NOWTRUTH!!! BECAUSE WE NEED TRUTH AND JUSTICE FROM THE COURTS MORE NOW THAN EVER, NOT HYPERPOLITICIZED, NUANCED LAW COMPLETE WITH THE REQUISITE NARRATIVE!! (LAW= Politically manufactured, orchestrated, strategic opinions, rulings, and orders for injustice to hide behind!)
“Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.” Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018. 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! al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy COURTEL “WRIT RACKET”
California Appeals and Superior Court Corruption
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.) Respectfully,
“Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.” Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018. 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! al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM aware of Court Entrapment Litigation Strategy
Judge Tigar’s Nullification of Trial
https://youtube.com/watch?v=R9tuXVxGVGs%26hl al-Hakim is aware that the Superior Court administration and judges have been working with law enforcement 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! The main purpose for the courts using this tactic and employing “court observers” and colluding with the opposing parties and the entities mention in the “WRIT RACKET” criminal, civil, vexatious entrapment defense litigation strategy with third parties in the next paragraphs was to enable the filing of this motion. 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 this 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! Respectfully,
“Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.” Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018. 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! al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM Entire “Illegal” Proceedings are Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption Entire “Illegal” Proceedings are Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption (see 2/25/19 Brand Challenge at ¶¶ 3, Page 23-25) 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!
Judge Tigar’s Mental Meltdown
Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption (see 2/25/19 Brand Challenge at ¶¶ 3, Page 23-25) 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].) “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”, “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 The 56 complaints listed in the 140 PAGE COMPLAINT and CHALLENGE against judge Clay is only a small sample, but since 1980, and more recently 2000, as a matter of documentation, 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. (see140 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, in al-Hakim v. Interserver Inc., RG18-888371) 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! Respectfully,
“Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.” Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018. 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! al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy 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, yet! (see “Opposition to Case Fixing”, filed April 4, 2018, in al-Hakim v. Interserver Inc., RG18-888371) As mentioned earlier, 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 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.”. (see April 17, 2019 email from Dept 511) 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! Oakland City Attorney John Russo’s Political Suicide- Planted Evidence
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 (see 2/25/19 Brand Challenge at ¶¶ 3, Page 23-25), 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 Muslimand 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 this 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! Respectfully,
“Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.” Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018. 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! al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy 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. 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 and discourage rather than to win.””The Law can be used very easily to harass and enough harassment on somebody who will be simply pushed to the thin edge, well knowing that he is not privileged, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional if not physical death. If possible. of course, ruin him utterly. 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 to annihilate him by destroying his credibility or moral character in any and all contexts leaving him a social and legal “pariah” in society incapable of being associated with or represented. Pursuant to the practices described herein, Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities set about to destroy Mr. al-Hakim. 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! Respectfully, Abdul-Jalil
“Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.” Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018. 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! al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM with “Muslim Ban”
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 Exhibits) 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” (see 2/25/19 Brand Challenge at ¶¶ 20, Page 36-38) compounded with the Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption (see 2/25/19 Brand Challenge at ¶¶ 3, Page 23-25) has irreparably and irretrievably altered the legal outcome of the proceedings herein questioned! Respectfully, Abdul-Jalil
“Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.” Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018. 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! al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy Order to Declare al-HAKIMVexatious Litigant is PURELY RETALIATORY
Judge Tigar’s Mental Meltdown
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 action is PURELY RETALIATORY, calculated to foreclose on al-Hakim’s civil rights as promised to protect those judges 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 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 He 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. This 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. Respectfully,
TO:Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye
Associate Justices of the Court
Supreme Court of California
350 McAllister Street, Room 1295
San Francisco, CA 94102-4797
FROM: Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE: May 3, 2019
NO PAGES: 8
RE: Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption, Annual Retreat for Ramadan, Green Key Investments v. al-Hakim, CASE NO.: RGI8927213, in related California Appeals Court Case NO: 156677, and California Supreme Court Case.
Dear Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye, and Justices of the Courts:
I am filing this appeal on the last day before I go into my annual retreat for the Holy Month of Ramadan from May 3, 2019 until June 14, 2019 and will be unable and unavailable to respond to any litigation. I have previously noticed the Court and I have already notified the parties.
The petition is properly and technically formatted to court specifications and timely filed to prevent any delays and everything is current in the above matter. If there is any defect in the filing, I will be unable to cure it until I return, so I would ask the court to consider, on it’s own motion, a stay in proceedings if that is the case.
As always, I am available on any Monday or Wednesday thereafter.
I want to notify the courts and the parties of my retreat and the need for a continuance or “stay of actions” during this time.
However, I am aware that the Superior Court administration and judges have been working with law enforcement trying to entrap, frame and incriminate me in criminal activity that is fostered by the hearings in these 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!
This is continuing the atmosphere of intolerable TERROR in furtherance of the judges, the courts, and opposing parties corruption and agenda of hate induced persecution and entrapment, with their version of the targeted “al-Hakim Muslim Ban”! Targeted “al-Hakim Muslim Ban, ”FIXING CASES” in Furtherance of Corruption Agenda
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 over 30 years, while REFUSING to have those proceedings on a date al-Hakim can attend, yet!
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 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 Muslimand 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.
The courts have began a THIRD attempt in six months at deeming al-Hakim a vexatious litigant to foreclose on his 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 35 years and the courts can not afford nor will they allow this to happen! They will shut down al-Hakim at ALL COST!
I have filed multiple complaints for years against Presiding Justice Barbara Jones and Justices Burns, Humes, Bruiniers, Margulies,Kline, and 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.
I have 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.
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 them”.
Judge Jon Tigar Criminal Legal Charges
Government Commandeered and Absconded with Plaintiff’s ENTIRE SERVER
These elements of Government working with al-Hakim’s VPS web host has engaged in censorship while commandeering and absconding with our ENTIRE VPS SERVER inspired by religious bigotry, religious discrimination, Islamophobia, Xenophobia with actions on the part of a defendant and the courts because of our exposing the judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities criminal corruption and persecution, andFixing Cases against al-Hakim because he is Muslimand Black, a Whistleblower!
They are blocking our access to our commercial server WHM and multiple cPanels administration, our VPS web server, our logins to All services, ALL incoming and outgoing email, websites and website traffic in an effort to censor, suppress, conceal, and shut down our exposing the corruption of the courts and others, thereby covering up their criminal acts!
They have destroyed ALL the businesses Aaron & Margaret Wallace Foundation hosts websites entities Superstar Management, The Genius of Randy Wallace, Inc., Nowtruth, eX-whY Adventures, CAECAY and their websites: Amwftrust.org, Superstarmanagement.com, Ex-Why.com, Nowtruth.org, Greencleanascene.com, Nobooksnoballsports.org, Steppingto.org, Bawha.com, DrKenya.net, Fightfordrghosh.org, CAECAY.org, Nstrongharmony.org; ALL their email address accounts; propriety email list Futurist, MWBE, Newsalert, NIA, Superstars, Act, Lawaid, Politicos, AMWF, Super Bowl Guest, Entrepreneur, and SJA!
They have shut down ALL our Twitter accounts: @ajalil, @FirstSSM, @Nowtruth1, @EXWHYAD, @griotz, @AMWFND, @electionwin, and @caecay.
They have shut down our social media presence to silence our voice exposing their criminal activity along with that of the 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, and others. Government Covertly Planted SpyWare on al-Hakim’s Company Computer
On June 17, 2018, al-Hakim found SpyWare covertly planted on al-Hakim’s company computer through his web browser when he logged into his Interserver and U. S. Courts account.
SpyWare is programed to take control of your camera and microphone, to spy on their Computer Activities, Instant Message, Chats, Software usage, Take Screenshots Remotely, See File Transfers, Capture Key logs, Spy on Media Files, Spy on Emails, Spy on Browser Activities, monitor your workplace or home remotely, notify them if it detects your computers activities, including an alarm system, a recording system, and sending screengrabs of your PC or mobile phone. The SpyWare can connect to multiple IP cameras and microphones, then automatically starts recording whenever it captures motion and enable live remote viewing from any PC.
It’s a terrifying invasion of privacy that defendants with government agencies like the NSA can take control of the webcam and microphone on your computer and spy on you without your knowledge.
Previously, censorship had been implemented by them by blocking and blacklisting plaintiffs servers IP’s, device IP’s, domain IP’s, email addresses with accomplices SORBS, SpamHaus, RBL, SURBL, Mailchannels, Trouble-Free.net, Barracuda, ABUSE.NET, Exploits Bot List (XBL), AbuseIPDB, Invaluement, MXToolBox, MultiRBL, URIBL, SURBL, Composite Blocking List (CBL), Passive Spam Block List (PSBL), with reverse DNS verifications, DNSBL blocks, surveilled email content, censored email content, blocked or throttled email distribution as Internet filters, firewalls, Internet blocking, DNS poisoning, and Internet zoning.It is currently used by some organizations and governments to control the content viewed by individuals accessing Web pages over the Internet. The largest complaint about Internet censorship is that it ignores free-speech rights and violates the civil liberties of Internet users.
That censorship along with AMWF’s server and hosted websites being intentionally mis-configured by defendants it is causing the many, many, over 40 years of creating a brand, establishing goodwill, proprietary client email list and email distribution to those lists, clients intellectual property, trade secrets, clients data, content, website service pages, articles, posts, videos, podcasts, features, photos, marketing, promotion, testimonials, social media, email lists, simple inter-company and inter-office email communications, the theft and missing proprietary client email list, the theft and missing clients intellectual property, the theft and missing clients trade secrets, the theft and missing clients data, links to partner websites (blogroll), thousands of broken links prevent access to all these features via website visits, search engines, and by blocking web IP’s, server IP’s, device (computers, phones, tablets, etc.) IP’s, email addresses, ALL INTERNET CONNECTED AND RELATED COMMUNICATIONS AND DEVICES, referrals, from ALL the above mentioned sources, for all intents and purposes, burying the business.
This prevented employees, volunteers, clients, donors, donees, subscribers, users, contributors, and visitors from accessing the site, services, articles, posts, videos, photos, events calendar, information, fundraising efforts, advertising, special events, marketing, promotions, special offers, acknowledgement, individual and group discussion, town hall meetings, online forms for FREE tickets to entertainment events, to join the mail list, to be a subscriber, to become a member, submit a special request for services, for FREE educational opportunities and assistance, for FREE rental assistance, for FREE food, for FREE clothing, for FREE computers, for FREE housing, for FREE medical services, for FREE legal services, for FREE home and cell phones, fundraising donations, for volunteering, Inter-Faith and Multi-Cultural events, for FREE Youth resources, for FREE employment opportunities and assistance, for FREE resources and assistance, for FREE Autism resources and assistance, for FREE homeless resources and assistance, for FREE proprietary videos, CD’s and podcasts, to purchase proprietary videos, CD’s and podcasts, for FREE clinics and health centers, client proprietary videos, partner proprietary videos, selected educational/information proprietary videos, and sharing the above.
al-Hakim’s “court activities”, in the last 40 years al-Hakim has documented, filed and served court actions, filed and served complaints and filed and served correspondence memorializing and exposing the judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities criminal corruption and persecution, Fixing Cases against al-Hakim because he is Muslimand 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 to suffer at their individual and collective gavels and authorities.
al-Hakim proves where charges has shown that previously, under color of law, these judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities criminal corruption and persecution sought to deprive plaintiff of litigation due him contrary to the right to due process and immunity from takings without due process is a gross abuse of discretion in violation of the law that will violate plaintiff’s rights guaranteed under the First, Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution; First Clause of Section 13 of Article I of California Constitution, art. VI, § 4 1/2; California Code of Civil Procedure §§ 355, 356, 473, 475; Civ. Code, §§ 3523, 3528.
Some of those Co-Defendants Equinix and Interserver referenced in their reply, ALL of whom have been complained of or to are, in major part because al-Hakim reported the very obvious agenda of parties by memorializing and exposing the judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legalentities corruption and persecution and their involvement in the cover-up of that criminal corruption.
al-Hakim’s viewpoints, are protected speech under the California Constitution. The court harassed al-Hakim by engaging in a severe and pervasive scheme to suppress his constitutional and statutory right to engage in protected activity, by threatening him with and by executing against him punitive and adverse judicial actions, including delay and termination of his basic rights to due process. The court created, tolerated and condoned a court environment that is pervasively hostile to al-Hakim on account of viewpoints he holds regarding religion, politics and whistleblowing activities. The court failed and refused to remedy this hostile environment, and permitted al-Hakim to be harassed by both administrators and co-workers on account of his viewpoints. The court has engaged in an ongoing and continuous course of harassment based on al-Hakim’s protected rights under the California Constitution.
The conduct of various judges and the court as alleged in this Challenge are sufficiently pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of litigation and the legal, judicial and court environment such that it created a hostile environment, hostile to the al-Hakim.
The unlawful conduct alleged was engaged in by various judges and the court, supervisors and/or managing agents of the judges and the court and/or who were acting at all times relevant within the scope and course of their employment. The court are, therefore, strictly liable for the conduct of said agents and employees.
al-Hakim is informed, believes, and based thereon alleges that these judges and the court MUST accept that they have taken a sworn oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America and the State of California, while some judges has lied and perjured themselves in WRITING, casting off any remote semblance of honor or integrity that anyone present could respect, has enacted his personal agenda to persecute me and deny my rights under the aforementioned Constitutions, whom along with the judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and the court acted with malice, criminal corruption and persecution as described herein with reckless disregard for al-Hakim’s rights and/or with the intent to injure, vex, annoy and harass al-Hakim, and subjected al-Hakim to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of al-Hakim’s rights with the intention of causing al-Hakim injury and depriving him of his constitutional rights.
This appears to be the process enacted by Presiding Judge Barbara J. R. Jones with the order from the Appeals Court dated July 16, 2018, dismissing the above action due to an “unopposed” June 22, 2018, motion to dismiss filed by Defendant-Respondent, CSAA- Wellpoint Asset Recovery LLC that we have complained of for months!
Oakland City Attorney Gives Defendants Stephan Barber and Law Firm Ropers Majeski Case File, Doesn’t Tell Court or Plaintiff!
Entire “Illegal” Proceedings are Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption
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 argument, 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!
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, judge, jury, executioner, as the opposition party with their agenda of criminal corruption and persecution to the detriment and oppression of al-Hakim.
This grand, systemic and endemic corruption is the abuse of power, office, and resources by judicial, political, law enforcement, governmental or legal entities and officials for organizational and personal gain, with and by the herein listed tactics. It also takes the form of these judicial, political, law enforcement, governmental or legal entities office holders maintaining themselves in office by their agenda of criminal corruption and persecution illegally utilizing the full force and resources of the government in a covert criminal undercover sting operation to the detriment and oppression of al-Hakim with use taxpayers’ money.
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.
Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration.
Respectfully,
Abdul-Jalil
510-394-4501
TO: Phyllis J. Hamilton- Chief District Judge
Claudia Wilken- District Judge
Yvonne Gonzalez Rodgers- Judge
U. S. District Court- No. Division
4th Floor Oakland Courthouse
1301 Clay Street
Oakland, CA 94612
FAX No.: 510-637-3545, 415-522-3605
Phyllis_Hamilton@cand.uscourts.gov
Claudia_Wilken@cand.uscourts.gov
Yvonne_Rodgers@cand.uscourts.gov
cc: Susan Y. Soong ; bcc
Faxed and Emailed
FROM: Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE: March 13, 2019
NO PAGES: 3
RE: ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim v. Green Key Investments L.L.C., Case: #C19-0303 JSC,
Dear Chief Justice Phyllis Hamilton, Judge Claudia Wilken, and Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rodgers:
On March 11, 2019, I received a second order from Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rodgers
regrading the filing of another “revised application” as follows: The Court is in receipt of plaintiffs four-page letter dated February 27, 2019. (Dkt. No 14.) Therein, plaintiff appears to complain that the Court is requesting confirmation of his status with respect to his application to proceed in forma pauperis. While the Court is quite aware of the financial circumstances of many in this District, that does not mean that the Court can ignore its duty to ensure that those asking for financial relief provide an explanation, under penalty of perjury, regarding their financial situation. Judge Corley appropriately described the gaps with respect to the information provided, which this Court reiterated in its subsequent order. (See Dkt. No.6, 13.) It is not clear why plaintiff refuses to respond substantively. Plaintiff may submit the information confidentially if that is the concern.”
It goes on to state: All parties are required to comply with Court orders and rules. Accordingly, the Court will EXTEND, one last time, plaintiff’s deadline to Tuesday, April 2, 2019 to submit a revised application, or enough supplemental information to explain the information gaps set forth in Judge Corley’s and this Court’s orders.’ If plaintiff does not use the Court’s application itself but provides further information in a different form, he is reminded to include the following: “I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and understand that a false statement herein may result in the dismissal of my claims.”
Failure to provide the Court with the information requested will result in the denial of plaintiff s application. IT Is So ORDERED. Dated: March 7, 2019 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
It provides as a footnote the “relevant” paragraph from Judge Corley’s order: Although Plaintiff has listed himself as self-employed, he appears to have listed his income as 00. Further, although he does not list any other income nor any savings nor debt, he identifies his monthly expenditures as $300.00 for utilities. Plaintiff does not indicate any monthly expenses for rent, food, or clothing. Thus, there appear to be several information gaps on Plaintiffs in forma pauperis application. Accordingly, Plaintiff shall submit a revised application by February 7, 2019. If Plaintiff fails to submit a revised application by this date, his application to proceed in forma pauperis may be denied. (Order re: IFP Application at ECF p. 1 (emphasis supplied).) To date, plaintiff has failed to comply with Judge Corley’s order, and the “information gaps” in his in forma pauperis application remain. Accordingly, the Court EXTENDS plaintiffs deadline to submit a revised application to Tuesday, March 5, 2019. Failure to submit a revised application by this date may result in the denial of his application. IT Is So ORDERED. Dated: February 19, 2019 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
The original form was submitted under the penalty of perjury, if that was/is the concern, and to be absolutely clear, so is this second letter addressing the same issues raised in the first order, the “flagging” of certain alleged deficiencies as “information gaps” in plaintiffs pending application to proceed in forma pauperis is without any merit and the responses remain the same.
I reiterate in use of your language “Plaintiff listed his income as 00, does not list any other income nor any savings nor debt, he identifies his monthly expenditures as $300.00 for utilities, and does not indicate any monthly expenses for rent, food, or clothing” because that is true and correct and will not change simply because you do not like the answer fishing for another.
These statements ARE sworn under the penalty of perjury, and are NOT impeached because you threaten to dismiss the matter in search of some fraudulent or perjurious information that you could be considered “forcing” upon plaintiff under that “one last time” threat and the accompanying duress.
There is NO need nor requirement, beside the one fabricated here to induce a “revised application, or enough supplemental information” solely for that purpose.
The only legal question is “does plaintiff meet that criterion that is ruled by the financial requirements for IFP status of 28 U.S.C. § 1915?
The esoteric blather about the Legal Help Center, which I have contacted and they can not and do not assist in these matters, is just that.
Again, how does this means of obtaining a filing fee waiver REALLY impact ones ability to represent themselves which is suppose to be the purpose of the form?
It is very disconcerting that the court has taken the approach to this case that it has at present and clearly was embarked upon an agenda that reeks of implicit bias and prejudice, at the very least, already!
As previously mentioned, I will address the previous assignment of this matter by the alleged Executive Committee to Judge Tigar in a following letter as it is unfathomable, heinous, reprehensible, disgraceful, inexcusable, unconscionable, outrageous, nefarious example of “MALFEASANCE”
Who comprises this alleged Executive Committee?
You are ALL being served and I will file this letter with the courts.
Call if you have any questions, and “Thank you” for your consideration.
Respectfully, I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and understand that a falsestatement herein may result in the dismissal of my claims.
Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
510-394-4501
TO: Barbara J. Parker FAX #: 510 238-6500
City Attorney NO PAGES: 11
City of Oakland
1 Frank Ogawa Plaza, 6th Floor
Oakland CA 94612
The Honorable Mayor Jean Quan FAX #: 510 238-4731
City of Oakland
One City Hall Plaza, 3rd Floor
OAKLAND CA 94612
Deanna J. Santana FAX #: 510 238-2223
Oakland City Administrator
City of Oakland
One City Hall Plaza, 3rd Floor
OAKLAND CA 94612
The Honorable C. Don Clay FAX #: 510 891-6276
Presiding Judge
Superior Court of California
County of Alameda
1225 Fallon St., Dept #1
Oakland CA 94612
Nancy O’Malley FAX #: 510 271-5157
District Attorney
René C. Davidson Courthouse
1225 Fallon Street, Room 900
Oakland CA 94612
cc: Barbara Lee, Desley Brooks, Larry Reid, Sandre Swanson, K. Carson, Courtney Ruby, Jayne Williams, bcc:
FROM: Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE: May 3, 2012
RE: Repairs to City Sewer along 7633 Sunkist Drive, Oakland, CA 94605 and Non-Response to Filed and Served “Whistle-Blower” Corruption Complaint
Dear Mrs. Parker,
I am in receipt of a letter dated April 10, 2012 from a Donna Enright, Administrative Assistant 1, with copies to Arlette Flores-Medina, the Open Government Coordinator from your office, with another non response to my continuing requests for ALL documents and materials related to the repair work of the sewer main along my property that was most recently allegedly performed by Andes Construction from June to August 2010. From the physical observations of the areas repaired, the same concern seems to be apparent again and the main is still in need of repair due to the negligent and improper repair from 1992 to present as a result of the main collapse in 1991. (Enright link to letter attached hereto and can be viewed and/or downloaded at: https://www.box.com/s/93e388d1d54da35a6658 )
The response from your office provided nothing related to my property but was enlightening as I have requested ALL DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS RELATED TO THE REPAIR yet nothing you offered was responsive.
The document from Gunawan Santoso, P.E., of the City of Oakland Community and Economic Development Agency dated March 26, 2012, to Andes Construction entitled “PROPOSAL REQUEST No. 2”; with headings:
PROJECT: The Rehabilitation of Sanitary Sewer in Area Bounded by Lakeshore Dr., Alice St., 20th St., and 11th St.
PROJECT NO: C59310
This City of Oakland document requests quoted estimates for the quantities of the repairs for changes in “a contracted sum or proposed modifications to the contract” and states that very sternly “THIS IS NOT A CHANGE ORDER NOR A DIRECTION TO PROCEED WITH THE WORK HEREIN.”
It further indicates that: “Note: Construction area is located in easement between Sunkist Dr and Hillmont Dr, enter from 10’ path at the side 7633 Sunkist Dr.
Per Maintenance CCTV LH 84-112-14 does not exist. Please verify.”
The document provided from Cynthia Orozco of Andes Construction dated May 18, 2012 entitled “Alice C59310-Proposal No. 2” for “Re: The Rehabilitation of Sanitary Sewer in Area Bounded by Lakeshore Dr., Alice St., 20th St., and 11th St. C59310” is addressed to Julius (perhaps Kale Jr.) Below that entitlement is another line that reads “Sub: Proposal #2- Emergency Job @ Sunkist Dr.” This Rehabilitation proposal includes “Clean & Televise Sewer Main” as a line item of the repair. It further states that Andes will “perform the aforementioned work as described in Proposal Request # 2 and as per plans provided by the City”. There is also a hand written attachment on the face of this document stating “NOTE: PLEASE USE BID ITEMS OF PROJECT C59310”. The acceptance of this Proposal for $30,297 is endorsed by Allen Law of City of Oakland Public Works on May 19, 2012.
I have a few questions that must be answered:
1) When was this “Request for Proposal #2 for the Emergency work at Sunkist Drive” prepared?
2) How was this “Request for Proposal #2 for the Emergency work at Sunkist Drive” prepared?
3) Who prepared the Request for Proposal?
4) How were bids solicited for the Request for Proposal?
5) How were bids submitted for this “Request for Proposal #2 for the Emergency work at Sunkist Drive”?
6) How many bid responses were there to the Request for Proposal?
7) What criteria was used to select the awarded bid to the Request for Proposal?
8) How was the bid awarded for the Request for Proposal?
9) When was the bid awarded for the Request for Proposal?
10) What is CCTV LH 84-112-14 ? Does CCTV LH 84-112-14 exist?
11) Where is CCTV LH 84-112-14?
12) Where are the videos of the sewer main inspection both pre and post repair?
13) Where are the photos of the repair including the one of the cleaning snake stuck in the displaced rubber donut coupling that triggered this problem in January 2010?
Both the videos and photos exist and that existence is verified in a conversation between myself and City of Oakland Engineer Julius Kale Jr. on January 26, 2012. You can listen to and/or download that conversation at: http://www.box.com/s/61971f508caaba0e67bb
It seems that perhaps the reason why you feel you are able to withhold the requested documents and materials with impunity is because this repair is just another example of the ongoing fraud in this case dating back to 1991. If the alleged repairs to my property were performed and billed as part of repairs to another property, it would conceal the fraud not only in the repair to my property but also the awarding of the bid for the repair to both properties without the existence of any record of repairs to my property, as it is neatly tucked into the ALICE C59310 repair!
On February 25, 2010 I appeared at your offices and filed a request for the documents from this event and videos of the sewer dating back to 2004. I have not received any response from your crack staff headed by Mark Morodomi, and Michele Abbey whom have pledged in former City Attorney John Russo and your office’s infamous Public Service videos for Real Oakland Administrative Reform (ROAR) to provide those documents to the public as a right of Oakland citizens.
In a Public Service Announcement entitled “Oakland Open Government” Russo point out Mark Morodomi and Michelle Abney as “The Advocate for the Public”. Morodomi proclaims “Citizens have a right to see documents” and the City motto is “Jus Por Popolo” meaning “Law in the Service of the Public” to give you(the citizens of Oakland) the tools and the resources to compete fully in our local democracy.
On Russo’s website he referred to himself as “The Leader for government transparency and civic reform!” – Pragmatic Progressive Leadership!, and describes himself as “passionate that all Oakland citizens have a right to a safe community, good job opportunities, a thriving economy, and a responsible and transparent government.” He paraded this rhetoric of Government Transparency, Accountability and Civic Reform in cleaning up Government and Law Enforcement aimed at restoring public confidence in government, and maintaining the Highest Ethical Standards designed to “make city government more accountable, more transparent and more effective” as his personal “Shield of Honor”. We shall now find out if you are any different for Russo or like Russo and really stand for the things you selectively choose to enforce on others and more like Russo, if you just want to in RUSSO’s OWN WORDS act as “most politicians, and simply keeping the game going as long as they can!”
After leaving the City Attorney’s office I went to the office of the City Auditor to inquire about the process to file an ethics and “Whistle-blower” complaint against Russo and your staff. While meeting with the receptionist, Russo entered the office in a very intimate manner with the City Auditor, Courtney Ruby. I introduced myself and gave them both cards and stated that I would be in touch them both. I am fulfilled that mention with a letter and “Whistle-blower” complaint.
I have filed and am still awaiting the City of Oakland, City Attorney, and John Russo’s answer to the notice of the Corruption Complaint filed and served on your office on May 5, 2010 and the formal 200 page Corruption, Extrinsic Fraud, Criminal Misconduct, Ethics and “Whistle-Blower” Complaint complete with audio CD filed and served on your office on June 7, 2010 stemming from criminal actions committed by the City Attorney’s Office, Mr. Russo and others resulting from the sewer main collapse alongside my home in 1991. A copy of that complaint can be viewed and/or downloaded at: http://www.box.net/shared/4424e7822p. A documents referred to herein below are in reference to documents attached to the complaint.
My ethics and “Whistle-blower” complaint that I filed against Russo and your staff including Mark Morodomi, Randy Hall, Janie Wong, Anita Hong, Sophia Li, Demetruis Shelton, Elizabeth Allen, Erica Harrold and Michele Abbey; former Oakland and current San Leandro City Attorney Jane Williams and former employee Pat Smith; was for their fraudulently fabricating evidence in 1999 and planting that evidence favorable to the defendants in the case files SIX years AFTER the case was closed, engaged in spoliation of remaining evidence in the court files from 1991, fostering Rescue trial Judge David C. Lee’s allowance of the illegal product of fabricated and planted evidence, spoliated evidence and unclean hands by defendant/hostile intervener AAA Insurance; Ron Cook and Willoughby, Stuart & Bening; defense counsel Steve Barber and the law firm of Ropers Majeski; the other underlying defendants; and the Oakland City Attorney’s Office; to be admitted as evidence, subjected to testimony based on this planted evidence in the al-Hakim v CSAA and the underlying Rescue Rooter case that was created thru EXTRINSIC FRAUD with accompanying testimony procured thru admitted suborned and solicited perjurious acts and fostered it’s use to prejudice the jury. During the Rescue trial, testimony revealed that there were numerous documents and photos of a very damning nature to the defense and AAA as the hostile intervener, that were missing, altered, or incomplete, and providing the case file to defendants Stephan Barber and Ron Cook for nearly a year, Russo and your office failed to notify the court of this unpardonable illegal breach in the chain of custody of the file, and engaged in actions to destroy the litigation of my legal case; Russo and your office engaged in actions to coverup your unlawful acts; as you committed, aided and abetted this criminal activity.
On October 20, 2010 I filed a letter response entitled “Response to Denial of Your Claim #C28043 Served and Filed August 31, 2010” to a Mr. Doug Kapovich, Claims Administrator for Acclamation Insurance Management Services in which I stated “ I am in receipt of your letters addressed to “Abdul-Salil Al-Hakim” dated September 3, and 24, 2010 both denying a claim numbered C28043 that HE/SHE/THEY filed on August 31, 2010. Since I am not “Abdul-Salil Al-Hakim” and your information contained in both denial letters are not factually related to my claim, nor grounds for denial of my claim, it is deduced that my claim filed on the date referenced above is still active and pending unless
and until such proper notice of denial is received. His/your denial letters gave four (4) repeated erroneous grounds for denial without factual evidence to support those assertions, and in fact refute the common facts established and acknowledged in his/your letters.
Given that he and your office had ALL this information at the time of your “assumed denial letter”, it is reasonably deduced that your denial could not possibly have been related to my claim, but was in fact intended for the differently named party in the letters I received. I further requested that if I was in error, please feel free to factually correct me with a properly named, factually evidenced denial letter and not merely serve another misstep in your, the City of Oakland, City Attorney’s Office, John Russo and others bad faith, fraud, civil conspiracy, and violation of the business and professional codes. Russo and your office has never responded to the letter and the uncured defect is yours!
I have contacted Russo and your office many, many times by registered mail, phone and fax, regarding Russo and your staffs independent knowledge of the defendants absconding with the files from the City’s possession, and if such action was with the permission of the City Attorney. Russo and your office have failed and refused to effectively respond and has always denied knowing who made the request to review the files or what happened to them, while me and my attorneys at that time, Michael Michel and Jeff Fackler, had attempted several times to obtain copies of the City litigation file from October 1999 to June of 2000 and was told by the City Attorney’s Office that the file was “missing” and was last requested by defendant Ron Cook. Finally, after six months, in June 2000, Anita Hong called to notify Mr. Michel that the file had been returned and was available for viewing. At that time Mr. Fackler and Michel was told that the file had been returned by CSAA’s attorney. I called Ms. Hong and was told the file was back and available for viewing, and when asked who returned the file, she responded “it was returned by Steve Barber of Ropers Majeski”.
Although Russo and your office have adamantly denied the City Attorney’s office had anything to do with the case and was not involved as recently as your assistant Alex Katz’s threatening emails and voice mail messages left for KPFA reporter Gabrielle Wilson, then interim Program Director Sasha Lilly, and Music Director Luis Medina, that resulted in Ms. Wilson’s September 5, 2009 show being censored and canceled. Mr. Cook and Mr. Barber both recently testified in the CSAA trial that they were given the case file by your office and they did not “remove” them without notice. I have previously served multiple deposition and trial subpoenas on ALL the parties from the City Attorney’s office named above and they have ALL failed and refused to provide the information sought by me, and further failed and refused to appear under court ordered subpoena for deposition testimony twice and under court ordered subpoena for trial testimony every time.
The censoring of Ms. Wilson’s scheduled show was another instance of Russo and your office continual engaging in actions to destroy the litigation of my legal case; continuing to engage in actions to coverup your unlawful acts; and that Russo and your office committed, aided and abetted this criminal activity of the defendants in both the al-Hakim matters mentioned herein.
As a direct and proximate result of Russo and your office’s actions, you have caused me and my family to be forced from our $1 million plus home and office, foreclosed from two over $20 million law suits, and multi-million business for 14 years thru the City Attorneys violation of the business and professional codes, extrinsic fraud, subornation of perjurious testimony, committing these acts under the color of law with unclean hands, and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I should remind you that Russo and your office again did this with the unwitting aid of the same army of City Officials that Russo eagerly employ to rid the City of criminals like himself!
We now have you, Mr. Russo, and the municipality of the City of Oakland with the City Attorney’s Office being guilty of unclean hands without notifying the court of these specious, treacherous acts and my complaint addresses the concern that Russo and your office criminal violations of the Civil Code, Business and Professions Code, the Rules of Professional Conduct; and Cal.Cannons and strikes at the heart of my fundamental civil and human rights and right to due process under the law guaranteed by the United States Constitution Amendments and the California Constitution and qualify as a Hate Crime under the Unruh and Ralph Civil Rights and the Bane Acts, while they are clear acts of religious bigotry and intolerance where such conduct rose to the level of consideration for a Federal Crime and a Civil Rights violation because the City Attorney’s Office operates “under the color of law” and certainly the violation of anyone’s civil rights is a federal crime. This deprivation of my civil, human and due process rights by the law enforcement body of the City Attorneys’ office of Oakland rise to the level of criminal activity and “misconduct by local and federal law enforcement officials. These criminal actions by you, Russo, your staff and your office demand you ALL be charged and prosecuted.
Mr. Russo, has stated “that City employees should be held to the highest ethical standards; that there is a formidable crisis of lack of public confidence in Oakland City Government”; in his ROAR video he and City Auditor Courtney Ruby state they truly believe “that City employees should be held to the highest ethical standards; that there is a formidable crisis of lack of public confidence in Oakland City Government”, that people are fatally mad about the unethical behavior, and abuse of power rampant in the City Government; and that Oakland truly deserves a new day”.
If you like Russo and your office are honestly “mad about it; that it is truly time for Oakland, in quoting Mr. Russo, “To Get On With It!” to clean up corruption”; that you, Russo, your office and Ruby “truly want to enact, and enforce your self authored Whistleblower program”; and you sincerely “want the public to believe that the City Government is operating on the level”, then you and the City should start with the complaint to investigate your office and provide answers as to why you, Russo, Mark Morodomi, Randy Hall, Janie Wong, Anita Hong, Sophia Li, Demetruis Shelton, Elizabeth Allen, Erica Harrold and Michele Abbey, and former Oakland and current San Leandro City Attorney Jane Williams and former employee Pat Smith fraudulently fabricated evidence in 1999 and planted that evidence favorable to the defendants in the case files SIX years AFTER the case was closed, engaged in spoliation of remaining evidence in the court files from 1991, fostering Rescue trial Judge David C. Lee’s allowance of the illegal product of fabricated and planted evidence, spoliated evidence and unclean hands by defendant/hostile intervener AAA Insurance; Ron Cook and Willoughby, Stuart & Bening; defense counsel Steve Barber and the law firm of Ropers Majeski; the other underlying defendants; and the Oakland City Attorney’s Office; to be admitted as evidence, subjected to testimony based on this planted evidence in the al-Hakim v CSAA and the underlying Rescue Rooter case that was created thru EXTRINSIC FRAUD with accompanying testimony procured thru admitted suborned and solicited perjurious acts and fostered it’s use to prejudice the jury.
You will NEVER escape the fact that during the Rescue trial, testimony revealed that there were numerous documents and photos of a very damning nature to the defense and AAA as the hostile intervener, that were missing, altered, or incomplete, and providing the case file to defendants Stephan Barber and Ron Cook for nearly a year, you failed to notify the court of this unpardonable illegal breach in the chain of custody of the file, and engaged in actions to destroy the litigation of my legal case; you engaged in actions to coverup your unlawful acts; as you committed, aided and abetted this criminal activity; you all failed and refused to provide the information sought by me, and further failed and refused to appear under court ordered subpoena for deposition testimony twice and under court ordered subpoena for trial testimony and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Perhaps even worst, this evidence was the ONLY EVIDENCED PRODUCED AT TRIAL BY THE DEFENDANTS in the recent al-Hakim v. CSAA trial and presented while I was away attending a funeral!
Judge John Tigar’s Admission of Fabricated Evidence, Planted in Case Files Tainted, and Spoiled by the Hostile Intervener and the Oakland City Attorney
The only evidence produced by CSAA in their defense at trial during the al-Hakim vs. CSAA trial in April 2008 was the two fabricated notes allegedly from Pat Smith taken at the time of the occurrence of 1991 back up. There was no other evidence lodged with the court reflected in the minutes of the hearing. The hearing was held in al-Hakim’s noticed absence as he was attending a funeral after a second death during the trial of an over 40 year friend. THE AUGUST 1999 CITY NOTE (See video of Notes)
al-Hakim had served a trial subpoena upon defendant Ron Cook to produce his entire case file at trial. Cook appeared at trial with less than 15 boxes of files claiming that these were the only ones he felt was responsive to the subpoena. Upon review of the files provided, it was clear that there were just many, many duplicates of the same documents copied over and over without there being any new information provided. al-Hakim had also subpoenaed Ronald J. Cook, Randy Willoughby, Alex Stuart, Bradley Bening and others of the law firm Willoughby, Stuart & Bening yet no one else appeared or provided their case files pursuant to the subpoena claiming that they knew nothing about the case and it was Cook’s alone as an unsupervised “independent contractor”.
During a review of Cooks files in the court room while trial was recessed for a week, al-Hakim found a document in Ron Cook’s copies of the City of Oakland files which was a note entitled “Al-Hakim v. C/O (92416)” with two bates stamp numbers 001323 and 000002 (See one page note under Exhibit C) that was discovered on April 2, 2008 during trial subject to subpoena. This document apparently states a list of “documents not provided to council requesting file”, and further mentions “Attorney-Client and work product documents”. These notes clearly address:
1) conversations between and a one page memo from EFA (City Attorney Elizabeth Allen) to RWH (City Attorney Randy Hall) and former City Attorney employee Pat Smith on August 27, 1999- SIX YEARS AFTER Smith was fired by the City;
2) another conversation between and a one page memo from EFA (City Attorney Elizabeth Allen) to former City Attorney employee Pat Smith on August 27, 1999- SIX YEARS AFTER Smith was fired by the City;
3) Two pages of hand-written notes from JWW (City Attorney Jayne W. Williams) to RWH (City Attorney Randy Hall) and former City Attorney employee Pat Smith on September 3, 1999- SIX YEARS AFTER Smith was fired by the City;
4) Undated, one page hand-written note from JLW (City Attorney Janie L. Wong) to persons unknown;
5) Undated, one page hand-written note from former City Attorney employee Pat Smith SIX YEARS AFTER Smith was fired by the City to EFA (City Attorney Elizabeth Allen);
6) Two pages of undated, unaddressed, nondescript notes for placement into the City file.
For years al-Hakim has asked for answers to the illuminating question of “Where are the rest of Pat Smith’s alleged City case file notes allegedly taken contemporaneously during her two years of involvement from 1991-1993 in this case?”. There was never any answer because there were no notes other than the two pages of notes (See two pages of notes under Exhibit C) that were fabricated and planted into the City file after August 1999 by the Oakland City Attorney’s mentioned herein and at the behest of the defense attorney Stephan Barber.
Acting as Deputy Defense-Counsel Judge Tigar had ruled in pre-trail conference that Pat Smith’s notes would be admitted as evidence despite the fact that he noted that Judge David Lee had ruled them inadmissible in the Rescue trial. This is inconsistent with his ruling of all the previous orders of other judges relative to this case, no matter how remote, would prevail in this case and remain in full effect as he ruled on them and cited the prior judges ruling. Perhaps more revealing is that ALL those orders that he ruled on with the alleged support of previous judges orders were ALL against al-Hakim’s interest.
During pre-trial conference al-Hakim had stated to the court that the defendants could not and would not produce any of the witnesses from the Rescue trial and none would appear at this trial because they all were known to have committed perjury. During the trial Defense counsel Barber stated to the court that he had tried to locate Pat Smith at the City of San Francisco but she no longer worked there and requested of the court that Pat Smith be allowed to testify through her notes and the Rescue transcript.
al-Hakim raised the issue that the defendants had not provided any proof of their efforts to locate and serve Smith and alleging that they merely tried to reach her at her former place of employment was not enough. Tigar stated that he had read the Rescue trial testimony and notes of Pat Smith and would allow the transcript and her notes to be admitted as evidence if there was agreement that she would not appear as a witness. There was never any agreement between the parties on her not appearing as a witness and though Tigar knew there was no such agreement, Tigar admitted her testimony and notes into evidence at trial on August 6, 2008 while al-Hakim was absent attending a funeral for a second death during the trial.(See Trial ending order dated August 9, 2008)
Oakland City Attorney Was Aware At All Times Whom Had The Files And Why and Concealed Oakland City File Note Refutes Defendants Recision Claim!
This evidence proves that the Oakland City Attorney’s Office knew at all times that defendants CSAA, Ron Cook and defense counsel Stephan Barber had the case files, that they provided the case files to them, that Pat Smith’s notes were clearly constructed in fraud and planted in the case files by the Oakland City Attorney’s Jayne Williams, Randy Hall, Elizabeth Allen, Eliada Perez, Janie Wong, Anita Hong, and former Senior Investigator Pat Smith at the behest of defendants CSAA, Ron Cook, defense counsel Stephan Barber, and underlying defendants Rescue Rooter with their counsel William Jemmott and Bay Area Carpets with their counsel Todd Jones. al-Hakim has previously served several deposition and trial subpoenas on ALL the parties named above and they have all failed to appear every time.
As a protective measure for his co-defendants, Judge Jon Tigar had ruled that Barber would have to testify and answer al-Hakim’s charges of spoliation of evidence and subornation of perjurious testimony stemming from his handling of the City file if there was more than one case file. If there was ever more than one case file, they were ALL missing and that fact was attributed to CSAA’s attorneys by the City Attorney. Clearly, Mr. Barber now has to leave the seat as defense counsel and take the stand as a witness and defendant! See video of Tigar’s ruling.
Since Pat Smith was terminated from the al-Hakim v. City of Oakland case for lying, fraud, and presenting false evidence before it was settled in September 1993 and she was fired from Oakland City employment shortly thereafter in 1994, there is no logical reason for her to have had such close and alleged privileged contact, conversations, and the sending and receiving of documents between her and Oakland City Attorneys Jayne Williams, Randy Hall, Elizabeth Allen, Eliada Perez, Janie Wong, Anita Hong in August 1999- SIX YEARS AFTER she was fired by the City of Oakland. As she said at the Rescue trial while being examined by Rescue defense counsel William Jemmott under oath she “required her notes to respond to questions” because she could not remember what lies she had to testify to without them. The notes she previously alleged to have “created those notes at or near the time of the event as part of her claims file” is simply untrue. Her notes and testimony is why the defendants could not and would not ever produce her for testimony at trial and Oakland City Attorneys John Russo, Jayne Williams, Randy Hall, Elizabeth Allen, Eliada Perez, Janie Wong, Anita Hong could not and would not ever appear for testimony at deposition or trial in this or the underlying case.
Oakland City Attorneys Jayne Williams and John Russo Fabricated and Planted Evidence!
Now my Dear Mrs. Parker you have the honor privilege and responsibility to answer:
1) Who authored the August 1999 City note and how did they come to know the facts that were contained in it?
2) When was the note constructed?
3) What documents were provided to the requesting counsel?
4) Who was the attorney that requested the file and how was it provided to them?
5) What other documents were withheld and why?
6) Who is the Attorney and who was the Client referred to in the Attorney-Client asserted in the note?
7) What documents comprised the Attorney-Client privilege?
8) What documents comprised the work product?
9) What are the notes for, who’s file and what happened to them?
10) Did they get placed in the file, if so, by whom, when, where, why, how?
11) What was the chain of command in the handling of the notes?
12) Who approved and who knew about this illegal covert action?
13) The August 1999 City note clearly demonstrates that someone had made contact with Pat Smith before that date in order for her to engage in the illegal activities with the City Attorneys. Who contacted Smith, when, how and why?
14) She admitted during her testimony at trial in the Rescue case that she was being paid for her efforts by the defendants. How much was she paid and what was the basis for her employment?
15) When did Pat Smith review the City file after her employment ended in 1994 and October 1999?
Since there is proof from invoices that defendant Ron Cook had hired John Ratto of D. L. Glaze, later called ASU, as an alleged adjustor in this case and we have found out that they had contacted the Oakland Police Department, the City Attorney’s Office, and the Department of Insurance in an investigation of al-Hakim under the guise of adjusting/settling the claim in early 1999. It is entirely reasonable to expect that defendants CSAA, Cook and defense counsels themselves may have initiated the contact directly with both Smith and the Oakland City Attorneys office prior to August 1999 or at the very least it was another of their employees or contractors Douglas Kroll, Eller Torres, Lynn Koehler, Michael DeCesare, Gary Halpin. The blatant illegal activities of defense counsels Stephan Barber and Shawn O’Halloran are well established in this and the underlying case.
Jayne William’s Specious, Treacherous Acts
After see all the aforementioned evidence, not so shockingly Retired Judges Lee, Michael Ballachey, and Richard Hodge, though they live in three different counties, all coincidentally hired the same Oakland defense firm, Meyers Nave, run by former Oakland and current San Leandro City Attorney Jayne Williams whom was responsible for providing the files to the defendants initially that was then given to her client Judge Lee for trial by John Russo. (See July 26, 2006 letter from Kim Colwell under Exhibit B) Clearly an effort on the part of the defendants, their defense counsels, and the courts to protect their own fallen, now exposed crooks and coverup their corruption.
al-Hakim was stumped for years trying to find “Jane Williams” and was unsuccessful until recently while attending a Oscar Grant Town Hall meeting someone mentioned the Meyers Nave report on the abuses of the BART police in his murder and the general professional and ethical nature of the force. Curious about the alleged findings, al-Hakim did a web search and was surprised to find out that the principle of Meyers Nave and the City Attorney of San Leandro was none other than “Jayne Williams”! From there he found her active in many investigative roles as the finder of fact in case involving high level, high profile, governmental crimes.
How important is it to the integrity and validity of the proper investigation and analysis of high profile crimes that the finder of fact is in fact guilty of corruption, collusion, conspiracy, extrinsic fraud, breaching the chain of custody giving the case files to defendants for nearly a year, fabricating evidence, planting fabricated evidence in case files and providing that spoliated case file to the courts without informing the court! This fact alone would bring all of their cases under scrutiny with the potential to be overturned!
As you all are aware, this matter has been and will continue to be submitted to the United States Attorney General, Department of Justice, among others, for further investigation and prosecution.
Thank you and I welcome and look forward to your response with the furthering of the litigation and resolution of this ongoing case.
Respectfully,
Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
” In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” — George Orwell. For The Truth In The News!
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.
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!
Brand has begun this 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!
He 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.
The court has failed and refused to respond with their scheduling seeking an uncontested order, thereby making their agenda of hate apparent to all!
You must be logged in to post a comment.