Timeout subject: Corrupted police department

 On Dr. Phil's today there was a show about that story of the death of a child followed by a death of a woman who was responsible for him when that happened. I don't know why  people can not see how clear the picture that show that police department as a corrupted police department. The signs that they conspired to allow the second death to happen are unavoidable. They could have conveyed to the father of the child directly or indirectly or he could have picked up from them on his own a signal stating something like this:

 

Look, we can take that woman as suspect then to court but still she may not be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Or we can consider it accidental and give you a chance to take revenge and call it also accidental. That way we can avoid suspicion because we ruled the first death also as accident.

  

I don't see any sign that they would have offered that alternative path if the father was not rich and connected.   

  

 Apparently  many people here could have lived in Saddam's Iraq and thought they were living at best democratic system on earth.

 

 

 

 

A big supporting sign

A big supporting sign for the theory in the previous post is how many in this group do not believe in religion but when it comes to that notion they do not hesitate to  join in
although that notion itself came from religion. This supports that it is the result of a psychological disturbances to the person probably created because of his childhood exposure to this notion.    

Artificial heredity

I think that the upbringing of their children by this group with concentration on
being chosen and selected from an inappropriate age could acting as an artificial heredity factor against morality and creating an abnormal double standard for self - through the group -versus other people.

"sua sponte"

While the absence of the district judge's hand signature was an important sign in suggesting that the two court orders came from the magistrate judge rather than the district judge, it was the use of the Latin phrase "sua sponte" to point out that the thinking and creation of the orders was not called for by an external entity what intensified the significance of the absence of hand signature even more . How natural is it for a person to put an effort to reach a decision that he thought about on his own then stops short of extending the existence of that thought from mind to the outer world with a signature?   

The Purpose Behind That First Court Order

As shown in the previous post a purpose behind the second
order that also connect with other things is not hard to find
but what about the purpose behind the first order? How was
that order supposed to disrupt the lawsuit? After all,just
to perplex the plaintiff by itself doesn't seem to be worthy
of taking the risk of an action that cannot be easily understood
as being other than an intentional violation of Federal Rules
Of Civil Procedures(FRCP).     

The answer to that is yes there is some other intention behind
that first court order other than just to simply mess up or perplex
me. Actually, any intention to confuse me seems only as being an
additional benefit to the main intention.The main purpose of that
order seems to be that the hedge fund guy wanted to make me
think that this district judge is on his side so I abandon my lawsuit
with this judge. It is as if the hedge fund guy, helped by the support
he had there, was telling me through that order:
You dismissed your first filing because you thought I have
a connection to the previous judge, right? Then look at this
order and think about the connection I have to this district
judge and avoid this one as well.

Of course as a plaintiff I had only one chance for a voluntary
dismissal without prejudice but one could always achieve similar
effect by not pursuing his lawsuit.  

Notice how the timing for that order was chosen carefully
so that it won't give me much time to think and see the real
reason for issuing it while at the same time it shortens the
120 days by a considerable amount of time to emphasize
its violation of  the FRCP.

Notice also how the level of  the outrageousness and violation
for the FRCP of that order changes with this explanation from
a burden that needs a satisfactory answer to counterbalance its
effect to something very supportive and/or ,in fact, needed. 

I may appeal the ruling of this judge like any other judge.
But I did not find that the hedge fund guy is counting on
any connection to him and that is a very necessary thing.

Who knows? It could be that the hedge fund was counting
on some biased help from the previous judge he wouldn't get
but what I saw was enough to make a person try to avoid being
in a position where he may suffer injustice as long as he is not
obligated to do that.

One may also see the support to this explanation and to the whole
picture of both orders in how the purpose of the first order is like
plan A to that of the second court order which represented plan B.
In other words, it is clearly easier for the hedge fund if I abandon
my lawsuit myself than it is for him to arrange for the defendants
not to be served.

More links related to those two orders

These links are for images taken from the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) related to the two unlawful intentionally misleading orders I received from
that court. The first link shows when I filed my complaint and contains a description for the order issued on  4/9/2013 and clearly shows how the 21 day time limit
leaves more than two weeks of the 120 days for serving complaints in violation of
Federal Rules Of Civil Procedures (FRCP) Rule 4(m).

The second link shows the details of that court order issued on 4/9/2013.

The third link shows the related detail part for the order issued on 4/17/2013
containing this wrong generalization and intentionally  misleading information
" If a pro se plaintiff cannot serve the complaint on a defendant, due to lack of    information, the case will be dismissed with respect to that defendant"

In addition, the effort the hedge fund exerted in contacting every process server
I contact to keep them from serving my complaint completes the part mentioned
above as part of a plan that was intended to make me abandon my complaint based
on that false information they gave me.

Again those orders contained only electronic signatures and did not have the
hand signature of the district judge.
  
Link showing when my complaint was filed and summery content of the 4/9/2013 court order

Link showing the details of the order issued on 4/9/2013

Link showing the related part of the order issued on 4/17/2013

Court intentionally issuing misleading unlawful orders

You want to see the power some hedge funds have inside even the federal
courts? Here are links to two orders I received from the court. The first order
was for me to serve my complaint within 21 days or suffer a dismissal. That
meant my lawsuit would have been dismissed more than two weeks short of
the 120 days allowed for the plaintiff to serve the complaint by the Federal
Rules Of Civil Procedure and that violates these rules.
I called the court and the judge's chamber and they both confirmed to me that the order
was real.

The second order contains something wrong inserted in order to mislead me into
thinking that my complaint will be necessarily dismissed against a defendant if
service of process fails which is clearly wrong according to so many other court
cases. It is this part in page two:

" If a pro se plaintiff cannot serve the complaint on a defendant,
due to lack of information, the case will be dismissed with
respect to that defendant"

Both orders were supposedly rom the district judge but had no signature.

Order1-page1

Order1-page2

Order1-page3

Order1-envelop

Order2-page1

Order2-page2

Order2-page3

Order2-page4

Order2-page5

Order2-envelop

One judge systems

One irony is that I used to see mostly three judges courts in countries
that are not classified as democratic and saw the one judge systems mostly
in places like here and the west in general. I don't know what makes people
here so crazy about concentrating power in individuals. Everything is better
in a group.   

Just want to make something clear

I want to make it clear that it was never my intention in this case
to select the judge. No, my intention has been to avoid selections
and arrangements made by the hedge fund guy. In fact, while judge
Graham is the next judge in experience after the chief judge, I am
not really that enthusiastic about what seems to me his over strictness
on procedural matters. I would rather have a judge who do not give
an opportunity to anyone to claim that he did not lose on the merits
of the case. Nevertheless, when you see how this hedge fund guy can
get everywhere you would try to hang on tooth and nail like me to a judge
that doesn't seem to have any connection to him rather than giving him
the opportunity of a reentry to work the power of his connections again.