A letter from young Devi (Kamala ) Harris to her older self- Vice President Kamala Harris- Saying She Doesn’t Want to be Her (Kamala)!


http://Superstarmanagement.com
http://Ex-Why.com
Aaron & Margaret Wallace Foundation
Abdul-Jalil’s Haas School of Business Profile
Linked In Profile on Abdul-Jalil
Abdul-Jalil on Twitter: @ajalil
Abdul-Jalil on FaceBook
Abdul-Jalil’s “ooVoo” Video Chat Room
AIM, Video Chat Screen Name:  jalil@superstarmanagement.com
Skype Video Chat Screen Contact Name: Superstarmanagement
Portrait of Abdul-Jalil by Artist Buford Delaney in Paris, France
Articles on Abdul-Jalil
: The Man Who Turns Hits Into Million$, One Special CaseESPN Bostock 5th & Jackson TV Special Part 1, and Part 2ESPN Bostock Magazine Special, the “al-Hakim Tax Code Ruling”, Smart Agent, Busy Agent, Dellums for Mayor, Hip Hop’s Islamic Influence, 1979 National BALSA ConferenceOakland Police Officers Arrested for Computer Store Burglaries, Police Found Guilty in Burglaries, Police Officers Sentenced for Burglaries,
Email Abdul-Jalil here


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: TV * RADIO * PRESS * INTERNET *
You can click on any highlighted word to view or download that item

MEDIA ADVISORY

We have received many, many requests to re-post A letter from young Devi (Kamala ) Harris to her older self- Vice President Kamala Harris explaining why young girls and boys look at her and DON’T see themselves, how she (Devi) doesn’t want to be her SEX-for-support,  FREAKISH, IMMORAL, VIRTUELESS older self (Kamala)! #Kamalaisacop; #KamalaHarrisisaPoliticalPornStar, #PoliticalPornStar, #Nowtruth.org, www.Nowtruth.org

A letter from young Devi (Kamala ) Harris to her older self- Vice President Kamala Harris explaining why young girls and boys look at her and DON’T see themselves, how she (Devi) doesn’t want to be her SEX-for-support, FREAKISH, IMMORAL, VIRTUELESS older self (Kamala)!

Dear Older Me………Kamala,

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE STOP saying ”When I look at young girls and boys, and they look at me, they see themselves, and what they can be.”

The kids in school whisper about you, what their parents and relatives say. The whispers are now taunts of you as a pure politician in the worst moral and ethical way.

Rumors will haunt me of what you did for the right kind of advantage in political circles as “sex-for-support” with appointments to Commissions that paid over $400,000 from the State of California and a NEW BMW worked your way up the ranks of the Democrat Party!

So, why would YOU or ANY other attractive female District Attorney in her Twenties EVER get caught screwing a MARRIED, Senior Citizen in his Sixties AND his wife??!!!

Ask yourself if your Great-Grand Father, Grand Father, Father, Brothers, Uncles, Cousins, Great-Grand Mother, Grand Mother, Mother, Sisters, Aunts, etc., would approve of such behavior?!

Unfortunately, your sexual exploits were well know long before and after your screwing in the Wille Brown threesomes! Your “click” handle as “Cowgirl” says it all!

You see, HOW and the WAY someone gets where they are is MORE IMPORTANT than where the got and what they got out of it! When INTEGRITY and MORALS are tools for barter, THAT person is WORTHLESS, not just WORTH LESS than you value them!!

YOU did it PUBLICLY, and has a very well substantiated REP as a FREAK, referred to then as a “Toss Up”, that now would be referred to as a Hoe, Slut, THOT! They use hashtags #Kamalaisacop; #KamalaHarrisisaPoliticalPornStar, and #PoliticalPornStar to track you!

Too many people KNOW of these things and they are uncontroverted! If ANY MAN did the same thing, he might be considered “a PIMP, the Man!”, but it’s NOT an acceptable path for ANY RESPECTFABLE woman that wants to be considered a LADY, MUCH LESS VICE PRESIDENT!!

Mom is burning in her grave and dad is dying a slow death from your suffocating “daddy issues” playing out on a world stage! 

I DON’T WANNA BE like you, I DON’T WANNA BE YOU! I’M BETTER THAN YOU! I can’t look UP to you, I can’t look UP someone who’s BENEATH me!

Devi Harris

###
Oakland, Ca
Contact:
Nowtruth@Nowtruth.org

Officials Condemn DA O’Malley For Not Pursuing New Charges In Oscar Grant’s Death

OAKLAND (CBS SF) — Two BART directors and an Oakland City Councilmember condemned Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley Tuesday for deciding not to pursue charges against former BART police officer Anthony Pironein the Jan. 1, 2009 death of Oscar Grant.

BART directors Bevan Dufty and Lateefah Simon and Councilmember Loren Taylor held a Tuesday morning news conference along with Grant’s family to speak out against O’Malley’s decision in the case.

The Oakland City Council and the BART Board are both scheduled to vote this week on resolutions urging O’Malley to reconsider and charge Pirone with felony murder.

“We condemn the decision of the district attorney not to proceed with these charges,” Dufty said. “There is no question that this murder would not have happened without the actions of Officer Tony Pirone. There is simply no question.”

Simon called O’Malley’s decision a failure to do her job.

Nazi Nanzi Oink’Malley

“Nancy O’Malley has failed yet again to do her job and that job was to insure equally justice under the law,” Simon said. “Only through the recently unsealed report we have mentioned here do we know that Officer Pirone was in fact the aggressor when Oscar was murdered. Pirone was found to have lied repeatedly, use unreasonable and unnecessary force.”

A spokesperson for O’Malley said her office did not have any additional response to Tuesday’s news conference beyond its statement Monday.

Taylor said he and fellow council members Carroll Fife, Treva Reid and Nikki Fortunato Bas plan to introduce a resolution at Tuesday’s City Council meeting imploring O’Malley to charge Pirone for his role in the shooting.

“We will never reimagine public safety if bad actors are never held to account for their crimes,” Taylor said.

Grant’s mother, the Rev. Wanda Johnson, argued that O’Malley’s job is not to be impartial toward issues like police brutality that disproportionately affect people of color.

“You have an obligation and a duty to do what is right,” Johnson said in reference to O’Malley. “And because you are failing to do what is right, Oscar’s blood is on your hands, Nancy O’Malley.”

O’Malley’s office issued a 16-page report on Monday that detailed the investigation into Pirone’s action on the night Grant lost his life.

In the report’s conclusion, it stated that the law “makes clear that Anthony Pirone can be guilty of murder only if he personally killed Mr. Grant, or if he aided and abetted the actual killer. In fact, Pirone neither killed nor aided and abetted Mr. Mehserle, who actually killed Mr. Grant.”

The conclusion also noted that the autopsy report on Grant gave no indication that the victim suffered from a head or neck injury that contributed to his death from Pirone placing a knee on Grant’s neck prior to the fatal shooting by Mehserle.

Grant died early New Year’s Day 2009 after being shot in the back while laying on his stomach on the BART Fruitvale Station platform. Only former officer Johannes Mehserle has been charged in connection to his death.

Mehserle was tried and convicted of involuntary manslaughter in 2010. A judge sentenced Mehserle to two years in jail minus time served, and Mehserle was paroled after 11 months.

O’Malley and other representatives from her office met with the Grant family on Monday to discuss the conclusions of the investigation.

Grant’s family has been calling for Pirone to be charged after a report from an internal affairs investigation was unsealed in 2019.

The report claimed that Pirone’s actions were “aggressive and unreasonable” and noted that he used a racial epithet against Grant when he was being detained. Pirone also at one point knelt on Grant’s neck as the officers struggled with him on the BART platform.

Attorneys for the Grant family had asked O’Malley to file felony murder charges against Pirone. With the passing of California Senate Bill 1437 in 2018, defendants can be charged with felony murder for aiding and abetting a killing.

Grant’s family on Monday maintained its position that Mehserle would never have been in a position to fire the fatal shot in the first place had it not been for Pirone.

“I’m not asking for different than what our US Constitution says or what our laws say,” said Grant’s mother, the Rev. Wanda Johnson on Monday. “I’m asking for him to be charged for his actions leading up to my son’s death. If it was myself who had done those things, I would definitely be in jail or prison.”

IN MEMORIAM: Mama- I CAN'T BREATHE, Blacks Killed by Police from 1968 – 2020

RENÉE ATER

Public Scholar

IN MEMORIAM: I CAN’T BREATHE

May 29, 2020

I am angry. I am anguished. I am heartbroken.

I am hallowed out.

I am sick and tired of police needlessly killing black and brown people. Some police still see black men as threats, to brutalize, to contain, to remand. They have stereotyped our grandfathers, fathers, husbands, sons, and nephews, as monsters, subject to violence and death. They have killed our grandmothers, mothers, wives,

daughters, and nieces. Every time I watch the video of George Floyd’s death, my heart weeps. Who in their right mind, kneels on another human’s neck and ignores desperate pleas of “I Can’t Breathe”? Where is the humanity of these white police officers? Policing should not be predicated on brutal force and a complete disdain for black life. White supremacy has no place in the criminal justice system, in government, in the White House, in the United States. Black lives matter every second, every minute, every hour, every day.

IN MEMORIAM                   

The universe shrank 

when you went away.

Every time I thought your name,

stars fell upon me. 

— Henry Dumas (poet, social activist, teacher)

Andre Maurice Hill, May 23, 1973 – December 22, 2020

Columbus, Ohio

Shot: December 22, 2020, Columbus Police Officer

Casey Christopher Goodson Jr., January 30, 1997 – December 4, 2020

Columbus, Ohio

Shot: December 4, 2020, Franklin County Sheriff Deputy 

Angelo “AJ” Crooms, May 15, 2004 – November 13, 2020

Cocoa, Florida

Shot: November 13, 2020, Brevard County Sheriff Deputies

Sincere Pierce, April 2, 2002 – November 13, 2020

Cocoa, Florida

Shot: November 13, 2020, Brevard County Sheriff Deputies

Marcellis Stinnette, June 17, 2001 – October 20, 2020

Waukegan, Illinois

Shot: October 20, 2020, Waukegan Police Officer

Jonathan Dwayne Price, November 3, 1988 – October 3, 2020

Wolfe City, Texas

Tasered/Shot: October 3, 2020, Wolfe City Police Officer

Dijon Durand Kizzee, February 5, 1991 – August 31, 2020
Los Angeles, California

Shot: August 21, 2020, Los Angeles County Police

Rayshard Brooks, January 31, 1993 – June 12, 2020
Atlanta, Georgia

Shot: June 12, 2020, Atlanta Police Officer

Carlos Carson, May 16, 1984 – June 6, 2020
Tulsa, Oklahoma

Pepper Sprayed/Shot in Head: June 6, 2020, Knights Inn Tulsa Armed Security Guard, former sergeant and detention officer with the Tulsa County Sheriff’s Office

David McAtee, August 3, 1966 – June 1, 2020

Louisville, Kentucky

Shot: June 1, 2020, Louisville Metropolitan Police Officer

Tony “Tony the TIger” McDade, 1982 – May 27, 2020
Tallahassee, Florida

Shot: May 27, 2020, Tallahassee Police Officers

George Perry Floyd, October 14, 1973 – May 25, 2020

Powderhorn, Minneapolis, Minnesota

Knee on neck/Asphyxiated: May 25, 2020, Minneapolis Police Officer 

Dreasjon “Sean” Reed, 1999 – May 6, 2020

Indianapolis, Indiana

Shot: May 6, 2020, Unidentified Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Officer

Michael Brent Charles Ramos, January 1, 1978 – April 24, 2020

Austin, Texas

Shot: April 24, 2020, Austin Police Detectives

Daniel T. Prude, September 20, 1978 – March 30, 2020

Rochester, New York

Asphyxiation: March 23, 2020, Rochester Police Officers

Breonna Taylor, June 5, 1993 – March 13, 2020

Louisville, Kentucky

Shot: March 13, 2020, Louisville Metro Police Officers 

Manuel “Mannie” Elijah Ellis, August 28, 1986 – March 3, 2020

Tacoma, Washington

Physical restraint/Hypoxia: March 3, 2020, Tacoma Police Officers

William Howard Green, March 16, 1976 – January 27, 2020

Temple Hills, Maryland

Shot: January 27, 2020, Prince George’s County Police Officer

John Elliot Neville, 1962 – December 4, 2019

Winston-Salem, North Carolina

Asphyxiated (hog-tied in prone position)/Heart Attack/Brain Injury: December 2, 2019, Forsyth County Sheriff Officers 

Atatiana Koquice Jefferson, November 28, 1990 – October 12, 2019

Fort Worth, Texas

Shot: October 12, 2019, Fort Worth Police Officer 

Elijah McClain, February 25, 1996 – August 30, 2019
Aurora, Colorado

Chokehold/Ketamine/Heart Attack: August 24, 2019, Aurora Police Officers and Paramedic

Ronald Greene, September 28, 1969 – May 10, 2019

Monroe, Louisiana

Stun gun/Force: May 10, 2019, Louisiana State Police

Javier Ambler, October 7, 1978 – March 28, 2019
Austin, Texas

Tasered/Electrocuted: March 28, 2019, Williamson County Sheriff Deputy

Sterling Lapree Higgins, October 27, 1981 – March 25, 2019
Union City, Tennessee

Choke hold/Asphyxiation: March 24-25, 2019, Union City Police Officer and Obion County Sheriff Deputies

Gregory Lloyd Edwards, September 23, 1980 – December 10, 2018

Brevard County Jail, Cocoa, Florida

Kneed, Punched, Pepper Sprayed, Tasered, and Strapped into a restraint chair with a spit hood over his head/Failure to Provide Medical Care: December 9, 2019, Brevard County Sheriffs

Emantic “EJ” Fitzgerald Bradford Jr., June 18, 1997 – November 22, 2018

Hoover, Alabama

Shot: November 22, 2018, Unidentified Hoover Police Officers

Charles “Chop” Roundtree Jr., September 5, 2000 – October 17, 2018

San Antonio, Texas

Shot: October 17, 2018, San Antonio Police Officer 

Chinedu Okobi, February 13, 1982 – October 3, 2018

Millbrae, California

Tasered/Electrocuted: October 3, 2018, San Mateo County Sheriff Sergeant and Sheriff Deputies 

Anton Milbert LaRue Black, October 18, 1998 – September 15, 2018

Greensboro, Maryland

Tasered/Sudden Cardiac Arrest: September 15, 2018, Greensboro Police Officers

Botham Shem Jean, September 29, 1991 – September 6, 2018

Dallas, Texas

Shot: September 6, 2018, Dallas Police Officer 

Antwon Rose Jr., July 12, 2000 – June 19, 2018

East Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Shot: June 19, 2018, East Pittsburgh Police Officer 

Saheed Vassell, December 22, 1983 – April 4, 2018

Brooklyn, New York City, New York

Shot: April 4, 2018, Four Unnamed New York City Police Officers

Stephon Alonzo Clark, August 10, 1995 – March 18, 2018

Sacramento, California

Shot: March 18, 2018, Sacramento Police Officers 

Dennis Plowden Jr., 1992 – December 28, 2017

East Germantown, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Shot: December 27, 2017, Philadelphia Police Officer

Bijan Ghaisar, September 4, 1992 – November 27, 2017

George Washington Memorial Parkway, Alexandria, Virginia

Shot: November 17, 2017, U.S. Park Police Officers   

Aaron Bailey, 1972 – June 29, 2017

Indianapolis, Indiana

Shot: June 29, 2017, Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Officers 

Charleena Chavon Lyles, April 24, 1987 – June 18, 2017 

Seattle, Washington

Shot: June 18, 2017, Seattle Police Officers

Fetus of Charleena Chavon Lyles (14-15 weeks), June 18, 2017 

Seattle, Washington

Shot: June 18, 2017, Seattle Police Officers

Jordan Edwards, October 25, 2001 – April 29, 2017

Balch Springs, Texas

Shot: April 29, 2017, Balch Springs Officer 

Chad Robertson, 1992 – February 15, 2017

Chicago, Illinois

Shot: February 8, 2017, Chicago Police Officer 

Deborah Danner, September 25, 1950 – October 18, 2016

The Bronx, New York City, New York

Shot: October 18, 2016, New York City Police Officers

Alfred Olango, July 29, 1978 – September 27, 2016

El Cajon, California

Shot: September 27, 2016, El Cajon Police Officers 

Terence Crutcher, August 16, 1976 – September 16, 2016

Tulsa, Oklahoma

Shot: September 16, 2016, Tulsa Police Officer 

Terrence LeDell Sterling, July 31, 1985 – September 11, 2016

Washington, DC

Shot: September 11, 2016, Washington Metropolitan Police Officer 

Korryn Gaines, August 24, 1993 – August 1, 2016

Randallstown, Maryland

Shot: August 1, 2016, Baltimore County Police

Joseph Curtis Mann, 1966 – July 11, 2016

Sacramento, California

Shot: July 11, 2016, Sacramento Police Officers 

Philando Castile, July 16, 1983 – July 6, 2016

Falcon Heights, Minnesota

Shot: July 6, 2016, St. Anthony Police Officer 

Alton Sterling, June 14, 1979 – July 5, 2016

Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Shot: July 5, 2016, Baton Rouge Police Officers 

Bettie “Betty Boo” Jones, 1960 – December 26, 2015

Chicago, Illinois

Shot: December 26, 2015, Chicago Police Officer 

Quintonio LeGrier, April 29, 1996 – December 26, 2015

Chicago, Illinois

Shot: December 26, 2015, Chicago Police Officer 

Corey Lamar Jones, February 3, 1984 – October 18, 2015

Palm Beach Gardens, Florida

Shot: October 18, 2015, Palm Beach Gardens Police Officer 

Jamar O’Neal Clark, May 3, 1991 – November 16, 2015

Minneapolis, Minnesota

Shot: November 15, 2015, Minneapolis Police Officers 

Jeremy “Bam Bam” McDole, 1987 – September 23, 2015

Wilmington, Delaware

Shot: September 23, 2015, Wilmington Police Officers 

India Kager, June 9, 1988 – September 5, 2015

Virginia Beach, Virginia 

Shot: September 5, 2015, Virginia Beach Police Officers

Samuel Vincent DuBose, March 12, 1972 – July 19, 2015

Cincinnati, Ohio

Shot: July 19, 2015, University of Cincinnati Police Officer 

Sandra Bland, February 7, 1987 – July 13, 2015

Waller County, Texas

Excessive Force/Wrongful Death/Suicide (?): July 10, 2015, Texas State Trooper

Brendon K. Glenn, 1986 – May 5, 2015

Venice, California

Shot: May 5, 2015, Los Angeles Police Officer 

Freddie Carlos Gray Jr., August 16, 1989 – April 19, 2015

Baltimore, Maryland

Brute Force/Spinal Injuries: April 12, 2015, Baltimore City Police Officers 

Walter Lamar Scott, February 9, 1965 – April 4, 2015

North Charleston, South Carolina

Shot: April 4, 2015, North Charleston Police Officer 

Eric Courtney Harris, October 10, 1971 – April 2, 2015

Tulsa, Oklahoma

Shot: April 2, 2015, Tulsa County Reserve Deputy 

Phillip Gregory White, 1982 – March 31, 2015

Vineland, New Jersey

K-9 Mauling/Respiratory distress: March 31, 2015, Vineland Police Officers

Mya Shawatza Hall, December 5, 1987 – March 30, 2015

Fort Meade, Maryland

Shot: March 30, 2015, National Security Agency Police Officers

Meagan Hockaday, August 27, 1988 – March 28, 2015

Oxnard, California

Shot: March 28, 2015, Oxnard Police Officer

Tony Terrell Robinson, Jr., October 18, 1995 – March 6, 2015

Madison, Wisconsin

Shot: March 6, 2015, Madison Police Officer 

Janisha Fonville, March 3, 1994 – February 18 2015

Charlotte, North Carolina

Shot: February 18, 2015, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Officer

Natasha McKenna, January 9, 1978 – February 8, 2015

Fairfax County, Virginia

Tasered/Cardiac Arrest: February 3, 2015, Fairfax County Sheriff Deputies

Jerame C. Reid, June 8, 1978 – December 30, 2014

Bridgeton, New Jersey

Shot: December 30, 2014, Bridgeton Police Officer 

Rumain Brisbon, November 24, 1980 – December 2, 2014

Phoenix, Arizona

Shot: December 2, 2014,  Phoenix Police Officer 

Tamir Rice, June 15, 2002 – November 22, 2014

Cleveland, Ohio

Shot: November 22, 2014, Cleveland Police Officer 

Akai Kareem Gurley, November 12, 1986 – November 20, 2014

Brooklyn, New York City, New York

Shot: November 20, 2014, New York City Police Officer 

Tanisha N. Anderson, January 22, 1977 – November 13, 2014

Cleveland, Ohio

Physically Restrained/Brute Force: November 13, 2014, Cleveland Police Officers

Dante Parker, August 14, 1977 – August 12, 2014

Victorville, California

Tasered/Excessive Force: August 12, 2014, San Bernardino County Sheriff Deputies

Ezell Ford, October 14, 1988 – August 11, 2014

Florence, Los Angeles, California

Shot: August 11, 2014, Los Angeles Police Officers

Michael Brown Jr., May 20, 1996 – August 9, 2014

Ferguson, Missouri

Shot: August 9, 2014, Ferguson Police Officer 

John Crawford III, July 29, 1992 – August 5, 2014

Beavercreek, Ohio

Shot: August 5, 2014, Beavercreek Police Officer 

Tyree Woodson, July 8, 1976 – August 2, 2014

Baltimore, Maryland

Shot: August 2, 2014, Baltimore City Police Officer

Eric Garner, September 15, 1970 – July 17, 2014

Staten Island, New York

Choke hold/Suffocated: July 17, 2014, New York City Police Officer 

Dontre Hamilton, January 20, 1983 – April 30, 2014

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Shot: April 30, 2014, Milwaukee Police Officer 

Victor White III, September 11, 1991 – March 3, 2014

New Iberia, Louisiana

Shot: March 2, 2014, Iberia Parish Sheriff Deputy

Gabriella Monique Nevarez, November 25, 1991 – March 2, 2014

Citrus Heights, California

Shot: March 2, 2014, Citrus Heights Police Officers

Yvette Smith, December 18, 1966 – February 16, 2014

Bastrop County, Texas

Shot: February 16, 2014, Bastrop County Sheriff Deputy

McKenzie J. Cochran, August 25, 1988 – January 29, 2014

Southfield, Michigan

Pepper Sprayed/Compression Asphyxiation: January 28, 2014, Northland Mall Security Guards

Jordan Baker, 1988 – January 16, 2014

Houston, Texas

Shot: January 16, 2014, Off-duty Houston Police Officer

Andy Lopez, June 2, 2000 – October 22, 2013

Santa Rosa, California

Shot: October 22, 2013, Sonoma County Sheriff Deputy

Miriam Iris Carey, August 12, 1979 – October 3, 2013

Washington, DC

Shot 26 times: October 3, 2013, U. S. Secret Service Officer

Barrington “BJ” Williams, 1988 – September 17, 2013

New York City, New York

Neglect/Disdain/Asthma Attack: September 17, 2013, New York City Police Officers

Jonathan Ferrell, October 11, 1989 – September 14, 2013

Charlotte, North Carolina

Shot: September 14, 2013, Charlotte-Mecklenburg  Police Officer 

Carlos Alcis, 1970 – August 15, 2013

Brooklyn, New York City

Heart Attack/Neglect: August 15, 2013, New York City Police Officers

Larry Eugene Jackson Jr., November 29, 1980 – July 26, 2013

Austin, Texas

Shot: July 26, 2013, Austin Police Detective 

Kyam Livingston, July 29, 1975 – July 21, 2013

New York City, New York

Neglect/Ignored pleas for help: July 20-21, 2013, New York City Police Officers

Clinton R. Allen, September 26, 1987 – March 10, 2013

Dallas, Texas

Tasered and Shot: March 10, 2013, Dallas Police Officer

Kimani “KiKi” Gray, October 19, 1996 – March 9, 2013

Brooklyn, New York City, New York

Shot: March 9, 2013, New York Police Officers

Kayla Moore, April 17, 1971 – February 13, 2013

Berkeley, California

Restrained face-down prone: February 12, 2013, Berkeley Police Officers

Jamaal Moore Sr., 1989 – December 15, 2012

Chicago, Illinois

Shot: December 15, 2012, Chicago Police Officer 

Johnnie Kamahi Warren, February 26, 1968 – February 13, 2012

Dothan, Alabama

Tasered/Electrocuted: December 10, 2012, Houston County (AL) Sheriff Deputy

Shelly Marie Frey, April 21, 1985 – December 6, 2012

Houston, Texas

Shot: December 6, 2012, Off-duty Harris County Sheriff’s Deputy 

Darnisha Diana Harris, December 11, 1996 – December 2, 2012

Breaux Bridge, Louisiana

Shot: December 2, 2012, Breaux Bridge Police Office

Timothy Russell, December 9. 1968 – November 29, 2012

Cleveland, Ohio

137 Rounds/Shot 23 times: November 29, 2012, Cleveland Police Officers 

Malissa Williams, June 20, 1982 – November 29, 2012

Cleveland, Ohio

137 Rounds/Shot 24 times: November 29, 2012, Cleveland Police Officers 

Noel Palanco, November 28, 1989 – October 4, 2012

Queens, New York City, New York

Shot: October 4, 2012, New York City Police Officers

Reynaldo Cuevas, January 6, 1992 – September 7, 2012

Bronx, New York City, New York

Shot: September 7, 2012, New York City Police Officer 

Chavis Carter, 1991 – July 28, 2012

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Shot: July 28, 2012, Jonesboro Police Officer

Alesia Thomas, June 1, 1977 – July 22, 2012

Los Angeles, California

Brutal Force/Beaten: July 22, 2012, Los Angeles Police Officers

Shantel Davis, May 26, 1989 – June 14, 2012

New York City, New York

Shot: June 14, 2012, New York City Police Officer 

Sharmel T. Edwards, October 10, 1962 – April 21, 2012

Las Vegas, Nevada

Shot: April 21, 2012, Las Vegas Police Officers 

Tamon Robinson, December 21, 1985 – April 18, 2012

Brooklyn, New York City, New York

Run over by police car: April 12, 2012, New York City Police Officers

Ervin Lee Jefferson, III, 1994 – March 24, 2012

Atlanta, Georgia

Shot: March 24, 2012, Shepperson Security & Escort Services Security Guards

Kendrec McDade, May 5, 1992 – March 24, 2012

Pasadena, California

Shot: March 24, 2012, Pasadena Police Officers 

Rekia Boyd, November 5, 1989 – March 21, 2012

Chicago, Illinois

Shot: March 21, 2012, Off-duty Chicago Police Detective 

Shereese Francis, 1982 – March 15, 2012

Queens, New York City, New York

Suffocated to death: March 15, 2012,  New York City Police Officers

Jersey K. Green, June 17, 1974 – March 12, 2012

Aurora, Illinois

Tasered/Electrocuted: March 12, 2012, Aurora Police Officers

Wendell James Allen, December 19, 1991 – March 7, 2012

New Orleans, Louisiana

Shot:  March 7, 2012, New Orleans Police Officer

Nehemiah Lazar Dillard, July 29, 1982 – March 5, 2012

Gainesville, Florida

Tasered/Electrocuted: March 5, 2012, Alachua County Sheriff Deputies

Dante’ Lamar Price, July 18, 1986 – March 1, 2012

Dayton, Ohio

Shot: March 1, 2012, Ranger Security Guards

Raymond Luther Allen Jr., 1978 – February 29, 2012

Galveston, Texas

Tasered/Electrocuted: February 27, 2012, Galveston Police Officers

Manual Levi Loggins Jr., February 22, 1980 – February 7, 2012

San Clemente, Orange County, California

Shot: February 7, 2012, Orange County Sheriff Deputy 

Ramarley Graham, April 12, 1993 – February 2, 2012

The Bronx, New York City, New York

Shot: February 2, 2012, New York City Police Officer 

Kenneth Chamberlain Sr., April 12, 1943 – November 19, 2011

White Plains, New York

Tasered/Electrocuted/Shot: November 19, 2011, White Plains Police Officers

Alonzo Ashley, June 10, 1982 – July 18, 2011

Denver, Colorado

Tasered/Electrocuted: July 18, 2011, Denver Police Officers 

Derek Williams, January 23, 1989 – July 6, 2011

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Blunt Force/Respiratory distress: July 6, 2011, Milwaukee Police Officers

Raheim Brown, Jr., March 4, 1990 – January 22, 2011

Oakland, California

Shot: January 22, 2011, Oakland Unified School District Police

Reginald Doucet, June 3, 1985 – January 14, 2011

Los Angeles, California

Shot: January 14, 2011, Los Angeles Police Officer 

Derrick Jones, September 30, 1973 – November 8, 2010

Oakland, California

Shot: November 8, 2010, Oakland Police Officers 

Danroy “DJ” Henry Jr., October 29, 1990 – October 17, 2010

Pleasantville, New York

Shot: October 17, 2020, Pleasantville Police Officer 

Aiyana Mo’Nay Stanley-Jones, July 20, 2002 – May 16, 2010

Detroit, Michigan

Shot: May 16, 2010, Detroit Police Officer 

Steven Eugene Washington, September 20, 1982 – March 20, 2010

Los Angeles, California

Shot: March 20, 2010, Los Angeles County Police

Aaron Campbell, September 7, 1984 – January 29, 2010

Portland, Oregon

Shot: January 29, 2010, Portland Police Officer 

Kiwane Carrington, July 14, 1994 – October 9, 2009

Champaign, Illinois

Shot: October 9, 2019, Champaign Police Officer 

Victor Steen, November 11, 1991 – October 3, 2009

Pensacola, Florida

Tasered/Run over: October 3, 2009, Pensacola Police Officer 

Shem Walker,  March 18, 1960 – July 11, 2009

Brooklyn, New York

Shot: July 11, 2009, New York City Undercover C-94 Police Officer

Oscar Grant III, February 27, 1986 – January 1, 2009

Oakland, California

Shot: January 1, 2009, BART Police Officer 

Tarika Wilson, October 30, 1981 – January 4, 2008

Lima, Ohio

Shot January 4, 2008, Lima Police Officer 

DeAunta Terrel Farrow, September 7, 1994 – June 22, 2007

West Memphis, Arkansas

Shot: June 22, 2007, West Memphis (AR) Police Officer 

Sean Bell, May 23, 1983 – November 25, 2006

Queens, New York City, New York

Shot: November 25, 2006, New York City Police Officers 

Kathryn Johnston, June 26, 1914 – November 21, 2006

Atlanta, Georgia

Shot: November 21, 2006, Undercover Atlanta Police Officers

Ronald Curtis Madison, March 1, 1965 – September 4, 2005

Danziger Bridge, New Orleans, Louisiana

Shot: September 4, 2005, New Orleans Police Officers 

James B. Brissette Jr., November 6, 1987 – September 4, 2005

Danziger Bridge, New Orleans, Louisiana

Shot: September 4, 2005, New Orleans Police Officers 

Henry “Ace” Glover, October 2, 1973 – September 2, 2005

New Orleans, Louisiana

Shot: September 2, 2005, New Orleans Police Officers 

Timothy Stansbury, Jr., November 16, 1984 – January 24, 2004

Brooklyn, New York City, New York

Shot: January 24, 2004, New York City Police Officer 

Ousmane Zongo, 1960 – May 22, 2003

New York City, New York 

Shot: May 22, 2003, New York City Police Officer 

Alberta Spruill, 1946 – May 16, 2003

New York City, New York

Stun grenade thrown into her apartment led to a heart attack: May 16, 2003, New York City Police Officer

Kendra Sarie James, December 24, 1981 – May 5, 2003

Portland, Oregon

Shot: May 5, 2003, Portland Police Officer

Orlando Barlow, December 29, 1974 – February 28, 2003

Las Vegas, Nevada

Shot: February 28, 2003, Las Vegas Police Officer 

Nelson Martinez Mendez, 1977 – August 8, 2001

Bellevue, Washington

Shot: August 8, 2001, Bellevue Police Officer

Timothy DeWayne Thomas Jr., July 25, 1981 – April 7, 2001

Cincinnati, Ohio

Shot: April 7, 2001, Cincinnati Police Patrolman 

Ronald Beasley, 1964 – June 12, 2000

Dellwood, Missouri

Shot: June 12, 2000, Dellwood Police Officers  

Earl Murray, 1964 – June 12, 2000

Dellwood, Missouri

Shot: June 12, 2000, Dellwood Police Officers 

Patrick Moses Dorismond, February 28, 1974 – March 16, 2000

New York City, New York

Shot: March 16, 2000, New York City Police Officer 

Prince Carmen Jones Jr., March 30, 1975 – September 1, 2000

Fairfax County, Virginia

Shot: September 1, 2000, Prince George’s County Police Officer

Malcolm Ferguson, October 31, 1976 – March 1, 2000

The Bronx, New York City, New York

Shot: March 1, 2000, New York City Police Officer 

LaTanya Haggerty, 1973 – June 4, 1999

Chicago, Illinois

Shot: June 4, 1999, Chicago Police Officer

Margaret LaVerne Mitchell, 1945 – May 21, 1999

Los Angeles, California

Shot: May 21, 1999, Los Angeles Police Officer

Amadou Diallo, September 2, 1975 – February 4, 1999

The Bronx, New York City, New York

Shot: February 4, 1999, New York City Police Officers 

Tyisha Shenee Miller, March 9, 1979 – December 28, 1998

Riverside, California

Shot: December 28, 1998, Riverside Police Officers

Dannette “Strawberry” Daniels, January 25, 1966 – June 7, 1997

Newark, New Jersey

Shot: June 7, 1997, Newark Police Officer

Frankie Ann Perkins, 1960 – March 22, 1997

Chicago, Illinois

Brutal Force/Strangled: March 22, 1997, Chicago Police Officers

Nicholas Heyward Jr., August 26, 1981 – September 27, 1994

Brooklyn, New York City, New York

Shot: September 27, 1994, New York City Police Officer 

Mary Mitchell, 1950 – November 3, 1991 

The Bronx, New York City, New York

Shot: November 3, 1991, New York City Police Officer

Yvonne Smallwood, July 26, 1959 – December 9, 1987

New York City, New York

Severely beaten/Massive blood clot: December 3, New York City Police Officers

Eleanor Bumpers, August 22, 1918 – October 29, 1984

The Bronx, New York City, New York

Shot: October 29, 1984, New York City Police Officer

Michael Jerome Stewart, May 9, 1958 – September 28, 1983

New York City, New York

Brutal Force: September 15, 1983, New York City Transit Police 

Eula Mae Love, August 8, 1939 – January 3, 1979

Los Angeles, California

Shot: January 3, 1979, Los Angeles County Police Officers

Arthur Miller Jr., 1943 – June 14, 1978

Brooklyn, New York City, New York

Chokehold/Strangled: June 14, 1978, New York City Police Officers

Randolph Evans, April 5, 1961 – November 25, 1976

Brooklyn, New York City, New York

Shot in head: November 25, 1976, New York City Police Officer

Barry Gene Evans, August 29, 1958 – February 10, 1976

Los Angeles, California

Shot: February 10, 1976, Los Angeles Police Officers

Rita Lloyd, November 2, 1956 – January 27, 1973

New York City, New York

Shot: January 27, 1973, New York City Police Officer

Henry Dumas, July 20, 1934 – May 23, 1968

Harlem, New York City, New York

Shot: May 23, 1968, New York City Transit Police Officer

*************************************************

NOTE 

This memorial is in honor of those unarmed black and brown people killed by the police, sheriff deputies, and security guards. The list is organized by most recent incident of police brutality (David McAtee and George Perry Floyd) and then moves back in time. I have listed each person by their name; birth and death dates; the location of their death; the means of death, date of death, and name of the police department. 

I culled the names from a variety of online sources including Black Lives Matter’s protests; Wikipedia; Black Past; Dangerous Objects, a website run by Mercy Garriga, that investigates cases of excessive use of force and death by the police force; and Professors Cassandra Chaney and Ray V. Robertson’s essay “Armed and Dangerous? An Examination of Fatal Shootings of Unarmed Black People by Police.” I have included women from the #SaveHerName project because we often ignore the injustices and violence that black women experience from the police: police brutality is real for women as it is for men. 

At the age of twenty-four, a friend introduced me to the radical and astonishingly beautiful poetry and writing of Henry Dumas. His poetry serves as the epitaph for this memorial; Dumas is the last entry on this list, shot by New York City Transit Police on May 23, 1968.

— Renée Ater, May 29, 2020

**Many thanks to Cecilia Wichmann and Mary Savig for their fact checking of this list, including adding birth dates from the Social Security Death Index and links to additional news stories. 

*************************************************

SOURCES

Dangerous Objects

https://www.dangerousobjects.org/

Black Past

https://www.blackpast.org/tag/race-and-justice-black-lives-matter/

Say Her Name: Resisting Police Brutality Against Black Women

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/53f20d90e4b0b80451158d8c/t/55a810d7e4b058f342f55873/1437077719984/AAPF_SMN_Brief_full_singles.compressed.pdf

Everyday Harm: Black Women and a History of Police Violence

Unarmed People of Color Killed by Police, 1999-2014

https://gawker.com/unarmed-people-of-color-killed-by-police-1999-2014-1666672349

82 Black Men and Boys Killed by Police

“Armed and Dangerous? An Examination of Fatal Shootings of Unarmed Black People by Police” 

http://www.jpanafrican.org/docs/vol8no4/8.4-5-CCRR.pdf

Mothers Against Police Brutality

Color of Change
https://colorofchange.org/about/

Clinton R. Allen Speak Out 2018

Families United 4 Justice Network

https://fu4jgroup.website/index.html

Mapping Police Violence

https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/

Fatal Force, Washington Post

2020: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/

2019: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/police-shootings-2019/

2018:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/police-shootings-2018/

2017: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/

2016: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/

2015: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/

”What We’ve Learned About Police Shootings 5 Years After Ferguson,” Washington Post, August 9, 2019

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/08/09/what-weve-learned-about-police-shootings-years-after-ferguson/?arc404=true

The Counted, The Guardian, 2015 and 2016

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/series/counted-us-police-killings

Fatal Encounters

Stolen Lives: Killed by Law Enforcement

http://www.stolenlives.org/book.html

Police Brutality Cases (PBC), Open Lab at City Tech

The Center for Homicide Research, Police Shootings Database

Three Words. 70 Cases. The Tragic History of ‘I Can’t Breathe.’

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/28/us/i-cant-breathe-police-arrest.html

Nearly 250 Women Have Been Fatally Shot By Police Since 2015

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/investigations/police-shootings-women/

FACEBOOK MUST STOP THIS TROLLING,  SURVEILLING, CORRUPTION, CONSPIRING AND CENSORSHIP FOR KAMALA HARRIS AND THE COURTEL IMMEDIATELY

FACEBOOK MUST STOP THIS TROLLING,  SURVEILLING, CORRUPTION, CONSPIRING AND CENSORSHIP FOR KAMALA HARRIS AND THE COURTEL IMMEDIATELY!!
On October 25, 2016, I posted an article “Kamala “Kriminal Harass” Harris Embezzled Child Support from FaceBook Legal Counsel and Fundraiser! Extorts Parents, Targets and Threatens Father!” 
The article addressed Alameda County Superior Court Judges, District Attorney, Department of Child Support Services ALL involved in Admitted Embezzlement, Corruption, Fraud, Extortion Case of child support payments al-Hakim made in trust to the DA in their fiduciary capacity for the minor al-Hakim children depriving al-Hakim and the minor child of THOUSANDS of DOLLARS paid, then fraudulently and illegally charging al-Hakim with the crime of violating the child support statute for nonpayment! Full Story with Videos and Documents at http://tinyurl.com/ljk8av
The decades old conflict between Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim and Family with the Alameda County District Attorney (DA) and the Department of Child Support Service (DCSS) is among the most extensively told in the history of the American judiciary.
The posted article included my daughter, Bari al-Hakim-Williams, who was a Legal Counsel, Global Infrastructure & Operations at FaceBook where she created the Diversity program until she left two years ago in 2018, whom had her Child Support embezzled and stolen by the District Attorney, whom tried to frame me for it, and persecuted our Family for over 20 years when we ALL objected, agreed NOT to pay and refused to pay the stolen funds again. 
Wherein the DA suspended my drivers license and revoked my passport for over TWENTY YEARS in an effort to force me to pay again, but more so just to put me in the “system” susceptible to ALL possible police, judicial, law enforcement whims of hate induced persecution, harassment, oppression, racism, bigotry, Islamophobia, Xenophobia and retaliation! They did this despite the fact that the District Attorney Bill Kleeman ADMITTED in a letter to the parents apologizing for their crimes, stopped the fraudulent theft of the child support, then doubled down and began stealing the money all over again three years later after the supervising DA died! You can read or download the letter here: https://www.box.com/shared/vny517fknk 
Kamala Harris was working with the DA’s office with all her friends directly involved in this Admitted Embezzlement, Corruption, Fraud, and Extortion Case!
As Attorney General “Kriminal Harass” and the Office of The Attorney General of The State of California substituted in as attorney of record in this case for the Alameda County Department of Child Support Services allegedly “in the interest of justice”. What justice is there in the Attorney General defending, concealing and thereby further complicitly committing the admitted willful and intentional extrinsic fraud upon the court; prosecutorial misconduct; willful and malicious prosecution; misconduct; conflict of interest; obstruction of justice; denial of due process under the law; willful and intentional fabrication and authoring false evidence; misstating and mischaracterizing evidence; misrepresentation and concealment of material facts with knowledge of the truth with the intent to induce the court’s act or reliance; harassment; and intimidation on behalf of District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, former DA Tom Orloff, Maureen Lenahan, Valgeria Harvey, counselors L. Lavagetto, Ms. K. Pendergrass, Ms. Adler, Kris Ferre, and accountant Mr. Lovelady and others unnamed in the DA’s office; various judges and Commissioner Oleon’s abuse of discretion, willful misconduct, conduct prejudicial, illegal ex-parte communications and bias that resulted in error.
This was done to excuse and protect the Alameda County Department of Child Support Services from their ongoing conflict of interest in their alleging to represent the interest of Joette Hall, whom they had defrauded along with al-Hakim of the funds paid to the DCSS in trust for their minor child Bari.
I received a letter from Marina Soto, California Deputy Attorney General, dated June 1, 2017 regarding our Noticed Request for Documents served on Kamala Harris May 22 and 23, 2017. It was served on the Parties to provide the time to comply with previous Requests made subject to Rule 10.500; Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act; Brown Act- California Public Records Act Request (PRA), and Ethics Complaints.
Feigning ignorance in the letter, she asks me to clarify the request, if under PRA, wherein they will respond accordingly. Every one of you herein has done the exact same thing for years only to have the evidence of crime against you mount to a point of insurmountable!
As a result, I clarified the Demand for Production of Documents for each of them therein that has had a previous request made. If there is no compliance in seven (7) days, we will file formal Request for Production of Documents and Depositions on each herein. I will start with Attorney Generals Jerry Brown, Kamala Harris, Xavier Becerra and Ms. Soto.
On April 7, 2014, we filed and served a FOIA/Brown Act Request on Attorney General Kamala D. Harris, Joan Kirtlan, Stephen Napolillo- Records Co-ordinators, and Custodian of Records.
By letter attached dated April 17, 2014, Brent Orick- Special Agent in Charge- Professional Standards Group, Division of Law Enforcement, acknowledging receipt of our PRA Request on April 7, 2014, therein requesting time to respond by May 1, 2014, in order “to consult with another agency having a substantial interest in the determination of the request or among two or more components of the agency having a substantial subject matter interest therein”. In a separate letter Soto made the same request for an extension of time to comply the very same day! The letter can be read or downloaded at:
AG Harris- Orick FOIA Response
https://app.box.com/s/zcl41lib06z12ninb2dzqlsigl4tpyer
and 
AG Harris- Soto FOIA Response
https://app.box.com/s/7f8u8dr274z6wdskgx40a0auujpw7uf3
Additionally, on May 6, 2014 and July 3, 2014 Orick left voice mail messages for me regarding the Attorney General’s response. The voice mail can be listen to or downloaded at:
May 6, 2014  https://app.box.com/s/kpnvn0lvx74bm8dahsc5vgd2686zfdyd
July 3, 2014  https://app.box.com/s/uexrxsxwjfkpavxdaetwqqk1z1wcev2j
By letter attached dated May 2, 2014, I informed both Ms. Soto and Mr. Orick that the FOIA/Brown Act Request filed on April 7, 2014 and their acknowledged receipt from both dated April 17, 2014 that they have both for the Attorney General failed and refused to comply with ANY of the requested information as per the law by providing NO RESPONSE AT ALL. This implies that the original request they both made on April 17, 2014 at the conclusion of the required time to provide the information was totally disingenuous! The letter can be read or downloaded at: 
https://app.box.com/s/vf4tnpxz7mhx9t545d80e6sqhxvuh138
In an attached letter dated May 28, 2014, to Mrs. Harris, Ms. Soto, Mr. Orick and Custodian of Records requesting again that the Attorney General respond to the request, to comply with all relevant deadlines and other obligations set forth in FOIA and the agency’s regulations. 5 U.S.C. § 552, (a)(6)(A)(i); 26 a.F.R. § 601.702(c)(9)(ii). Pursuant to 26 C.F.R. § 601.702(c)(2)(i), I would prefer the responsive records be provided in an electronic format. Attorney General’s March 2009 FOIA memorandum, reiterating President Obama’s directive that in “the face of doubt, openness prevails.” Attorney General, Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies at 1 (March 19, 2009) (Attorney General Memorandum). They have yet to comply or even respond! The letter can be read or downloaded at: https://app.box.com/s/feolyhbt0rchngtugayi5cj8chr9mayj
But as any good politician has done, Harris has actually been involved in stealing child support from Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim’s minor child with an outstanding order! She not only worked in the DA’s office during the time this embezzlement was happening but then represented the Department of Child Support Services and the DA’s office AGAINST al-Hakim. 
Now 25 years later, that minor child that Kriminal Harass embezzled is Bari al-Hakim-Williams.
Bari al-Hakim-Williams has hosted and attended multiple fundraisers for Harris, even held at her home, that was promoted on
“Heyevent.com” 
Host included ROBERT L. HARRIS, ESQ., SHONDA SCOTT, DEMETRIUS SHELTON, ESQ., LALITA TADEMY, BARRY LAWSON WILLIAMS, JAIME A. WILLIAMS, HON. JOEL YOUNG
Shelton posted:
Fundraiser – Kamala Harris for CA Attorney General 
Saturday, 14 November 2009, 15:00
 At the Home of Bari and Jaime Williams – Oakland, CA 

Fundraiser – Kamala Harris for CA Attorney General 
Friends,
Please join me at a fundraiser in support of my friend and colleague 

SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT ATTORNEY
&
CANDIDATE FOR CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL 2010 KAMALA D. HARRIS 

Saturday, November 14, 2009 3:00 – 5:00 pm 
AT THE HOME OF JAIME & BARI WILLIAMS OAKLAND, CA* 
Hosted by – 
ROBERT L. HARRIS, ESQ., SHONDA SCOTT, DEMETRIUS SHELTON, ESQ., LALITA TADEMY, BARI A. WILLIAMS, ESQ., BARRY LAWSON WILLIAMS, JAIME A. WILLIAMS, HON. JOEL YOUNG 
Guest . . . . . . . . . $250 
If you are unable to attend the event, but would like to support. You can donate online by visiting: http://kamalaharris.org/donate/event/534. Please let me know if you donate via the website so that I can track your contribution. 
Thanks in advance for your support! 
Demetrius
Oddly enough Shelton is involved in the al-Hakim legal action against the City of Oakland in the Case of al-Hakim vs CSAA and Rescue Rooter, et. al. You can hear Demetruis Shelton, President of the National Bar Association and City Attorney employee’s Voicemail “Russo Received Trial Subpoenas!!!”
The Facebook posted article included photos of my daughter, Bari al-Hakim-Williams, whom had her child support, with President Barack and Michelle Obama at the White House and her Facebook employee photo. 
Bari al-Hakim-Williams, was honored for her fine achievements at the White House where she was hosted by President Obama and Michelle Obama, as one of the Nations “40 Under 40” top lawyers by the National Bar Association, among others. She was featured in Black Enterprise Magazine, discussing her plight as a minority and woman of color in a major corporation, in a commanding leadership position over men, lawyers and engineers, and the Diversity Program she founded at FaceBook. Her title there is Legal Counsel, Global Infrastructure & Operations at Facebook where she governs everything that is purchased. She created the Diversity program and talks about it here.
For some unknown reason, FaceBook “wiped/scrubbed” her photos from the post. I replaced them and they were removed again! The suddenly the posts with the photos were removed from my Facebook Profile entirely without explanation! JUST WHAT IS FACEBOOK UP TO WITH MY ACCOUNT? Something is HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS about THEIR actions! The decades old conflict between Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim and Family with the Alameda County District Attorney (DA) and the Department of Child Support Service (DCSS) is among the most extensively told in the history of the American judiciary with the admitted willful fraud and extortionate scheme that the District Attorney and DCSS extensively exercised to persecute the family that they are liable for.
On February 19, 2017, I posted an article on FaceBook called The “Courtel” that was labeled as “false information”. THAT WAS FACTUALLY UNTRUE!!! We were NEVER noticed of this and only found out about it years later! There as no other information. How, why and by whom was this “fact-checked”? This IS NOT an error, it’s CENSORSHIP! FACEBOOK MUST STOP THIS TROLLING,  SURVEILLING, CORRUPTION, CONSPIRING AND CENSORSHIP FOR KAMALA HARRIS AND THE COURTEL IMMEDIATELY!!
The WORLD needs to know the TRUTH about Kamala Harris, The COURTEL their campaigns and how FaceBook is censoring the TRUTH to cover their FRAUD. ALL of our post you tagged as “false information” proven by a 3rd party fact checker, IS ITSELF FALSE INFORMATION, OPPRESSIVE,  HOSTILE AND DEFAMATORY OF ME, MY FAMILY, OUR BUSINESSES OUR COMMUNITIES AND THOSE THAT WE SERVE!! 
When I challenged the “false information” label and asked FACEBOOK to prove ANY of the information was false, they removed the label! ALL this information is listed in certified court documents including THEIR ADMISSIONS of Fraud, Embezzlement and Extorting my family! ALL PROVEN, TRUE AND ACCURATE! So Facebook is trolling, surveilling and monitoring ALL our activities and placing limits on every action of ours!
I recently filed the required documents to VERIFY my account at 1:57 am and that request was DENIED at 1:57 am after an alleged “review”. That is NOT HUMANLY POSSIBLE! There is no algorithm that can make that determination in less than 10 seconds!! First, it’s ME verifying that it’s ME!! That could ONLY possibly be for the purpose of assuring the viewers of my Profile that it’s ME! Who else would want to do that and can provide MY California government issued ID? 
I have been a Public Figure since I was 12 years old as a GENIUS and Sports Star, on to setting many unprecedented records in American History! My achievements have been chronicled in the media and taught in ALL the major MBA and Law School Academia Institutions in America! So, just how do you DENY me the verification in less than 10 seconds??!!!
The limits placed on OUR friend requests are absolutely ridiculous!!! Clearly FACEBOOK’S algorithm can distinguish between friend requests, comments, replies,  and postings, so there should be no confusion/association between those functions! Their algorithm doesn’t know who I know!!! AND, I don’t want the whores, snitches, and terrorist that Facebook suggest as friends whom I DON’T KNOW!!! This is just a measure to block the friend request process and deny certain users the opportunity to make requests of REAL friends and it’s NOT relative to time, time has no importance! This is simply B.S.!!
Again, I was blocked from posting to Groups we belong to for SEVERAL weeks without explanation.  What are their reasons for the Blocks? Other than THEIR CENSORSHIP, what reason could there possibly be for restricting our posts when they have been sooo widely reacted to with comments, likes, dislikes, etc. and recirculated over and over with shares??!!! WHO doesn’t like what’s being said? Facebooks restriction is OPPRESSION!!
We currently have a case pending in Alameda County Courts that addresses our censorship and conspiracy of Twitter and Google being complicit in the activities of Kamala Harris, the COURTEL, CORRUPTOCRATS AND KLEPTOCRATS  and it now seems that we MUST add FACEBOOK to the case.

Alameda County Judge Frank Roesch Admonished for Embroilment in Cases

The commission found Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch’s prior discipline an aggravating factor in deciding to admonish him.

Judge Frank Roesch, Alameda County Superior Court...Photo by Jason Doiy.3-23-06.040-2006Judge Frank Roesch, Alameda County Superior Court. (Photo: Jason Doiy/ALM)

An Alameda County judge was publicly admonished Thursday for becoming embroiled in two cases that were both overturned on appeals.

The Commission on Judicial Performance found Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch “displayed a lack of the dispassionate neutrality and the courtesy to others that is expected of judges” while overseeing both a 2015 jury trial and a 2017 property title matter.

“Although Judge Roesch believed, based on faulty assumptions, that his intervention in each case was justified, it is the misguided manner in which he attempted to address his misassumptions, and the discourteous way he comported himself toward those appearing in court before him, that is the basis for this discipline,” the commission wrote.

Roesch’s attorney, Long & Levit partner David McMonigle, did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

During the 2015 jury trial, Roesch repeatedly quizzed an insurance adjuster testifying in the case and then suggested she had perjured herself, according to a transcript provided by the commission. After the witness retained an attorney and asserted a Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, Roesch ordered her to announce that in front of the jury. The judge did not allow cross-examination of the adjuster.

Roesch should not have required the witness to assert her Fifth Amendment rights in front of the jury, nor should he have required a “blanket” declaration, the commission wrote. In 2018, the First District Court of Appeal, citing “several errors” by Roesch overturned the jury verdict.

Roesch said he allowed the witness to invoke a blanket privilege because he thought he had “buy-in from counsel in the case,” according to the commission’s report.

“Having attorneys agree to something the law does not permit does not obviate the judge’s duty to respect and comply with the law,” the commission wrote. “The judge’s action in this regard constituted an intentional disregard of the law.”

In 2017, Roesch engaged in an extensive debate with an attorney representing a client seeking a quiet title judgment. After repeatedly questioning whether anyone would pay supplemental taxes on the property, despite assurances from the new owner that he would, Roesch dismissed the case with prejudice. The First District reversed the ruling.

The commission found that Roesch displayed poor demeanor and became embroiled in the matter.

“Judge Roesch argued that he was merely exercising his ‘gatekeeping’ function because he believed there should have been a probate proceeding to transfer the property,” the commission wrote. “Even if the judge had been correct about his concerns, he could have conveyed those concerns to the parties and counsel without resorting to unduly harsh language.”

The commission found Roesch’s prior discipline an aggravating factor in deciding to admonish him. Roesch, appointed by Gov. Gray Davis in 2001, received a private advisory letter in 2011 for making discourteous remarks to a self-represented litigant.

Nine of the 11 commissioners voted to publicly admonish Roesch. One member, Kay Cooperman Jue, would have imposed a private admonishment. Commissioner Sarah Kruer Jager did not participate in the matter.

Bigot Brand Contempt Threat, Disparages al-Hakim Religious Practice of Islam at May 1, 2019 Hearing!

TO:  Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye          Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye
Chair, Judicial Council of California               Supreme Court of California
Comm. Judicial Appointments                       350 McAllister Street, Room 1295
455 Golden Gate Ave.                                     San Francisco, CA 94102-4797
San Francisco, CA 94102                                Fax: (415) 865-7181
Fax: 415-865-4200,415-865-4205             Tani.Cantil-Sakauye@jud.ca.gov
Presiding Judge Wynne Carville                  Chad Finke
Supervising Judge Michael Markman         Executive Officer
Judge Stephen Kaus                                    Superior Court of Alameda County
Judge Kevin R. Murphy                                1225 Fallon Street Room 209
Judge C. Don Clay                                        Oakland, CA 94612
Judge Jeff Brand                                          Fax: 510-891-6276
Judge Kim Colwell                                        cfinke@alameda.courts.ca.gov
Judge Morris Jacobson
Judge Winifred Smith                                 Charles Johnson
Judge Jon Rolefsen                                     Beth Robbins
Judge Yolanda Northridge                          Deputy Clerk
Judge Dennis Hayashi                                 First District Court of Appeal
Judge Jo-Lynne Q. Lee                               350 McAllister Street
Superior Court of Alameda County            San Francisco CA 94102
Departments 1, 6, 511, and 518                   Fax: 415-865-7309, 415-865-7209
René C. Davidson Courthouse                    Beth.Robbins@jud.ca.gov,
1225 Fallon Street                                        Charles.Johnson@jud.ca.gov
Oakland CA 94612
FAX #: 510-891-5304, 510-891-6276, 510-267-1567
dept.1@alameda.courts.ca.gov,WCarville@alameda.courts.ca.gov, MMarkman@alameda.courts.ca.gov, JRolefsen@alameda.courts.ca.gov, EGrillo@alameda.courts.ca.gov,MJacobson@alameda.courts.ca.gov, JBrand@alameda.courts.ca.gov,CClay@alameda.courts.ca.gov,WSmith@alameda.courts.ca.gov,dept.6@alameda.courts.ca.gov,KColwell@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.511@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.518@alameda.courts.ca.gov, SKaus@alameda.courts.ca.gov,KMurphy@alameda.courts.ca.gov,JLee@alameda.courts.ca.gov,YNorthridge@alameda.courts.ca.gov, DHayashi@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.19@alameda.courts.ca.gov,RFreedman@alameda.courts.ca.gov
Martin Hoshino                                      Victoria B. Henley
Director                                                  Director-Chief Counsel
Judicial Council of California               Commission on Judicial Performance
455 Golden Gate Avenue                    455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 14400
San Francisco, CA 94102-3688         San Francisco, CA 94102-3688
FAX NO. 415-865-4586                     FAX NO. (415) 557-1266
Martin.Hoshino@jud.ca.gov               Victoria.Henley@jud.ca.gov
John.Wordlaw@jud.ca.gov
Alex Tse                                                  Phyllis J. Hamilton
Director- No. District                            Chief District Judge
U. S. Attorney’s Office                          U. S. District Court- No. Division
Federal Courthouse                              6th Floor Oakland Courthouse- 2
450 Golden Gate Avenue                     1301 Clay Street
San Francisco, CA 94102                     Oakland, CA 94612
Fax No.: (415) 436-7234                      Fax No.: 415 522-3605
charles.oconnor@usdoj.gov                Phyllis_Hamilton@cand.uscourts.gov
stacey.geis@usdoj.gov                         Richard_Wieking@cand.uscourts.gov
alex.Tse@usdoj.gov                              Joseph_Spero@cand.uscourts.gov
joshua.Eaton@usdoj.gov
Barbara.Valliere@usdoj.gov
sara.Winslow@usdoj.gov
Brent and Sarah Hanson                        Anthony S. Leung, Christopher Leung
Green Key Investments                           Green Key Investments
508 Dimm Street                                    110 Franklin Street, Suite # 2
Richmond, CA 94805                             Oakland, CA 94607
                                                                 mrchrisleung@gmail.comXavier Becerra
Xavier Becerra
Attorney General of California
1300 I Street, Suite 125
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
FAX No.: 916-324-8835
Xavier.Becerra@doj.ca.gov
Sean.McCluskie@doj.ca.gov
Robert.Wilson@doj.ca.gov
Laura.Stuber@doj.ca.gov
Kelli.Evans@doj.ca.gov
Marina.Soto@doj.ca.gov
Fax No.: 916-322-4532, 916-323-5341, 916-324-5567, 916-319-9421cc: ; bcc ACLU, LCCR, East Bay Community Law Center, Bay Area Legal Aid, USC Gould School Of Law, Western Center On Law & Poverty, Electronic Frontier Foundation, National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms, Equal Justice Society, Center for Constitutional Rights, Southern Poverty Law Center,
Faxed and Emailed
FROM:     Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE:     May 2, 2019
NO PAGES: 14
RE:        Bigot Brand Contempt Threat, Disparages al-Hakim Religious Practice of Islam at May 1, 2019 Hearing

“In another religion they honor people who serve like you with Sainthood!”” – Economics Professor Adeel Malik,Oxford University, England and World Renowned News Expert Commentator, speaking about Abdul-Jalil and the Aaron & Margaret Wallace Foundation.

GOD sent me an ANGEL” – Hammer, speaking about Abdul-Jalil.

“Jalil, YOU ARE A TZADIK (SAINT)!”– Barry Barkan, Live Oak Institute and
  Ashoka Fellow at Ashoka Foundation:Innovators for the Public

 

“I thank God for you and for bringing you into my life and for the ministry you have been given to help the people of God!”– Pastor L. J. Jennings, Kingdom Builders Christian Fellowship, speaking about Abdul-Jalil and AMWF

Dear Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye, Judges Phyllis Hamilton, Jacobson, Rolefson, Carvill, Kaus, Colwell, Hayashi, Clay, Lee, Murphy, Smith, Brand, Freedman, Markman and Carvill; Alex Tse, Xavier Becerra, Ms. Henley, Mr. Finke, Mr. Hoshino and OTHERS:
Bigot Brand OUTRIGHT LIES in Disparaging al-Hakim Religious Practice of Islam at May 1, 2019 Hearing
At the hearing on May 1, 2019, upon being called, al-Hakim served Brand a Challenge for Cause, upon which he complained that he had filed an answer to the previous challenge served on him just 48 hours ago, but he did NOT provide nor serve that answer on the parties present. He then announced that he would take a brief recess to read the new challenge.
Brand recalls the case, fully intent on jailing al-Hakim for contempt, nods to the the sheriffs deputy seated in the jury box next to al-Hakim, lights into al-Hakim for serving the challenge, affirming that he was going to proceed with the matters at hand regardless of the challenge that he felt could not be any different from the challenge served on him just 48 hours ago! As he is doing so, the sheriffs deputy leaves the jury box and approaches al-Hakim seated at the plaintiff’s table.
al-Hakim responded by illustrating and addressing Brand’s bigotry in his disparagement, denigration, and deprecation of al-Hakim, his religious practice of Islam and Islam had occurred just 48 hours ago at the hearing on April 29, 2019! al-Hakim dramatically argued Brand’s INDEFENSIBLE act of referring to al-Hakim’s weekly religious obligation as “I know that you say you have a religious Holiday every Tuesday and Thursday?!”in Brand’s attempts to cast aspersions on al-Hakim, his religion and it’s practice as frivolous, a Frat party, to impugn, vilify, traduce and portray al-Hakim as a nefarious hypocrite! At this point, the sheriffs deputy is standing arms distance away from al-Hakim seated at the plaintiff’s table.
Defendants then offer that the challenges are a contempt of court, wherein al-Hakim states: “you have held proceedings in this matter while there is a stay in place from the vexatious motion and have asked for a warrant for my arrest, this proceeding is a attempt to provoke and provide an opportunity for an arrest for contempt. This vexatious proceeding is just your defense strategy to prevent further exposure and prosecution of your corruption and bigotry!”. Brand responds that “I could not disagree with you more, the court takes every opportunity to accommodate every religion”.
Brand, now confronted with the clear line of bigotry that he has gone FAR beyond, trips and falls over it as he can NOT in good conscience order al-Hakim arrested for contempt as it would prove al-Hakim’s point of his bigotry!
Brand is NOTHING BUT A MISERABLE, PATHOLOGICAL LIAR, INCAPABLE OF THE TRUTH!
If Brand can make such a statement as “I could not disagree with you more, the court takes every opportunity to accommodate every religion”, then how does that comport that with his actions in the Green Key case where he DID NOT RESPOND to over THIRTEEN (13) communications, contacts, documents, faxes and emails, including TWO phone calls and voicemail messages, and hand delivered documents to him over a three week period requesting a continuance, proceeded despite the notices and issued a default against al-Hakim in favor of Green Key?
Green Key Defaulted, Failure to Appear Three Times
In the Green Key Case, Brand ignored the fact al-Hakim did NOT received any response from the court to his over THIRTEEN (13) communications, contacts, documents, faxes and emails, including TWO phone calls and voicemail messages, and hand delivered the documents with a court filed letter requests to his clerks Scott Sanchez and Cynthia Trinidad over three weeks PRIOR to the January 2, 2019 and January 3, 2019, hearings to request a reservation number to file an ex-parte motion for a continuance of the hearings he was unable to attend as the court and plaintiffs are and have been aware for over 30 years that al-Hakim has religious obligations on Tuesdays and Thursdays that do not allow for his presence in court which included the hearing, and proceeded despite the notices and issued a default against al-Hakim in favor of Green Key. Judge Brand, and Colwell before him, their Department 511 clerks and court administrations continuing fraud, corruption and collusion being solely responsible for this case as filed, NOT Green Key. They have been the sole force behind moving this litigation forward for them, as Green Key has failed to appear THREE TIMES consecutively without notice nor reason submitted to the court nor al-Hakim, have not filed an opposition to the motion to vacate the default writ of execution, and have NOT been issued a default nor al-Hakim being granted his motion to vacate the default taken against him!
Brand, who admitted that the last two continuances given to Green Key had NOTHING to do with the case, attempts to sit in SOLE judgment of his, the Department 511 clerks and court administration’s OWN Continuing Fraud, Corruption and Collusion committed on HIS and their OWN part!
The last Green Key defaulted, failure to appear was at the February 25, 2019, hearing, over two months ago, yet to date Brand has NOT issued an order despite the fact they failed to appear THREE TIMES consecutively without notice, and did not file an opposition to the motion to vacate the default writ of execution! On April 3, April 15, and April 17, 2019, al-Hakim sent two faxes and emails each time to the court and opposing parties requesting the order from the uncontested, defaulted motion. That’s TEN REQUESTED NOTICES and it has yet to be served even though it was unopposed and thrice defaulted for failure to appear.
Due to the illegal eviction from the defaulted Green Key case, al-Hakim was forced out of his home with only two days to move and was unable to take anything! Of note is the fact he left all his personal and business computers, files that are now in the custody and control of the opposition. al-Hakim has NONE of the files he had accumulated over his life of years! Green Key has taken complete and total custody and control of ALL al-Hakim’s entire lifetime possessions, accumulation of ALL personal, family, and business belongings, things, property, goods, personal effects, assets, chattels, movables, valuables, EVERYTHING!! Over $800,000 in value that has been destroyed by Green Key and MUST BE REPLACED!!!
Four times al-Hakim has demanded the return of EVERYTHING, ALL ITEMS LEFT IN THE HOUSE, WITHOUT ANY DAMAGE TO THEM! Green Key has NEVER responded to the demand. We are sure the items of interest are in the control of the courts partners, law enforcement!
This places an intolerable burden on al-Hakim and makes it impossible to present this document in a concise and cogent manner without the necessary documentary support.
THIS BEGS THE QUESTION WHY IS BRAND FAVORING THEM AND NOT ISSUING THE ORDER UNTIL HE HAS SHACKLED AL-HAKIM WITH BEING DEEMED A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT UNABLE TO PURSUE ANT LITIGATION AGAINST HIM, THEM OR ANYONE ELSE?!!!
Bigot Brand Disparages al-Hakim’s Religious Practice of Islam at April 29, 2019 Hearing
At the hearing on April 29, 2019, Brand disparaged, denigrated, and deprecated, al-Hakim and his religious practice of Islam by referring to al-Hakim’s weekly religious obligation as “I know that you say you have a religious Holiday every Tuesday and Thursday?!”.
This bigoted, ignorant, thoughtless, irresponsible, caustic remark left al-Hakim shocked, speechless and dumbfounded! al-Hakim, humiliated at the utterance finally stumbled out “I have NEVER said that I have a religious Holiday every Tuesday and Thursday!”Brand says “Well I know you have said something like that”. al-Hakim responds “I have religious obligations every Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, they are NOT Holidays”.
Irate at the fact that he MUST conform with the law to at least a minimum, Brand asks al-Hakim “when will you be available for an appearance”, wherein al-Hakim responded “the first Monday or Wednesday after June 20, 2019”. Brand states that “you will be gone for Ramadan?”and al-Hakim says “yes, I noticed you of that fact a month ago”. Brands retorts in a very snide, rude manner “I know, I was just asking”and al-Hakim responded “I was just answering”. Brand asks “when does it start?”, al-Hakim responds “Sunday”. Brand then orders the parties to appear two days later on May 1, 2019, at 9:00 a.m.
It was clear that Brand has an agenda to move the VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM Superior Court Criminal/Civil Vexatious Entrapment Litigation Strategy to completion before al-Hakim takes retreat for Ramadan so that they can gain another uncontested appeals verdict knowing al-Hakim will NOT be able to respond before June 15, 2019!
It MUST be noted that Brand had TWO sheriff’s deputies in the wings of the jury box waiting with orders in hand!
Brand attempts to cast aspersions on al-Hakim’s religion and it’s practice as frivolous, a Frat party, or Rave, to impugn, vilify, traduce and portray al-Hakim as a carouser, party animal, nefarious hypocrite, insincere. This is perhaps the HIGHEST ranking tenet in the pillars of Islam and is mandated, commanded upon ALL muslims! al-Hakim is long established at this, over 60 years, is recognized and honored world wide for his service, is consulted and relied on for his service to the Islamic community and humanity at large!
Brand and the judges have deprive al-Hakim of certain fundamental rights including the right to freedom of religion and to free speech and the due process of law and penalize him because of his religious beliefs! requiring al-Hakim to abandon his religious beliefs and practices in order to receive benefits. discriminates against al-Hakim and Muslims violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.
This divisive case highlights the vast difference between the reality and the rhetoric of religious freedom, which is often considered to be the ideal that promotes harmony and equality in the judicial system. But, history suggests that it does lead to more conflict due to the biases and prejudices of those same justices echoing the view that religious freedom brings inequality and disunity so the government and courts systematically enact mainstream practices favoring particular races and faiths for cause and preventing religious freedom and liberty!
Brands prejudice is pathological and projects a personality syndrome linked with racism as well to establish and cultivate his own race, class and religious supremacy based on favoritism towards his own perceived group, their admiration, sympathy, and trust of his ingroup, the “Courtel”.
BRAND CAN NOT SERVE IN ANY CAPACITY IN ANY AL-HAKIM MATTERS!
Repression of al-Hakim and First Amendment Free Exercise of Religion
The Constitution, and The Bill of Rights guarantees that the government can never deprive people in the U.S. of certain fundamental rights including the right to freedom of religion and to free speech and the due process of law. In recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution to keep the government out of religion– to guarantee the separation of church and state. This fundamental freedom is a major reason why the U.S. has managed to avoid a lot of the religious conflicts that have torn so many other nations apart.
The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment gives you the right to worship or not as you choose. The government can’t penalize you because of your religious beliefs.
Sherbert v. Verner (1963): The Supreme Court ruled that states could not require a person to abandon their religious beliefs in order to receive benefits. Sherbert v. Verner, in which a Seventh-day Adventist was fired because she wouldn’t work on Saturdays. The state denied her jobless benefits, saying she was fired for cause. The Supreme Court ruled that disqualifying her from benefits “solely because of her refusal to accept employment in which she would have to work on Saturday contrary to her religious belief, imposes an unconstitutional burden on the free exercise of her religion.” She got her benefits.
42 U.S. Code § 2000bb – Congressional Findings and Declaration of Purposes
(a) Findings The Congress finds that—
(1) the framers of the Constitution, recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution;
(2) laws “neutral” toward religion may burden religious exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious exercise;
(3) governments should not substantially burden religious exercise without compelling justification;
(4) in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral toward religion; and
(5) the compelling interest test as set forth in prior Federal court rulings is a workable test for striking sensible balances between religious liberty and competing prior governmental interests.
(b) PurposesThe purposes of this chapter are—
(1) to restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and
(2) to provide a claim or defense to persons whose religious exercise is substantially burdened by government.
42 U.S. Code § 2000bb–1 – Free Exercise of Religion Protected
(a) In general
Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b).
(b) Exception Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person—
(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.
(c) Judicial relief
A person whose religious exercise has been burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against a government. Standing to assert a claim or defense under this section shall be governed by the general rules of standing under article III of the Constitution.
(Pub. L. 103–141, § 3, Nov. 16, 1993, 107 Stat. 1488.)
This action is PURELY RETALIATORY
Judge Jeff Brand, other judges listed herein, court clerks and superior court administration, in concert with unscrupulous Federal, Sate County and local judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and agencies (“entities”) have committed over 150 violations under United States and California State Constitutions against Plaintiff Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim that have been graphically detailed and documented over 40 years! (United States Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, VIII, XIV, For Violations of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Under Color Of State Law; Section 1983).
This PURELY RETALIATORY, unjust, illegal act of revenge, calculated to foreclose on al-Hakim’s civil rights as promised to protect those judges and these underhanded entities known and documented to have repeatedly violated the law for years and just like Brand, they have been, are and will be a defendant and witness in those expected proceedings!! This is their collective legal defense effort to eliminate any possibility of that ever happening!
Brand has a challenge matter still pending, has NOT issued a ruling in Green Key default after their failing and refusing to file an opposition to the motion to vacate the writ of execution awarded to them by default taken against al-Hakim and THREE (3) failures to appear to oppose that motion, unlawfully evicting al-Hakim from his 40 year home, thereby strategically delaying the order to avoid further evidence of fraud on the court and to defeat this alleged vexatious litigant action wherein the judges and courts have acted as defendants CSAA co-counsel and CSAA has acted as judges counsel and government agent/informant for 20 years! BRANDS ACTIONS IN THIS CASE ARE INDEFENSIBLE! THUS THIS VEXATIOUS ACTION.
Brand installed the motion practice schedule to evade evidence of fraud on the court with the long pending six (6) CSAA orders so they could not be presented in this action.
The vexatious motion was filed on February 28, 2019, with opening brief due March 22, 2019, and reply brief due April 5, 2019, and the hearing set for April 19, 2019. Brand finally issued the long pending six (6) orders on March 24, 2019; three days AFTER the submission due date for the opening brief.
al-Hakim waited to receive the orders BEFORE filing the opposition/reply brief to include the orders as further evidence of Brands fraud on the court and exposing THIS frivolous motion as his sole defense for his, the judges, and court administration continuing fraud, corruption and conspiracy.
Court Scheduled Proceedings to Take Default against al-Hakim in VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their “Muslim Ban”
Brand even had the hearing set for Thursday, April 18, 2019 and then changed it to Friday, April 19, 2019, both dates that Brand knows al-Hakim will NOT be able to attend due to a 40 year religious commitments know to Brand, defendants and the court, in another effort to take a default against al-Hakim. On April 3, April 15, and today, April 17, 2019, al-Hakim sent two faxes and emails each time to the court and opposing parties announcing the fact the court has scheduled these proceedings in furtherance of their VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their Muslim Ban and requesting the hearing date be changed to a Monday or Wednesday. Thats TEN REQUESTED NOTICES FOR A CONTINUANCE and they were NOT answered. Finally, later on April 17, 2019, al-Hakim received an email from the department 511 clerk stating “Abdul-Jalil – Emailing the department is not sufficient notice for a continuance. If you need help obtaining a continuance please feel free to seek counsel or contact the self help center. This email address is only for people seeking reservations.”. (see April 17, 2019 email from Dept 511 under Exhibit 1)
This response clearly establishes their intent to take a default by design! The court can not complain about the cost of litigation in al-Hakim cases when they are responsible for the constant motions to continue, when they would not address the fact THEY chose the date without any input from al-Hakim knowing that he could NOT attend and rather than make a mutual accommodation, they suggest that he seek legal aid in filing a motion to continue! A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY SOLELY TO PERSECUTE AL-HAKIM AND REWARD THE COURT AND DEFENDANTS!
Brand, the judges, the court administrations, and opposing parties actions have altered the course of litigation in scheduling proceedings on dates they know plaintiff can not attend and refusing to schedule proceedings on dates that he can attend, delaying and denying reservation numbers to file motions, failing to file or respond to plaintiff’s filing of oppositions and contesting to rulings and orders, demanding documents they already have or have better access to than al-Hakim, adding and removing proceedings from the docket and register of actions without any proceedings or authority, continuing the atmosphere of intolerable TERROR in furtherance of their corruption and agenda of hate induced persecution and entrapment, with their version of the targeted “al-Hakim Muslim Ban” has irreparably and irretrievably altered the legal outcome of the proceedings herein questioned! (see VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”; and VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption)
VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “MUSLIM BAN” by ”FIXING CASES” in Furtherance of Corruption Agenda, IS PURE RETALIATION
The judges, clerks and court administration has been and are “fixing”cases against al-Hakim attempting to protect the opposition as they have scheduled proceedings DEMANDING the hearing be on a date al-Hakim can NOT attend due to religious commitments that has been known to the defendants and the court for nearly 40 years, while REFUSING to have those proceedings on a date al-Hakim can attend! (see VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM PERSECUTION, “MUSLIM BAN” by ”FIXING CASES”, al-Hakim Declaration at Page 12-14;“Opposition to Case Fixing”, filed April 4, 2018, in al-Hakim v. Interserver Inc., RG18-888371)
On April 3, April 15, and April 17, 2019, al-Hakim sent two faxes and emails each timeto the court and opposing parties announcing the fact the court has scheduled these proceedings Friday, April 19, 2019, a date that Brand knows al-Hakim will NOT be able to attend due to a 40 year religious commitments know to Brand, defendants and the court, in another effort to take a default against al-Hakim in furtherance of their VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their Muslim Ban and al-Hakim requested the hearing date be changed to a Monday or Wednesday. After TEN REQUESTED NOTICES FOR A CONTINUANCE and they were NOT answered. Finally, later on April 17, 2019, al-Hakim received an email from the department 511 clerk stating “Abdul-Jalil – Emailing the department is not sufficient notice for a continuance. If you need help obtaining a continuance please feel free to seek counsel or contact the self help center. This email address is only for people seeking reservations.”.
This response clearly establishes their intent to take a default by design as the court suggest that he seek legal aid in filing a motion to continue! A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY SOLELY TO PERSECUTE AL-HAKIM AND REWARD THE COURT AND DEFENDANTS!
If it is NOT possible to have litigation with the schedule proposed when the court is open EVERYDAY, the time is free and the court is paid to be there, then bigotry, Islamophobia, and Xenophobia are the specious basis for this continued Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption, Manipulation of the record and Register of Actions; Obstruction of Justice, Conduct To Pervert or Obstruct Justice, or the Due Administration of the Laws (Pen.Code, §§ 182, subd. (a)(1), 4570) 1 and Conspiracy to Pervert or Obstruct Justice (§ 182, subd. (a)(5)); the continued Fraud Upon The Court by Judge Brand regarding Motions clearly have a double standard! al-Hakim’s Religion and religious obligations on those days are NOT going to change for judge Brand nor the court.
al-Hakim has had to make multiple requests, once THIRTEEN times, another SEVEN TIMES to have a “Reservation Number to File a Noticed Motion and Ex-Parte motion to be heard on the SAME DATE as litigation previously scheduled, yet the requests were IGNORED/DENIED, and one resulted in the issuing of a default against al-Hakim by scheduling dates that the defendants and the court were aware al-Hakim was unavailable to attend.
The court has failed and refused to respond with their scheduling seeking an uncontested order, thereby making their agenda of hate apparent to all!
The judges and court administration’s continuing criminal harassment, obstruction of justice, denial of due process and corruption in his uniquely applied and enforced court rules summarily denies al-Hakim’s rights to a fair hearing without any statutory or contractual basis authorizing such a ruling and places an intolerable burden on him, denying his legitimate and undeniable rights and strikes at the heart of his fundamental civil rights and due process under the law, guaranteed by the United States Constitution and California Constitution. No statute in California authorizes the court to deny a right that is uncontroverted while in the process denying such precious fundamental rights of due process and justice. The use of judicial power to permit such injustice raises significant legal questions, and an order is necessary to prevent this abuse.
The judges mindless denials further expose and demonstrate the courts agenda of judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities criminal corruption and persecution, fixing cases against al-Hakim because he is Muslim  and Black, a Whistleblower; appointing themselves a Real Primary Party of Interest to the litigation with their OWN agenda; weaponizing vindictive rulings in furtherance of their agenda; engaging in the defense of opposing parties; the denial of due process, obstruction of justice, the harassment, provocation, and government sponsored terror, the gross examples of white class and privileged bias, prejudice, Islamophobia, Xenophobia, hate induced, vindictive, retaliatory agenda, favoritism, bigotry and racism, al-Hakim continues to experience with the courts retaliation against plaintiff by taking adverse judicial and legal actions against him as punishment of al-Hakim, his family, businesses, and communities they serve continue.
Brand has begun the specious vexatious litigant action to foreclose on al-Hakim’s civil rights to eliminate any further threat he poses to their “honor” and position, while denying al-Hakim any opportunity for truth, fair relief, and justice against them in the “legal system”! The court has heeded al-Hakim’s intentions to not only litigate his cases but some directly involve the corruption naming judges dating back nearly 40 years and the courts can not afford nor will they allow this to happen! They will shut down al-Hakim at ALL COST!
The cases and hearings, which involves contested issues of law or fact, and which had been assigned to Judge Brand, should NEVER have been assigned and no matters hereinafter arising should be heard or assigned to Judge Brand, on the ground that he is irreparably conflicted, tainted, biased, and prejudiced against the plaintiff.
Brand does not provide any answers to the Challenges served on him because he can’t afford to incriminate himself until finally he decided NOT to answer a Green Key challenge until over a month after the Challenge was served, thereby consenting to the Challenge. al-Hakim incorporated those entire challenges therein until such time as he answers the challenges!
VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM Aware Superior Court Criminal/Civil Vexatious Entrapment Litigation Strategy
al-Hakim is aware that the Superior Court administration and judges have been working with law enforcement in a covert criminal undercover sting operation trying to entrap, frame and incriminate him in criminal activity that is fostered by the hearings in his cases that are selectively being recorded by the court reporter whom arbitrarily goes on and off the record at the judges silent instruction, thereby editing the proceedings while in progress, to charge, try, convict, incarcerate and eliminate al-Hakim! The main purpose for the courts using this tactic and employing “court observers”, colluding with the opposing parties and the entities mention in the “WRIT RACKET” criminal, civil, vexatious entrapment defense litigation strategy with third parties was to enable the filing of the vexatious motion. These entities colluding and conspiring using the judicial arm of government whom perform and serve in the roles as suspect, culprit, criminal, evidence, testimony, facts, truth, perjury, investigator, witness, defendant, conspirators, corruptors, colluders, co-counsel, judge, jury, executioner, as the opposition party with their agenda of criminal corruption and persecution to the detriment and oppression of al-Hakim through the illegal use of public funds!The court costs of addressing the challenges can NOT be a consideration when the courts has deviated far from the norm of standard litigation by employing their own private court observers, reporters, and agents in their cause to fabricate a case against al-Hakim and the vexatious motion.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law! But it took four challenges and multiple rulings challenged for fraud on the court, abuse of discretion, bias, prejudice, perjury, and failing to disclose conflicts of interest for Kaus to finally recuse retroactive to his assignment because he failed and refused to disclose a know conflict in these cases that now have to re-litigated at a heavy cost to the parties and the court!
VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “Illegal” Proceedings are Corruption
Based on the matters contained herein, on the United States and California State Constitutional rights and on this document filed herewith, al-Hakim’s cases, these entire “illegal proceedings” are solely for the purpose of the unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities illegally utilizing the full force and resources of the government in a covert criminal undercover sting operation by fostering, fabricating and manipulating any filing, pleading, argument, facts, truth, faxes, emails, phone calls, voicemail messages, letters, hearings, request, reservation numbers, motion practice, motion titles, ex-parte applications, hearings, parties, appearances, continuances, schedules, proceedings, register of actions, Court Domainweb, statements, evidence, testimony, documents, word, inference, vague reference, or gesture that they can remotely interpret as evidence of any remote action they seek to advocate to incriminate, charge, try, convict, incarcerate and eliminate al-Hakim!
These are cases that al-Hakim has filed, they are his cases, NOT the courts, nor judges, nor law enforcement, nor government, nor legal entities in power! Yet they have hijacked al-Hakim, his religion, his truth, his family; their home, their lives; their personal, real, and business property; his businesses; his community; those they serve; his cases; his rights; his freedom; his pursuit of happiness; justice; the Constitution; his very existence! (See Entire “Illegal” Proceedings are Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption at page 138)
VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption
This Grand corruption is systemic and endemic in ALL al-Hakim cases involves the unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities in power colluding and conspiring using the judicial arm of government whom perform and serve in the roles as suspect, culprit, criminal, evidence, testimony, facts, truth, perjury, investigator, witness, defendant, conspirators, corruptors, colluders, co-counsel, judge, jury, executioner, as the opposition party with their agenda of criminal corruption and persecution to the detriment and oppression of al-Hakim through the illegal use of public funds!
Judges do not have discretion not to disqualify themselves. By law, they are bound to follow the law. Should a judge not disqualify himself as required by law, then the judge has given another example of his “appearance of partiality” which further disqualifies the judge. al-Hakim again renews the request for those affected Judges to disqualify themselves, ALL of them, including ALL those named herein.
The fact that the trial court, the judges, clerks, and court administration are parties is an insuperable moral, ethical, and legal obstacle since they are more than a nominal party. (People v. Cimarusti, supra, 81 Cal. App.3d 314, 320; U.S. Financial v. Sullivan (1974) 37 Cal. App.3d 5, 12, fn. 6 [112 Cal. Rptr. 18].)
al-Hakim 2005 U. S. A. G., DOJ- and Judge Clay’s 56 Federal Corruption Complaints
“I don’t care about challenges, they don’t mean anything to me, I’m not scared of them!”. “He has said that he files complaints, files challenges to document the actions of the court”. “He filed complaints with me when I was presiding court judge”, “his work is quite good, better than many of the attorney’s that has appeared before me!”, “he’s a litigator in his own way”
Judge C, Don Clay on al-Hakim’s challenges and 56 complaints filed with and against him over the years
In July, 2005, al-Hakim filed a Federal Corruption Complaint with the United States Attorney General, Department of Justice, of a hate crime of Islamophobia and Xenophobia committed against him during the trial al-Hakim v. CSAA and Rescue, et. al”  in Superior Court of Alameda County, California.
al-Hakim’s initial investigation of his USDOJ demanded a change in this criminal, tactical policy of isolation, victimization, criminalization and the attempted entrapment of al-Hakim as the continuing victim, including the use of government initiated, Nixon era “White House Plumbers” and CoIntelpro style dirty tricks!
This State sponsored persecutory terror and civil conspiracy has brought into play Federal, Sate County and local judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and agencies (“entities”) to further their continued investigation of al-Hakim whom has been surveilled for years and continues today with the compromising of many agents and informants covers due to their sloppiness. These actions of these judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and agencies are just one example of the continuing efforts of law enforcement to silence and eliminate al-Hakim, even by death, as their “enemy of the State” adversary when al-Hakim has caught and exposed them as they have been entrapped in their own criminal snares!
The FIFTY SIX (56) complaints listed in the 140 PAGE COMPLAINT and CHALLENGE against judge Clay is only a small sample of documentation since 1980, and more recently 2000, al-Hakim has filed and served a variety of letters, formal complaints, legal actions and legal challenges with the United States Attorney General’s Office- Department of Justice; Federal and California State Judges, their ruling bodies and Associations; the Alameda County Superior Court of California, United States Attorney’s Office- Northern District; United States District Court- Northern Division, Attorney General of California, Alameda County District Attorney; City of Oakland and Oakland City Attorney; Federal, State and local law enforcement; Federal, State and local politicians; regarding the many blatant civil rights violations, fraud, criminal activities and corruption of these judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities that was widely distributed over the internet and posted on many websites. (see 140 PAGE COMPLAINT and CHALLENGE of Judge Clay filed OCTOBER 3, 2018, and “al-Hakim 56 Complaints listed Document Communications with Clay Detail Corruption and Cover UP!”, filed December 19, 2018, both in al-Hakim v. Interserver Inc., RG18-888371)
“WRIT RACKET”
al-Hakim has filed multiple complaints for years against Justices Jones, Burns, James Humes, Terence Bruiniers, Sandra Margulies, Anthony Kline, and Kathleen Banke as well as Challenges for Cause against Associate Justice James Richman and Henry Needham, Jr. whom apparently sit in this group but has not openly participated in the decisions.
al-Hakim has filed multiple complaints for years against California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, former Chief Justice Ronald M. George, Federal Chief District Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton, and former Chief District Judge Claudia Wilken also.
In these matters, it has been established and admitted that there has been illicit ex parte collusion and conspiracy between Superior Court judges Wynne Carvill, Kim Colwell, Jeff Brand, Robert Freedman, Frank Roesch, Stephan Kaus, Mike Markman, Don Clay, Stephan Pulido, Ioana Petrou, Yolanda Northridge, Morris Jacobson, Jon Rolefson, Evelio Grillo, Kevin Murphy, Jo-Lynne Lee, Scott Patton, David Krashna, Jennifer Madden, Sue Alexander, Glenn Oleon, George Hernandez, Tara Desautels, Leo Dorado, Dennis Hayashi, Julia Spain, several commissioners, and the Superior Court Administration of Chad Finke and the Appeals court with the judges mentioned above. Three of the judges have offered the same unsolicited.
Additionally, Judges Ronni MacLaren, Frank Roesch and Jo-Lynne Lee issued ORDERS OF SELF DISQUALIFICATION/REFUSAL pursuant to C.C.P. §170.1 (a)(6)(A)(ii) and C.C.P. §170.1 (a)(6)(A)(iii). This fact demonstrates that there has been and continues to be pervasive illegal ex-parte communications between the judges regarding al-Hakim because al-Hakim has NEVER had any contact with some judges that recused.
These superior court judges have conspired with the appellant courts to independently take it upon themselves to broadcast their “dog whistle signal to the appeals court” to deny al-Hakim’s petition and issue orders in their support forcing al-Hakim into the “WRIT RACKET”! This is NOT having a trial, this is being “railroaded by the court in a case that is ALREADY fixed against you!”
This action are part of what litigants have come to know as the “WRIT RACKET” instituted by the legal system, judges, courts, the judicial administrative and regulatory agencies, both State and Federal!
These entities have made such a mockery of justice that now these judges do not hesitate to deny or violate a litigants rights and defy them to file a writ knowing that the Supreme Court, Appeals Court, Superior Court Administration, the Judicial Council, and the Commission on Judicial Performance, will cover up and white-wash their criminal activity! These criminal justices are forcing appellants into the Appeals Court cemetery for civil rights, where the Rule of Law is Overruled and Outlawed, the death of due process, where justice is a miscarriage, the treason of truth, the homicide of human rights, the dumpster for denial, where litigants rights are banished to rot in oppression, and die!
al-Hakim’s legal opponents, CSAA and others are engaged in corruption and conspired, consorted, colluded, conceived and employing this “WRIT RACKET” criminal entrapment defense litigation strategy with third parties, other judicial, governmental, law enforcement and legal entities employees, associates, members, agents, contractors, and informants of the U. S. Attorney General- Northern California, Homeland Security (NSA), F.B.I., U. S. Federal Court- Northern California District, California State Supreme Court, California State Appeals Court, Governor of California, California Attorney General, Alameda County District Attorney, Oakland City Attorney, California State Senator, California Congressperson, Alameda County Supervisors, Mayor of Oakland, Oakland City Councilpersons, Alameda County Superior Court, Judicial Council of California, among others, inciting the courts acrimony, animus, and persecution of al-Hakim with judicial calumny deceit!
To understand the “WRIT RACKET”, one needs to know what a “racket” and “racketeering” mean and depict in the legal community and population at large. The definitions are:
Racket
“A racket is a planned or organized criminal act, usually in which the criminal act is a form of business or a way to earn illegal or extorted money regularly or briefly but repeatedly. A racket is often a repeated or continuous criminal operation.”
Racketeering
“Racketeering, often associated with organized crime, is the act of offering of a dishonest service (a “racket”) to solve a problem that wouldn’t otherwise exist without the enterprise offering the service. Racketeering as defined by the RICO act includes a list of 35 crimes.”
Moreover, this is exactly what the judges meant by their “dog whistle” signal/statement at the hearings that they would rely on their “colleagues (in the Appeals Court)” to support their decision to ignore the Rule of Law knowing that the appellate judges would do just as Jones, Burns, Bruiniers, Margulies, Kline, Humes and Banke did, “cover-up for him”.
Brand and the courts actions are a content- and viewpoint- based restriction on speech and lacks any objective criteria for suppressing speech and censorship of constitutionally protected free speech, engage in discriminatory business practices with impunity in violation of the U. S. Constitution First Amendment and California Civil Code § 51, and Article I, section 2 of the California Constitution for Violations of Free Speech, provides: “Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press.” when Plaintiff‟s viewpoints, are protected speech under the California Constitution, where the court harassed Plaintiff by engaging in a severe and pervasive scheme to suppress his constitutional and statutory right to engage in protected activity, by executing against him punitive and adverse judicial actions, and termination of his basic rights to due process?
By operation and application of judges restrictions set forth herein has unlawfully deprived Plaintiff of their full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in violation of CCP §51 and abused its discretion and improperly prejudice al-Hakim, under color of law, the Judges sought to deprive him of litigation due him contrary to the right to due process and immunity from takings without due process guaranteed by the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution.
These Constitutional violations of Plaintiff’s rights and prejudices Plaintiff suffered herein, when the judges denied his civil rights and due process, an equal opportunity to participate in unbiased pursuit of his legal claims, on the basis of Plaintiff’s race, religion, whistleblowing activities, bias, Islamophobic, Xenophobic, vindictive, retaliatory agenda, prejudice, favoritism, bigotry and racism; exhibited bad faith and deceit; denied al-Hakim’s civil and human rights, the rights to the truth, justice, to evidence and testimony, to due process; illegal ex-parte communications regarding al-Hakim; denied the appeal with criminal intent under the color of law and authority in violation of the rights guaranteed by U. S. Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, XIV, Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Under Color Of State Law; Section 1983, Unruh and Ralph Civil Rights Acts, and the Bane Acts.
When the conduct of the Judges was unreasonable and undertaken intentionally with malice, willfulness, and reckless indifference to the rights of others, plaintiff’s injuries and the violations of his constitutional rights were directly and proximately caused by the policies and practices of the Appeals Court, which were the moving force behind the acts described herein caused damages to plaintiff, and will continue to cause damage to plaintiff in violation of his civil rights, and due process and equal protection of the laws under the U. S. Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, XIV by this denial of equal access to an unbiased legal process.
Given the principle involved in this case is not merely one of fairness to al-Hakim but also one of maintaining respect for the law and promoting confidence in the administration of justice. (As the United States Supreme Court stated in In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 [99 L. Ed. 942, 946, 75 S. Ct. 623, 625]: “A fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due process. Fairness of course requires an absence of actual bias in the trial of cases. But our system of law has always endeavored to prevent even the probability of unfairness. … Such a stringent rule may sometimes bar trial by judges who have no actual bias and who would do their very best to weigh the scales of justice equally between contending parties. But to perform its high function in the best way “justice must satisfy the appearance of justice.” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 [75 S. Ct. 11, 13].”)
Where the court acted as described herein with reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s rights with the intent to injure, vex, annoy and harass Plaintiff, subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights with the intention of causing Plaintiff injury and depriving him of his constitutional rights when in these circumstances, there was denial of a substantial right rendered the ensuing commitment illegal because it is impossible for this or a reviewing court not to conclude that “a different result would have been probable if such error … or defect had not occurred or existed.”? (CCP § 475.)
Faced with the imminent threat of having to publicly confront the legal, professional, social, political and financial consequences of their twenty (20) years of GRAND CORRUPTION, filed this polemic nearly bare of supported facts or authorities, in this completely meritless motion, in a last ditch attempt to BAR al-Hakim from “coming for them” in proceedings which are finally approaching on the outstanding grand corruption matters by Brand enacting their entrapment strategy to declare al-Hakim a “vexatious litigant” in a matter brought by Brand, to heard by Brand, and judged by Brand and BRAND ALONE!!!
A determination of vexatious litigant status specifically under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §391(b)(3) requires somewhat more than a retaliatory judge conspiring with the defendant to complain that they perceive al-Hakim vexed to their mutual motive, interest, benefit, and opportunity is a reoccurring theme over the 20 years of this case where the defendants have represented the judges in this case against al-Hakim and the judges have likewise defended the defendants as “sitting judge for the defense” and “deputy defense counsel”! There are simply no meritorious grounds for this motion at all. The statutory criteria are clearly stated and easily understood. And in this case, Plaintiff show they are as far removed from meeting the statutory criteria as possible, which Brand either knew or should have known before filing this motion out of retaliation and desperation.
The court can best decide upon the merits of the plaintiffs’ motions by reviewing them on the law, not by relying entirely upon the opinion of Brand and the entities. Even a cursory review can only lead to the conclusion that the Plaintiffs’ claims are potentially meritorious.  And that in fact the tactics of the defendants, including Brand and the entities, are harassing and delaying the court and wasting its judicial resources, by preventing his actions from proceeding to due process and discovery.
VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”
al-Hakim has long been targeted by United States Attorney General’s Office- Department of Justice; Federal and California State Judges, their ruling bodies and Associations; the Alameda County Superior Court of California, United States Attorney’s Office- Northern District; United States District Court- Northern Division, Attorney General of California, Alameda County District Attorney; City of Oakland and Oakland City Attorney; Federal, State and local law enforcement; Federal, State and local politicians.
The targeting by Brand, the judges, Alameda County Superior Court Administration, Alameda County District Attorney, City of Oakland and their City Attorney, California Attorney General, Governor Jerry Brown, Senator Kamala Harris, CSAA, Wellpoint, EBMUD, AT&T, Equinix, Interserver, and others, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities in their VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM PERSECUTION, “MUSLIM BAN” by ”FIXING CASES” in Furtherance of their Corruption Agenda, IS PURE RETALIATION, with an aggressive campaign of calumny deceit, encouraged opposing parties to do all that they can to cause the ruin of al-Hakim, his family, their businesses, their business, real and personal property, his community and the clients they serve. Their tactics are more extreme than muckraking or character assassination, wherein the court and opposing parties fabricate and gathered negative, embarrassing or compromising information about al-Hakim, publish and disperse that information as widely as possible.
In the legal context, Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities are encouraged to use the process of litigation to “harass, deny and win using all tactics””The Law can be used very easily to harass and enough harassment on someone will simply push them to the thin edge, well knowing that he is not privileged, will generally be sufficient to cause their professional if not physical death, possible to annihilate him by destroying his credibility and moral character in all contexts leaving him a social and legal “pariah” in society incapable of being associated with or represented, and utterly ruin him.
One of the many things they did to al-Hakim was to offer compensation to bribe members of his family in an effort to take his real, personal and business property from him and to cause him great pain and suffering in hopes that he would perish. Ultimately, the court and CSAA proceeded to bludgeon Mr. al-Hakim with over-burdensome litigation tactics, as well as communicating with and intimidating his partners into abandoning him, leaving al-Hakim standing alone.
The court and CSAA intimidated, coerced, bribed, and otherwise elicited perjurious, slanderous, libelous and false statements from various people about al-Hakim and implied prurient activities. What al-Hakim did not know at that time, however, was the fact that agents, informants, and contractors acted for and on behalf of Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities by unethical and criminal means, instigated the acts, which gave, rise to the fraudulent, corrupt orders in underlying cases.
In doing so, Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities actions precluded Mr. al-Hakim from ever having a fair opportunity in any of his cases, and makes it explicitly clear that he is anything but a vexatious litigant in that the unanswered challenges and orders replete with perjurious, incriminating statements were not only false but obtained through criminal conduct. In short the court instigated and committed criminal acts with these entire “illegal proceedings” solely for the purpose of the unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities illegally utilizing the full force and resources of the government in a covert criminal undercover sting operation by fostering, fabricating and manipulating any filing, pleading, argument, facts, truth, faxes, emails, phone calls, voicemail messages, letters, hearings, request, reservation numbers, motion practice, motion titles, ex-parte applications, hearings, parties, appearances, continuances, schedules, proceedings, register of actions, Court Domainweb, statements, evidence, testimony, documents, word, inference, vague reference, or gesture that they can remotely interpret as evidence of any remote action they seek to advocate to incriminate, charge, try, convict, incarcerate and eliminate al-Hakim, that DESTROYED his legitimate suits and then sought to have Mr. al-Hakim declared a vexatious litigant for seeking relief based on those criminal and civil violations of the law! (see VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”)
Respectfully,
ABDUL-JALIL al-HAKIM
510-394-4501

Bigot Brand Disparages al-Hakim Religious Practice of Islam at April 29, 2019 Hearing!

TO:  Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye          Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye
Chair, Judicial Council of California               Supreme Court of California
Comm. Judicial Appointments                       350 McAllister Street, Room 1295
455 Golden Gate Ave.                                     San Francisco, CA 94102-4797
San Francisco, CA 94102                                Fax: (415) 865-7181
Fax: 415-865-4200,415-865-4205             Tani.Cantil-Sakauye@jud.ca.gov
Presiding Judge Wynne Carville                  Chad Finke
Supervising Judge Michael Markman         Executive Officer
Judge Stephen Kaus                                    Superior Court of Alameda County
Judge Kevin R. Murphy                                1225 Fallon Street Room 209
Judge C. Don Clay                                        Oakland, CA 94612
Judge Jeff Brand                                          Fax: 510-891-6276
Judge Kim Colwell                                        cfinke@alameda.courts.ca.gov
Judge Morris Jacobson
Judge Winifred Smith                                 Charles Johnson
Judge Jon Rolefsen                                     Beth Robbins
Judge Yolanda Northridge                          Deputy Clerk
Judge Dennis Hayashi                                 First District Court of Appeal
Judge Jo-Lynne Q. Lee                               350 McAllister Street
Superior Court of Alameda County            San Francisco CA 94102
Departments 1, 6, 511, and 518                   Fax: 415-865-7309, 415-865-7209
René C. Davidson Courthouse                    Beth.Robbins@jud.ca.gov,
1225 Fallon Street                                        Charles.Johnson@jud.ca.gov
Oakland CA 94612
FAX #: 510-891-5304, 510-891-6276, 510-267-1567
dept.1@alameda.courts.ca.gov,WCarville@alameda.courts.ca.gov, MMarkman@alameda.courts.ca.gov, JRolefsen@alameda.courts.ca.gov, EGrillo@alameda.courts.ca.gov,MJacobson@alameda.courts.ca.gov, JBrand@alameda.courts.ca.gov,CClay@alameda.courts.ca.gov,WSmith@alameda.courts.ca.gov,dept.6@alameda.courts.ca.gov,KColwell@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.511@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.518@alameda.courts.ca.gov, SKaus@alameda.courts.ca.gov,KMurphy@alameda.courts.ca.gov,JLee@alameda.courts.ca.gov,YNorthridge@alameda.courts.ca.gov, DHayashi@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.19@alameda.courts.ca.gov,RFreedman@alameda.courts.ca.gov
Martin Hoshino                                      Victoria B. Henley
Director                                                  Director-Chief Counsel
Judicial Council of California               Commission on Judicial Performance
455 Golden Gate Avenue                    455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 14400
San Francisco, CA 94102-3688         San Francisco, CA 94102-3688
FAX NO. 415-865-4586                     FAX NO. (415) 557-1266
Martin.Hoshino@jud.ca.gov               Victoria.Henley@jud.ca.gov
John.Wordlaw@jud.ca.gov
Alex Tse                                                  Phyllis J. Hamilton
Director- No. District                            Chief District Judge
U. S. Attorney’s Office                          U. S. District Court- No. Division
Federal Courthouse                              6th Floor Oakland Courthouse- 2
450 Golden Gate Avenue                     1301 Clay Street
San Francisco, CA 94102                     Oakland, CA 94612
Fax No.: (415) 436-7234                      Fax No.: 415 522-3605
charles.oconnor@usdoj.gov                Phyllis_Hamilton@cand.uscourts.gov
stacey.geis@usdoj.gov                         Richard_Wieking@cand.uscourts.gov
alex.Tse@usdoj.gov                              Joseph_Spero@cand.uscourts.gov
joshua.Eaton@usdoj.gov
Barbara.Valliere@usdoj.gov
sara.Winslow@usdoj.gov
Brent and Sarah Hanson                        Anthony S. Leung, Christopher Leung
Green Key Investments                           Green Key Investments
508 Dimm Street                                    110 Franklin Street, Suite # 2
Richmond, CA 94805                             Oakland, CA 94607
                                                                  mrchrisleung@gmail.comXavier Becerra
Attorney General of California
1300 I Street, Suite 125
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
FAX No.: 916-324-8835
Xavier.Becerra@doj.ca.gov
Sean.McCluskie@doj.ca.gov
Robert.Wilson@doj.ca.gov
Laura.Stuber@doj.ca.gov
Kelli.Evans@doj.ca.gov
Marina.Soto@doj.ca.gov
Fax No.: 916-322-4532, 916-323-5341, 916-324-5567, 916-319-9421cc: ; bcc ACLU, LCCR, East Bay Community Law Center, Bay Area Legal Aid, USC Gould School Of Law, Western Center On Law & Poverty, Electronic Frontier Foundation, National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms, Equal Justice Society, Center for Constitutional Rights, Southern Poverty Law Center,
Faxed and Emailed
FROM:     Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE:     May 1, 2019
NO PAGES: 3
RE:        Bigot Brand Disparages al-Hakim Religious Practice of Islam at April 29, 2019 Hearing

“In another religion they honor people who serve like you with Sainthood!”” – Economics Professor Adeel Malik,Oxford University, England and World Renowned News Expert Commentator, speaking about Abdul-Jalil and the Aaron & Margaret Wallace Foundation.

GOD sent me an ANGEL” – Hammer, speaking about Abdul-Jalil.

“Jalil, YOU ARE A TZADIK (SAINT)!”– Barry Barkan, Live Oak Institute and
  Ashoka Fellow at Ashoka Foundation:Innovators for the Public

 

“I thank God for you and for bringing you into my life and for the ministry you have been given to help the people of God!”– Pastor L. J. Jennings, Kingdom Builders Christian Fellowship, speaking about Abdul-Jalil and AMWF

Dear Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye, Judges Phyllis Hamilton, Jacobson, Rolefson, Carvill, Kaus, Colwell, Hayashi, Clay, Lee, Murphy, Smith, Brand, Freedman, Markman and Carvill; Alex Tse, Xavier Becerra, Ms. Henley, Mr. Finke, Mr. Hoshino and OTHERS:
Bigot Brand Disparages al-Hakim Religious Practice of Islam at April 29, 2019 Hearing
At the hearing on April 29, 2019, Brand disparaged, denigrated, and deprecated, al-Hakim and his religious practice of Islam by referring to al-Hakim’s weekly religious obligation as “I know that you say you have a religious Holiday every Tuesday and Thursday?!”.
This bigoted, ignorant, thoughtless, irresponsible, caustic remark left al-Hakim shocked, speechless and dumbfounded! al-Hakim, humiliated at the utterance finally stumbled out “I have NEVER said that I have a religious Holiday every Tuesday and Thursday!”Brand says “Well I know you have said something like that”. al-Hakim responds “I have religious obligations every Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, they are NOT Holidays”.
Irate at the fact that he MUST conform with the law to at least a minimum, Brand asks al-Hakim “when will you be available for an appearance”, wherein al-Hakim responded “the first Monday or Wednesday after June 20, 2019”. Brand states that “you will be gone for Ramadan?”and al-Hakim says “yes, I noticed you of that fact a month ago”. Brands retorts in a very snide, rude manner “I know, I was just asking”and al-Hakim responded “I was just answering”. Brand asks “when does it start?”, al-Hakim responds “Sunday”. Brand then orders the parties to appear two days later on May 1, 2019, at 9:00 a.m.
It was clear that Brand has an agenda to move the VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM Superior Court Criminal/Civil Vexatious Entrapment Litigation Strategy to completion before al-Hakim takes retreat for Ramadan so that they can gain another uncontested appeals verdict knowing al-Hakim will NOT be able to respond before June 15, 2019!
It MUST be noted that Brand had TWO sheriff’s deputies in the wings of the jury box waiting with orders in hand!
Brand attempts to cast aspersions on al-Hakim’s religion and it’s practice as frivolous, a Frat party, or Rave, to impugn, vilify, traduce and portray al-Hakim as a carouser, party animal, nefarious hypocrite, insincere. This is perhaps the HIGHEST ranking tenet in the pillars of Islam and is mandated, commanded upon ALL muslims! al-Hakim is long established at this, over 60 years, is recognized and honored world wide for his service, is consulted and relied on for his service to the Islamic community and humanity at large!
Brand and the judges have deprive al-Hakim of certain fundamental rights including the right to freedom of religion and to free speech and the due process of law and penalize him because of his religious beliefs! requiring al-Hakim to abandon his religious beliefs and practices in order to receive benefits. discriminates against al-Hakim and Muslims violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.
This divisive case highlights the vast difference between the reality and the rhetoric of religious freedom, which is often considered to be the ideal that promotes harmony and equality in the judicial system. But, history suggests that it does lead to more conflict due to the biases and prejudices of those same justices echoing the view that religious freedom brings inequality and disunity so the government and courts systematically enact mainstream practices favoring particular races and faiths for cause and preventing religious freedom and liberty!
Brands prejudice is pathological and projects a personality syndrome linked with racism as well to establish and cultivate his own race, class and religious supremacy based on favoritism towards his own perceived group, their admiration, sympathy, and trust of his ingroup, the “Courtel”.
BRAND CAN NOT SERVE IN ANY CAPACITY IN ANY AL-HAKIM MATTERS!
Repression of al-Hakim and First Amendment Free Exercise of Religion
The Constitution, and The Bill of Rights guarantees that the government can never deprive people in the U.S. of certain fundamental rights including the right to freedom of religion and to free speech and the due process of law. In recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution to keep the government out of religion– to guarantee the separation of church and state. This fundamental freedom is a major reason why the U.S. has managed to avoid a lot of the religious conflicts that have torn so many other nations apart.
The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment gives you the right to worship or not as you choose. The government can’t penalize you because of your religious beliefs.
Sherbert v. Verner (1963): The Supreme Court ruled that states could not require a person to abandon their religious beliefs in order to receive benefits. Sherbert v. Verner, in which a Seventh-day Adventist was fired because she wouldn’t work on Saturdays. The state denied her jobless benefits, saying she was fired for cause. The Supreme Court ruled that disqualifying her from benefits “solely because of her refusal to accept employment in which she would have to work on Saturday contrary to her religious belief, imposes an unconstitutional burden on the free exercise of her religion.” She got her benefits.
42 U.S. Code § 2000bb – Congressional Findings and Declaration of Purposes
(a) Findings The Congress finds that—
(1) the framers of the Constitution, recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution;
(2) laws “neutral” toward religion may burden religious exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious exercise;
(3) governments should not substantially burden religious exercise without compelling justification;
(4) in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral toward religion; and
(5) the compelling interest test as set forth in prior Federal court rulings is a workable test for striking sensible balances between religious liberty and competing prior governmental interests.
(b) PurposesThe purposes of this chapter are—
(1) to restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and
(2) to provide a claim or defense to persons whose religious exercise is substantially burdened by government.
42 U.S. Code § 2000bb–1 – Free Exercise of Religion Protected
(a) In general
Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b).
(b) Exception Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person—
(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.
(c) Judicial relief
A person whose religious exercise has been burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against a government. Standing to assert a claim or defense under this section shall be governed by the general rules of standing under article III of the Constitution.
(Pub. L. 103–141, § 3, Nov. 16, 1993, 107 Stat. 1488.)
Brand Holds Proceedings in Violation of Stay Due to His Vexatious Litigant Motion
CCP 391.6 reads: “Except as provided in subdivision (b) of Section 391.3, when a motion pursuant to Section 391.1 is filed prior to trial the litigation is stayed, and the moving defendant need not plead, until 10 days after the motion shall have been denied, or if granted, until 10 days after the required security has been furnished and the moving defendant given written notice thereof. When a motion pursuant to Section 391.1 is made at any time thereafter, the litigation shall be stayed for such period after the denial of the motion or the furnishing of the required security as the court shall determine.”
Thus, this litigation is STAYED until the court issues a ruling on the merits of the motion for vexatious litigant. After the court rules on the vexatious litigant motion, the parties may pursue litigation.
Brand has attempted to hold proceedings and Defendants have filed order for an appearance and examination and a civil subpoena duces tecum and bench warrant set for April 8, 2019, before Brand when the court and defendants are aware that there is a stay in place during the pendency of a vexatious proceeding.
Defendants claim in the Background of their ex-parte application:
“The order and a civil subpoena duces tecum were served personally on the judgment debtor on February 25, 2019. The judgment debtor attempted to decline service and discarded the papers. See Exhibit 3. The judgment debtor has previously claimed a religious obligation precluding his attendance at court on days other than Mondays or Wednesdays. Wellpoint seeks an order re setting the order for appearance and examination proceeding to April 8th or 10th 2019 or the next available Monday or Wednesday as may be convenient to the court.”
Defendants claim in their ex-parte application Points and Authorities at ¶ 3:
Judgment debtor al-Hakim has been difficult to serve and even tried to refuse personal service twice in this proceeding within the last year. Bradley Dec. ~ 8 and Exhibit 3”
Defendants then claim in their ex-parte application Declaration at ¶ 5:
“The order for appearance and examination and a civil subpoena duces tecum for records was personally served on judgment debtor al-Hakim, although he attempted to refuse service and left the papers in the court’s stairwell.”
Defendants then claim in their ex-parte application Declaration at ¶ 8:
“I believe judgment debtor al-Hakim has been difficult to personally serve. Service has been a problem in this case with judgment debtor al-Hakim claiming that he does not receive documents served on him by mail (after complaining about receiving unsigned proofs of service) or even posted on the real property he used to own. I personally served judgment debtor al- Hakim with written discovery requests. He tried to refuse service. He later claimed he was not served. The process server who personally served the order for appearance and examination and civil subpoena reported similar problems with an attempt to refuse service. To maintain jurisdiction over the judgment debtor if he were to fail to appear for the continued hearing date, I ask that the court order a bench warrant but stay issuance pending the re-set hearing date.”
Defendants contention of an admitted failed attempt to serve al-Hakim with an “announced service” and leaving the alleged service “in the stairwell”.         According to their proof of service, the server SCOTT M. FEELY of SWIFT ATTORNEY SERVICE admits in his attached proof:
“THE SUBJECT WAS SERVED IN THE STAIRWELL – REFUSED TO TAKE THE DOCUMENTS. THE SUBJECT DID NOT WANT TO ACCEPT, SERVER ANNOUNCED SERVICE AND DROPPED THE DOCUMENTS ON THE FLOOR OF THE STAIRWELL. THE SUBJECT WAS POSITIVELY ID’D BY JOHN BRADLEY. Attempt made by: SCOTT M. FEELY. Attempt at: ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERlOR CT., DEPT. 511 24405 AMADOR STREET Hayward, CA 94544.”
This DOES NOT constitute proper service, quite the contrary, it’s admission of failing and refusing to do so! I was NEVER served anything, NEVER had anyone come up to me attempting to, NEVER saw anyone, and if anything occurred behind me as I went up the stairs, I NEVER looked back from the time I left the courtroom!
The imaginary service game of lies and deceit by defendants is constantly on FULL display in his racist, Islamophobic, Xenophobic specious vitriol  that are NOT covered under any litigation privilege! He volleys back and forth between lying as a lawyer and lying as a debt collector, which he does all the time. He dodges back and forth claiming he served al-Hakim then admits three times in the same document that he has problems doing so and has failed to, yet asks Brand to support him with a warrant for al-Hakim’s arrest!
It should be noted by the court that the proceedings that Brand has conducted since February 28, 2019, are ALL moot as there is a stay that accompanies your now THIRD ordered vexatious litigant motion. As such al-Hakim will not be attending the proposed April 8, 2019 hearing that is subject to the stay.
Reason for Late Submission of Opposition to Vexatious Litigant OSC
Plaintiff Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim’s (Plaintiff, al-Hakim) filed Brief in Opposition to the THIRD Order to Show Cause in the Alleged Vexatious Litigant Proceeding CCP 391(b)(3) in six months. The opposition is supported by the Memorandum, al-Hakim Declaration and Appendix attached in support of the brief. The opposition was submitted the last week of the hearing not out of neglect nor al-Hakim being remise, but for two reasons:
1)     a. because he waited to receive the orders from the February 25, 2019 hearings from the court on the six motions pending in the CSAA case. The six orders where served March 26, 2019, well AFTER the scheduled filing of the initial opening brief in this matter of March 21, 2019, so that they would evade being included in same,
b.  and the order from the February 25, 2019 hearing, unopposed, uncontested, three times failed to appear, defaulted motion to vacate the unlawful detainer/writ of execution in the Green Key case. On April 3, April 15, and April 17, 2019, al-Hakim sent two faxes and emails each time to the court and opposing parties requesting the order from the uncontested, defaulted motion. Thats TEN REQUESTED NOTICES and it has yet to be served even though it was unopposed and thrice defaulted for failure to appear.
2) Due to the illegal eviction from the defaulted Green Key case, al-Hakim was forced out of his home with only two days to move and was unable to take anything! Of note is the fact he left all his personal and business computers, files that are now in the custody and control of the opposition. al-Hakim has NONE of the files he had accumulated over his life of years! Green Key has total possession and control of ALL al-Hakim’s possessions, Four times al-Hakim has demanded the return of EVERYTHING, ALL ITEMS LEFT IN THE HOUSE, WITHOUT ANY DAMAGE TO THEM! Green Key has NEVER responded to the demand. We are sure the items of interest are in the control of the courts partners, law enforcement!
This places an intolerable burden on al-Hakim and makes it impossible to present this document in a concise and cogent manner without the necessary documentary support.
Green Key Defaulted, Failure to Appear Three Times
In the Green Key Case, Brand ignored the fact al-Hakim did NOT received any response from the court to his over THIRTEEN (13) communications, contacts, documents, faxes and emails, including TWO phone calls and voicemail messages, and hand delivered the documents with a court filed letter requests to his clerks Scott Sanchez and Cynthia Trinidad over three weeks PRIOR to the January 2, 2019 and January 3, 2019, hearings to request a reservation number to file an ex-parte motion for a continuance of the hearings he was unable to attend as the court and plaintiffs are and have been aware for over 30 years that al-Hakim has religious obligations on Tuesdays and Thursdays that do not allow for his presence in court which included the hearing, and proceeded despite the notices and issued a default against al-Hakim in favor of Green Key. Judge Brand, and Colwell before him, their Department 511 clerks and court administrations continuing fraud, corruption and collusion being solely responsible for this case as filed, NOT Green Key. They have been the sole force behind moving this litigation forward for them, as Green Key has failed to appear THREE TIMES consecutively without notice nor reason submitted to the court nor al-Hakim, have not filed an opposition to the motion to vacate the default writ of execution, and have NOT been issued a default nor al-Hakim being granted his motion to vacate the default taken against him!
Brand, who admitted that the last two continuances given to Green Key had NOTHING to do with the case, attempts to sit in SOLE judgment of his, the Department 511 clerks and court administration’s OWN Continuing Fraud, Corruption and Collusion committed on HIS and their OWN part!
The last Green Key defaulted, failure to appear was at the February 25, 2019, hearing, over two months ago, yet to date Brand has NOT issued an order despite the fact they failed to appear THREE TIMES consecutively without notice, and did not file an opposition to the motion to vacate the default writ of execution! Green Key has taken complete and total custody and control of ALL al-Hakim’s entire lifetime possessions, accumulation of ALL personal, family, and business belongings, things, property, goods, personal effects, assets, chattels, movables, valuables, EVERYTHING!! Over $800,000 in value that has been destroyed by Green Key and MUST BE REPLACED!!!
THIS BEGS THE QUESTION WHY IS BRAND FAVORING THEM AND NOT ISSUING THE ORDER UNTIL HE HAS SHACKLED AL-HAKIM WITH BEING DEEMED A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT UNABLE TO PURSUE ANT LITIGATION AGAINST HIM, THEM OR ANYONE ELSE?!!!
Defendant has not met their burden to show that al-Hakim is a “vexatious litigant” Under Cal. Code of Civil Procedure section 39I(b)(2), or 391(b)(3).
This action is PURELY RETALIATORY
Judge Jeff Brand, other judges listed herein, court clerks and superior court administration, in concert with unscrupulous Federal, Sate County and local judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and agencies (“entities”) have committed over 150 violations under United States and California State Constitutions against Plaintiff Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim that have been graphically detailed and documented over 40 years! (United States Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, VIII, XIV, For Violations of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Under Color Of State Law; Section 1983).
This PURELY RETALIATORY, unjust, illegal act of revenge, calculated to foreclose on al-Hakim’s civil rights as promised to protect those judges and these underhanded entities known and documented to have repeatedly violated the law for years and just like Brand, they have been, are and will be a defendant and witness in those expected proceedings!! This is their collective legal defense effort to eliminate any possibility of that ever happening!
Brand has a challenge matter still pending, has NOT issued a ruling in Green Key default after their failing and refusing to file an opposition to the motion to vacate the writ of execution awarded to them by default taken against al-Hakim and THREE (3) failures to appear to oppose that motion, unlawfully evicting al-Hakim from his 40 year home, thereby strategically delaying the order to avoid further evidence of fraud on the court and to defeat this alleged vexatious litigant action wherein the judges and courts have acted as defendants CSAA co-counsel and CSAA has acted as judges counsel and government agent/informant for 20 years! BRANDS ACTIONS IN THIS CASE ARE INDEFENSIBLE! THUS THIS VEXATIOUS ACTION.
Brand installed the motion practice schedule to evade evidence of fraud on the court with the long pending six (6) CSAA orders so they could not be presented in this action.
The vexatious motion was filed on February 28, 2019, with opening brief due March 22, 2019, and reply brief due April 5, 2019, and the hearing set for April 19, 2019. Brand finally issued the long pending six (6) orders on March 24, 2019; three days AFTER the submission due date for the opening brief.
al-Hakim waited to receive the orders BEFORE filing the opposition/reply brief to include the orders as further evidence of Brands fraud on the court and exposing THIS frivolous motion as his sole defense for his, the judges, and court administration continuing fraud, corruption and conspiracy.

Court Scheduled Proceedings to Take Default against al-Hakim in VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their “Muslim Ban”
Brand even had the hearing set for Thursday, April 18, 2019 and then changed it to Friday, April 19, 2019, both dates that Brand knows al-Hakim will NOT be able to attend due to a 40 year religious commitments know to Brand, defendants and the court, in another effort to take a default against al-Hakim. On April 3, April 15, and today, April 17, 2019, al-Hakim sent two faxes and emails each time to the court and opposing parties announcing the fact the court has scheduled these proceedings in furtherance of their VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their Muslim Ban and requesting the hearing date be changed to a Monday or Wednesday. Thats TEN REQUESTED NOTICES FOR A CONTINUANCE and they were NOT answered. Finally, later on April 17, 2019, al-Hakim received an email from the department 511 clerk stating “Abdul-Jalil – Emailing the department is not sufficient notice for a continuance. If you need help obtaining a continuance please feel free to seek counsel or contact the self help center. This email address is only for people seeking reservations.”. (see April 17, 2019 email from Dept 511 under Exhibit 1)
This response clearly establishes their intent to take a default by design! The court can not complain about the cost of litigation in al-Hakim cases when they are responsible for the constant motions to continue, when they would not address the fact THEY chose the date without any input from al-Hakim knowing that he could NOT attend and rather than make a mutual accommodation, they suggest that he seek legal aid in filing a motion to continue! A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY SOLELY TO PERSECUTE AL-HAKIM AND REWARD THE COURT AND DEFENDANTS!
Brand, the judges, the court administrations, and opposing parties actions have altered the course of litigation in scheduling proceedings on dates they know plaintiff can not attend and refusing to schedule proceedings on dates that he can attend, delaying and denying reservation numbers to file motions, failing to file or respond to plaintiff’s filing of oppositions and contesting to rulings and orders, demanding documents they already have or have better access to than al-Hakim, adding and removing proceedings from the docket and register of actions without any proceedings or authority, continuing the atmosphere of intolerable TERROR in furtherance of their corruption and agenda of hate induced persecution and entrapment, with their version of the targeted “al-Hakim Muslim Ban” has irreparably and irretrievably altered the legal outcome of the proceedings herein questioned! (see VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”; and VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption)
VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”
al-Hakim has long been targeted by United States Attorney General’s Office- Department of Justice; Federal and California State Judges, their ruling bodies and Associations; the Alameda County Superior Court of California, United States Attorney’s Office- Northern District; United States District Court- Northern Division, Attorney General of California, Alameda County District Attorney; City of Oakland and Oakland City Attorney; Federal, State and local law enforcement; Federal, State and local politicians.
The targeting by Brand, the judges, Alameda County Superior Court Administration, Alameda County District Attorney, City of Oakland and their City Attorney, California Attorney General, Governor Jerry Brown, Senator Kamala Harris, CSAA, Wellpoint, EBMUD, AT&T, Equinix, Interserver, and others, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities in their VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM PERSECUTION, “MUSLIM BAN” by ”FIXING CASES” in Furtherance of their Corruption Agenda, IS PURE RETALIATION, with an aggressive campaign of calumny deceit, encouraged opposing parties to do all that they can to cause the ruin of al-Hakim, his family, their businesses, their business, real and personal property, his community and the clients they serve. Their tactics are more extreme than muckraking or character assassination, wherein the court and opposing parties fabricate and gathered negative, embarrassing or compromising information about al-Hakim, publish and disperse that information as widely as possible.
In the legal context, Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities are encouraged to use the process of litigation to “harass, deny and win using all tactics””The Law can be used very easily to harass and enough harassment on someone will simply push them to the thin edge, well knowing that he is not privileged, will generally be sufficient to cause their professional if not physical death, possible to annihilate him by destroying his credibility and moral character in all contexts leaving him a social and legal “pariah” in society incapable of being associated with or represented, and utterly ruin him.
One of the many things they did to al-Hakim was to offer compensation to bribe members of his family in an effort to take his real, personal and business property from him and to cause him great pain and suffering in hopes that he would perish. Ultimately, the court and CSAA proceeded to bludgeon Mr. al-Hakim with over-burdensome litigation tactics, as well as communicating with and intimidating his partners into abandoning him, leaving al-Hakim standing alone.
The court and CSAA intimidated, coerced, bribed, and otherwise elicited perjurious, slanderous, libelous and false statements from various people about al-Hakim and implied prurient activities. What al-Hakim did not know at that time, however, was the fact that agents, informants, and contractors acted for and on behalf of Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities by unethical and criminal means, instigated the acts, which gave, rise to the fraudulent, corrupt orders in underlying cases.
In doing so, Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities actions precluded Mr. al-Hakim from ever having a fair opportunity in any of his cases, and makes it explicitly clear that he is anything but a vexatious litigant in that the unanswered challenges and orders replete with perjurious, incriminating statements were not only false but obtained through criminal conduct. In short the court instigated and committed criminal acts with these entire “illegal proceedings” solely for the purpose of the unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities illegally utilizing the full force and resources of the government in a covert criminal undercover sting operation by fostering, fabricating and manipulating any filing, pleading, argument, facts, truth, faxes, emails, phone calls, voicemail messages, letters, hearings, request, reservation numbers, motion practice, motion titles, ex-parte applications, hearings, parties, appearances, continuances, schedules, proceedings, register of actions, Court Domainweb, statements, evidence, testimony, documents, word, inference, vague reference, or gesture that they can remotely interpret as evidence of any remote action they seek to advocate to incriminate, charge, try, convict, incarcerate and eliminate al-Hakim, that DESTROYED his legitimate suits and then sought to have Mr. al-Hakim declared a vexatious litigant for seeking relief based on those criminal and civil violations of the law! (see VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”)
Respectfully,
ABDUL-JALIL al-HAKIM
510-394-4501

Immediate Preliminary and Permanent Injunction Unlawful, Illegal Eviction!

TO:  Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye          Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye
Chair, Judicial Council of California               Supreme Court of California
Comm. Judicial Appointments                       350 McAllister Street, Room 1295
455 Golden Gate Ave.                                     San Francisco, CA 94102-4797
San Francisco, CA 94102                                Fax: (415) 865-7181
Fax: 415-865-4200,415-865-4205             Tani.Cantil-Sakauye@jud.ca.gov
Presiding Judge Wynne Carville                  Chad Finke
Supervising Judge Michael Markman         Executive Officer
Judge Stephen Kaus                                    Superior Court of Alameda County
Judge Kevin R. Murphy                                1225 Fallon Street Room 209
Judge C. Don Clay                                        Oakland, CA 94612
Judge Jeff Brand                                          Fax: 510-891-6276
Judge Kim Colwell                                        cfinke@alameda.courts.ca.gov
Judge Morris Jacobson
Judge Winifred Smith                                 Charles Johnson
Judge Jon Rolefsen                                     Beth Robbins
Judge Yolanda Northridge                          Deputy Clerk
Judge Dennis Hayashi                                 First District Court of Appeal
Judge Jo-Lynne Q. Lee                               350 McAllister Street
Superior Court of Alameda County            San Francisco CA 94102
Departments 1, 6, 511, and 518                   Fax: 415-865-7309, 415-865-7209
René C. Davidson Courthouse                    Beth.Robbins@jud.ca.gov,
1225 Fallon Street                                        Charles.Johnson@jud.ca.gov
Oakland CA 94612
FAX #: 510-891-5304, 510-891-6276, 510-267-1567
dept.1@alameda.courts.ca.gov,WCarville@alameda.courts.ca.gov, MMarkman@alameda.courts.ca.gov, JRolefsen@alameda.courts.ca.gov, EGrillo@alameda.courts.ca.gov,MJacobson@alameda.courts.ca.gov, JBrand@alameda.courts.ca.gov,CClay@alameda.courts.ca.gov,WSmith@alameda.courts.ca.gov,dept.6@alameda.courts.ca.gov,KColwell@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.511@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.518@alameda.courts.ca.gov, SKaus@alameda.courts.ca.gov,KMurphy@alameda.courts.ca.gov,JLee@alameda.courts.ca.gov,YNorthridge@alameda.courts.ca.gov, DHayashi@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.19@alameda.courts.ca.gov,RFreedman@alameda.courts.ca.gov
Martin Hoshino                                      Victoria B. Henley
Director                                                  Director-Chief Counsel
Judicial Council of California               Commission on Judicial Performance
455 Golden Gate Avenue                    455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 14400
San Francisco, CA 94102-3688         San Francisco, CA 94102-3688
FAX NO. 415-865-4586                     FAX NO. (415) 557-1266
Martin.Hoshino@jud.ca.gov               Victoria.Henley@jud.ca.gov
John.Wordlaw@jud.ca.gov
Alex Tse                                                  Phyllis J. Hamilton
Director- No. District                            Chief District Judge
U. S. Attorney’s Office                          U. S. District Court- No. Division
Federal Courthouse                              6th Floor Oakland Courthouse- 2
450 Golden Gate Avenue                     1301 Clay Street
San Francisco, CA 94102                     Oakland, CA 94612
Fax No.: (415) 436-7234                      Fax No.: 415 522-3605
charles.oconnor@usdoj.gov                Phyllis_Hamilton@cand.uscourts.gov
stacey.geis@usdoj.gov                         Richard_Wieking@cand.uscourts.gov
alex.Tse@usdoj.gov                              Joseph_Spero@cand.uscourts.gov
joshua.Eaton@usdoj.gov
Barbara.Valliere@usdoj.gov
sara.Winslow@usdoj.gov
Brent and Sarah Hanson                        Anthony S. Leung, Christopher Leung
Green Key Investments                           Green Key Investments
508 Dimm Street                                    110 Franklin Street, Suite # 2
Richmond, CA 94805                             Oakland, CA 94607
                                                                  mrchrisleung@gmail.comXavier Becerra
Attorney General of California
1300 I Street, Suite 125
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
FAX No.: 916-324-8835
Xavier.Becerra@doj.ca.gov
Sean.McCluskie@doj.ca.gov
Robert.Wilson@doj.ca.gov
Laura.Stuber@doj.ca.gov
Kelli.Evans@doj.ca.gov
Marina.Soto@doj.ca.gov
Fax No.: 916-322-4532, 916-323-5341, 916-324-5567, 916-319-9421
cc: ; bcc ACLU, LCCR, East Bay Community Law Center, Bay Area Legal Aid, USC Gould School Of Law, Western Center On Law & Poverty, Electronic Frontier Foundation, National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms, Equal Justice Society, Center for Constitutional Rights, Southern Poverty Law Center,
Faxed and Emailed
FROM:     Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE:     January 30, 2019
NO PAGES: 3
RE:        Immediate Preliminary and Permanent Injunction preventing underlying Defendants Green Key Investments L.L.C. and CSAA-Wellpoint Unlawful, Illegal Eviction!
cc: ; bcc ACLU, LCCR, East Bay Community Law Center, Bay Area Legal Aid, USC Gould School Of Law, Western Center On Law & Poverty, Electronic Frontier Foundation, National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms, Equal Justice Society, Center for Constitutional Rights, Southern Poverty Law Center,
Faxed and Emailed
FROM:     Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE:     November 30, 2018
NO PAGES: 16
RE:        Clay’s Denial Hearing Dates, Reservation Numbers, State Sponsored Atmosphere of TERROR, Oppression, Persecution and Unfairness; and Judicial and Superior Court Administration Corruption, Collusion, and Conspiracy in al-Hakim v. Interserver, Case No.: RG18888371
“JUDGE NOT LEAST YE BE JUDGED!!”
“Judge not, that ye be not judged.
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?”
Matthew 7:1-3 “The Mote and the Beam is a parable of Jesus given in the Sermon on the Mount in the Gospel of Matthew”
Dear Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye, Judges Phyllis Hamilton, Jacobson, Rolefson, Carvill, Kaus, Colwell, Hayashi, Clay, Lee, Murphy, Smith, Brand, Freedman, Markman and Carvill; Alex Tse, Xavier Becerra, Ms. Henley, Mr. Finke, Mr. Hoshino and OTHERS:
I have NOTreceived any correspondence from the courts even though I filed a formal change of Address with the U.S. Postal Service. If you have sent any correspondence since January 12, 2019, it is a good likelihood that I have NOTreceived it and should be sent again to the new address above.
ALL correspondence as well as ALL our forty years of business and personal property, inventory, supplies, etc., is now in the hands of the defendants Green Key Investments L.L.C. and CSAA-Wellpoint as we had two (2) days to move!
This includes ALL personal and business effects, computers and accessories, jewelry, artwork, audio and video recorder equipment and tapes, chandeliers, silver and china ware, valuables, clothing, household goods, bedroom goods, kitchen ware, ALL food goods, supplies, gardening and pool supplies, tools, our non-profit inventory, accessories and supplies, among other things
I filed therein, seeking an immediate preliminary and permanent injunctionpreventing underlying Defendants Green Key Investments L.L.C. and CSAA-Wellpoint from enforcing the sale of my home and my being evicted from same. This aspect of the case demands immediate attention.
Respectfully,
ABDUL-JALIL al-HAKIM
510-394-4501

Requesting Results of Supreme Court Investigation of California Appeals Court Action

TO:
Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye            Beth Robbins
Supreme Court of California                     Charles Johnson
350 McAllister Street, Room 1295           Deputy Clerk
San Francisco, CA 94102-4797               First District Court of Appeal
Fax: 415-865-4205, 415-865-7181,       350 McAllister Street
415-865-4391, 415-865-4586                San Francisco CA 94102
Tani.Cantil-Sakauye@jud.ca.gov              Fax: 415-865-7309, 415-865-7209
Beth.Robbins@jud.ca.gov, Charles.Johnson@jud.ca.gov
Faxed and Emailed
FROM: Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE: January 7, 2019 
NO PAGES: 5
RE: Appellant al-Hakim’s Letter Requesting Results from Supreme Court Investigation of the Court of Appeal’s Action in, al-HAKIM VS CSAA- Wellpoint, Alameda County Superior Court Case: #C811337, California Appeals Court Case# 153640, California Supreme Court Case# S-250997.
“JUDGE NOT LEAST YE BE JUDGED!!”
“Judge not, that ye be not judged.
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?” 
Matthew 7:1-3 “The Mote and the Beam is a parable of Jesus given in the Sermon on the Mount in the Gospel of Matthew”
Dear Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye and Associate Justices of the Court, Beth Robbins, and Charles Johnson: 
On November 7, 2018, Pursuant to Rule 28(g) of the California Rules of Court, WE, the The AARON AND MARGARET WALLACE FOUNDATION, NOWTRUTH, my family, our businesses, my community, those we serve, and I, Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim, submitted a letter requesting an investigation of and urging both the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal to grant review of the Court of Appeal’s decision in al-HAKIM VS CSAA- Wellpoint (2018) California Appeals Court Case# 153510, and now California Supreme Court Case# S-250997.
We have received NO response from either of you and your response and the admissions of the facts, evidence, testimony, and proof from your findings of what happened in this incident has a drastic effect on this case as it will NOT “go away” merely because you chose to ignore it! We DEMAND ANSWERS TO THIS CONTINUING CRIME!
This is my THIRD letter and the Appeals Court has failed and refused to answer the question regarding their inaction in providing ANY proof of their having EVER served ANY notice of any kind of their receiving the motion to dismiss, NOTHING served on plaintiff even remotely noticing the motion, no briefing schedule, no schedule of motion practice and this clearly should have been the practice of the courts as it has before with Anne Reasoner and Truefiling. I NEVER received any email, or U. S. postal mail from Anne Reasoner or the appeals court nor any electronic service from TrueFiling as I usually would.
On October 9, 2018, I sent a two page fax and email to Beth Robbins and Charles Johnson, Deputy Clerks of the First District Court of Appeal entitled “Request for Information/Investigation Non-Service of Notice, Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim vs. Superior Court, Appeals case: Appeal Case No.A153640, Superior Court case No.: C-811337”.
I specifically asked of Ms. Robbins and Mr. Johnson:
I was NEVER served any filing notice of any type from the Appeals Court of any motion to dismiss by CSAA, no briefing schedule, no schedule of motion practice, and this clearly should have been the practice of the courts as it has before with Anne Reasoner and Truefiling. I NEVER received any email, or U. S. postal mail from Reasoner or the appeals court nor any electronic service from TrueFiling, which is the norm, and there is NO RECORD of any type that any of them sent any notice of any type to me! 
How is it possible for this to even happen and the court does NOT acknowledge that it IS a reason for the unopposed motion, and there is NO RECORD of any type that the appeals court EVER sent ANY notices of any type regarding the motion to dismiss to me?!
I respectfully ask the court to conduct and provide an extensive Information/Investigation to explain “what happened?”.
Judge Tigar Criminal Legal Charges

On October 12, 2018, they sent a reply that merely mentions that the defendants had submitted a proof of service dated June 22, 2018, that was allegedly served via mail and electronically to two different email addresses, 1) one that he has admitted to the courts that he has been blocked from sending email to for years due to his giving that email address to a commercial business without my knowledge or approval and 2) the other email address he knows is not mine. There NEVER was any U.S. mail nor personal service of any documents.
However, what is most notable is the Appeals Court has failed and refused to answer the question regarding their inaction in providing ANY proof of their having EVER served ANY notice of any kind of their receiving the motion to dismiss, NOTHING served on plaintiff even remotely noticing the motion, no briefing schedule, no schedule of motion practice and this clearly should have been the practice of the courts as it has before with Anne Reasoner and Truefiling. I NEVER received any email, or U. S. postal mail from Reasoner or the appeals court nor any electronic service from TrueFiling.
I asked that you investigate this aspect of this colossal failure and provide the information as to what happened but you have refused to do that, instead you want to ignore it and covered it up!
The Appeals court, Judge Barbara Jones and the court clerks are blocking and providing interference for judge Kim Colwell to make her “end run” and complete her fraud and corruption in her Order for sale of my Dwelling BEFORE the Motion to Vacate the Order, which was uncontested by defendants, was to be heard and has been continued by the court under an illegal Appeals stay since February 2018. 
My Motion to Vacate the Order granting the sale of plaintiff home is NOT an appealable order and is NOT subject to the automatic stay pending appeals, just as the defendants motion for sale of the dwelling with an undertaking is NOT subject to the automatic stay, which Colwell ruled the sale of dwelling could and did go forward, yet she has continued to delay the resolution to plaintiff’s motion to vacate that was uncontested by defendants! This would reverse the ruling made by Judge Colwell for the sale of the Dwelling!!!
For the last Six months Colwell has been begging the Appeals court to expedite the Remitter in the motion to dismiss so she can quickly rule on the motion to vacate with a denial! 
To deny such a serious motion when the appeals court was willfully and intentionally derelict in their NON-SERVICE of ANY notices to al-Hakim and CSAA obvious fraud, there is NO place for this in modern society much less in a courtroom before the people! It is even more enlightening in respects to the calumny deceit and denial of due process employed in it, that al-Hakim have complained of for years. This order in response to al-Hakim’s actions of merely invoking his rights to petition the courts was the very epitome of specious retaliation and heinous denial of due process FORCED on al-Hakim by defendants.
The Appeals courts actions depriving al-Hakim of litigation due him is unreasonable and was undertaken intentionally with malice, willfulness, and reckless indifference to the rights of al-Hakim, caused by the policies and practices of CSAA, which acts described herein have caused damages to al-Hakim with these Constitutional violations of al-Hakim’s rights.
The Appeals courts actions are repressive and has denied al-Hakim’s civil rights and due process, an equal opportunity to participate in unbiased pursuit of his legal claims as if these are still the dark days of American history when Black people had no rights at all!; This conduct and ongoing corruption of CSAA has resulted in Constitutional violations of al-Hakim’s rights, is tantamount to a scheme to hinder, deny and defraud al-Hakim.
The right for a litigant to challenge the fraud and corruption of the court and CSAA is second only to The GREATEST right a litigant has enshrined in the United States Constitution, the Fourteenth Amendment’s right to a fair trial! al-Hakim will ALWAYS continue the SLAVE DRIVEN FOUR HUNDRED YEAR fight for civil and human rights, the rights to the truth, justice, to evidence and testimony, to due process, equal protection, equal access to an unbiased legal process as is his OBLIGATION AND RIGHT under the U. S. Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, VIII, and XIV!
California Supreme, Appeals, and Superior Courts Corruption

Defendants obtained TWO orders that were the product of their non-service litigation strategy of fraud and deceit when:

  1. they moved the Bankruptcy court and held a hearing on May 16, 2018, when they knew I had served prior notice on ALL the courts 6 weeks earlier that I would be in the annual retreat for the Holy Month of Ramadan from May 14, 2018 until June 20, 2018 and unavailable to respond to any litigation and got a judgment without notice nor serving any documents; and
  2. this motion to dismiss that was granted!

On January 31, 2018, I filed a 117 page Judicial and Superior Court Administration Corruption Complaint and it is already outdated.The Complaint concerns the Judicial and Superior Court Administration Corruption; Manipulation; Obstruction of Justice in Motions for Peremptory Challenge; Demand for Removal of Judges For Cause; Due to Criminal Conduct In Violation of The Law; Conduct To Pervert or Obstruct Justice, or the Due Administration of the Laws (Pen.Code, §§ 182, subd. (a)(1), 4570) 1 and Conspiracy to Pervert or Obstruct Justice (§ 182, subd. (a)(5)); Fraud Upon The Court by Judge Kim Colwell; and to Vacate ALL Rulings and Orders Issued IN THE MATTERS OF: al-Hakim v. EBMUD, al-Hakim v. CSAA; and Miller v. al-Hakim.
On February 9, 2018, I sent you and Judges Jacobson, Rolefson, Carvill, Colwell, Krashna, Clay, Lee, Murphy, Smith, Patton, Pulido, Grillo, Markman and Carvill, Alex Tse, Phyllis Hamilton, Ms. Henley, Mr. Finke, Mr. Hoshino and OTHERS a 117 page complaint concerning the Judicial and Superior Court Administration Corruption; Manipulation; Obstruction of Justice in Motions for Peremptory Challenge; Demand for Removal of Judges For Cause; Due to Criminal Conduct In Violation of The Law; Conduct To Pervert or Obstruct Justice, or the Due Administration of the Laws (Pen.Code, §§ 182, subd. (a)(1), 4570) 1 and Conspiracy to Pervert or Obstruct Justice (§ 182, subd. (a)(5)); Fraud Upon The Court by Judge Kim Colwell; and to Vacate ALL Rulings and Orders Issued IN THE MATTERS OF: al-Hakim v. EBMUD, al-Hakim v. CSAA; and Miller v. al-Hakim. It is already out dated.
An example of their tactic of non-service of motion papers and conspiring with the court clerks working for them and causing a civil problem is on September 20, 2018 the Dept. 511 court clerks feigned getting any notice of the opposition and the court ruled that since there was no opposition to the tentative ruling thus it is  adopted as “unopposed”. Clearly there were THREE NOTICES filed with the court clerk and this still happened. 
Again on October 11, 2018, Plaintiff was forced to file another Complaint against the court and Department 511 clerks for same with Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye, Judges Phyllis Hamilton- Chief District Judge, Jacobson, Rolefson, Carvill, Kaus, Colwell, Krashna, Clay, Lee, Murphy, Smith, Patton, Freedman, Grillo, Markman and Carvill; Alex Tse- Director, U. S. Attorney’s Office, Xavier Becerra-Attorney General of California, Martin Hoshino- Director Judicial Council of California, Victoria Henley- Director Chief Counsel Commission on Judicial Performance, Chad Finke- Executive Officer Superior Court of Alameda County and 90 OTHERS, that CSAA- Wellpoint and “Department 511 Still Engaging in Perverting and Obstructing Justice, and Due Administration of the Law in Tentative Ruling issued in two motions of September 20, 2018”!
I implore this court to investigate this matter of the Appeals Court evading the proper response to their refusal to serve any notice of any kind to plaintiff regarding the defendants motion to dismiss and make those finding available to part of the record on appeal as it may explain/prove why the motion was uncontested!
Call if you have any questions, and “Thank you” for your consideration.
 
Respectfully,
Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
510-394-4501
ajalil1234@gmail.com