSP; JLC attempts to file complaint with BPD, but told to come back the next day 10/25/94 JAC is arrested attempting to see supervisor at WSP to report assault upon his brother JLC and held with handcuffs; released
10/26/94 JLC provides complaint to BPD; Officer Michel Pentony transcribes; Note: since day before, BPD calls WSP    
Early Nov 94 JLC goes to BDC (courthouse) to “contest” the citation; court said citation not yet filed; court takes JLC’s copy of citation, copies front and gives front copy back to JLC(back side had witness subpoena instructions) Early Nov 94 JAC is charged by King County Prosecutors of violating AHRO, by entering a police station;JAC files lawsuit against WSP
11/12/94 Citation entered into court system 11/12/94 JAC’s attorney files his Notice of Appearance in court
11/22/94 JLC shows up for hearing, but court said the case was NOT yet set for a hearing; JLC wants R/O present, but court says 1st avail time is Jan 95;JLC is given sworn statement of R/O; court finds committed    
  Note: In the next few weeks, an Analysis proves the Sworn Statement FALSE;Analysis, and three other points of error, submitted for Appeal; Appellate court judge affirms “committed”, as he was “not good at math” 2/6/95 3/95 – 9/97CivilLawsuitsreBellevue JAC found Not Guilty by Jury(Jury member contacts a JAC co-worker to ask why there was even a case); JAC’s attorney does NOT call WSP supervisor to testify;

JAC displeased with Attorney re malfeasance and fraudulent concealment
(withholds portion of fee)



Access To The Courts
Port Townsend, WA 98368
(360) 301-5133
info@accesstothecourts.org

 

Website Builder