(510) 394-4701
Tigar’s Mental Meltdown On Bench When Served Scathing 750 Page Indictment For Cause!
Click to View or Download 255 Page 7th Challenge For Cause Against Dishonored Judge Jon Tigar
Judge Jon Tigar, visibly shaking and muttering, suffered a mental meltdown on the bench as he admitted in open court striking the Seventh Challenge For Cause, a scathing over 750 page indictment, without reading it moments after it was filed and served on him by al-Hakim in the court room on November 20, 2008!!! He then avoided, failed and refused to timely file and serve a written answer to the Challenge For Cause and proceeded to rule on the matters heard that moment and denied both al-Hakim’s Motions to Vacate the Bereavement Order of April 7, 2008 and Trial Ending Minute Order of April 9, 2008 of unscrupulous Judge Tigar.
Tigar ordered the Seventh Challenge stricken allegedly on the grounds that “In open court, plaintiff acknowledged that the present Challenge merely repeat allegations made in earlier challenges, all of which were denied.” “ Accordingly, the present challenge is untimely, and is HEREBY STRICKEN.”
As is witnessed in this expose and verified by al-Hakim and Jason Miller’s testimony, and the hearing transcript, Tigar knew that this statement was not truthful, as he made obvious, blatant lies and mischaracterization of statements made by al-Hakim and wrote those obvious lies in his order. al-Hakim presents clear, uncontroverted, unopposed, uncontested, corroborated proof that this is not the first time that Tigar has written, signed and submitted willfully perjurious, deceptive and fraudulent orders in attempting to deceive the public in support of his ruling.
Tigar’s Mental Meltdown On Bench When Served
Scathing 750 Page Indictment For Cause!
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqGwaVFsEkI&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1]
“The order is not simply the ruling in the matter, the order and the ruling is evidence of and part of the crime!”
al-Hakim Predicted Tigar’s Striking Order and Blindly Prepared The Seventh Challenge For Cause In Advance
On November 19, 2008, at 9:25 a.m. al-Hakim filed and served the sixth challenge for cause against Tigar. Tigar continued the hearing until the next day to file a formal answer striking that challenge. al-Hakim knew if Tigar is true to previous form, his answer and striking order will again be totally void of any meaningful response to the challenge and merely “cut and paste” his previous answers of the five challenges alleging that it: a) fails to set forth any legal basis for disqualification, b) each of allegations is conclusory, c) is not supported by competent and admissible evidence, d) merely disputes the correctness of the court’s rulings, e) is improperly repetitive, and/or is untimely.
So al-Hakim had already prepared the 255 page Seventh Challenge For Cause with over 500 pages of exhibits to Disqualify Tigar based on Tigar’s predictable perjury, fraud, deceit, corrupt misconduct, bias, prejudice and bigotry to be served on Tigar the next day, November 20, 2008. TIGAR, SO EVER TRUE TO FORM, DID EXACTLY AS PREDICTED!!!
The November 19, and 20, 2008 striking orders as with the previous orders striking challenge was TOTALLY DEVOID of ANY ANSWERS to ANY of the issues raised in the Seventh Challenge For Cause, fact supported allegations filed by al-Hakim and is merely another attempt at fraud by Tigar to subvert justice in this case. The striking orders, as with the one filed November 17, 2008 was obviously constructed in haste for convenience, simply states that the challenge fails to set forth any legal basis for disqualification, each of allegations is conclusory, is not supported by competent and admissible evidence, merely disputes the correctness of the court’s rulings, is improperly repetitive, and/or is untimely.
However, all of Tigar’s striking order answers are knowingly false, perjurious, and fraudulently that seeks to avoid Tigar having to give truthful answers that would incriminate him and al-Hakim incorporates them herein until answered. Tigar is of the impression that if he does not answer the charges then they don’t exist or will miraculously go away. To be precise the unanswered charges and evaded citations mentioned herein are all true and verified by Tigar’s intentional omission as they are unopposed, uncontroverted, irrefutable, uncontested factual evidence support and demand his disqualification. al-Hakim’s demands simple, truthful answers to specific charges. Being forced to face the fact that he could no longer evade the truth and consequences, Tigar imploded and mentally melted down!
The Seventh Challenge For Cause, as do the others, presents clear, uncontroverted, unopposed, uncontested, corroborated proof Tigar has written, signed and submitted willfully perjurious, deceptive and fraudulent orders in attempting to deceive the public in support of his rulings; responded to his disqualification by his failure and refusal to timely filing an answer; doing so 8 days later only after al-Hakim had requested the written answer at least six times; filing an answer 8 days later only after al-Hakim contested his continued sitting in the case and indicated his intent to file an appeal for same; stating al-Hakim “attacks judges” in his answer without any explanation; calling al-Hakim a liar in his answer without any substance; publicly criticizing al-Hakim in court on the record; repeatedly lied under oath; made knowingly false statements in an effort to demean, humiliate and provoke plaintiff while lying under oath and perjury; dishonesty; fraudulent deception; calumny deceit; willful and prejudicial misconduct; abuse of discretion; negligence; bias; prejudice; misrepresentation; incompetence; conflict of interest; bad faith; collusion; denial of due process; obstruction of justice;
racism; bigotry; has exhibited, expressed and shown a fixed opinion of al-Hakim; displayed favoritism towards the defendants; made false accusations; harassed al-Hakim; has willfully, deceitfully and recklessly indulged in a series of offensive acts and statements against plaintiff and has displayed disdain, malice, and a mental attitude or disposition toward al-Hakim that prohibits the right to a fair hearing or trial; failed and refused to respond to the allegations contained in the challenges for cause; conduct prejudicial; and advocated a judicial imprimatur of the defense’s position are grounds for disqualification under Code Civ. Proc.; the Canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct, the corresponding Federal Statutes; Business and Professions Code; and violates al-Hakim’s fundamental civil rights and due process under the law guaranteed by the United States Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, and XIV, and as applicable to this state of California Constitution by the first clause of Section 13 of Article I; Article VI, section 13, as a “miscarriage of justice.”
Judge Tigar’s persistent willful misconduct, bad faith, mistreatment, promised retaliation and “atmosphere of unfairness” determines that there is a high probability he would continue his unethical behavior if he were to continue in a judicial capacity in the future.
The Two Hearings of November 19, and 20, 2008
The November 19, 2008 Hearing
On November 19, 2008 at the hearing on al-Hakim’s motions to vacate the bereavement and trial ending orders, al-Hakim had his know process server, Jason Miller, serve the Sixth Challenge For Cause against Judge Tigar. The Challenge was 219 pages that makes reference to over 500 pages of exhibits. When the case was called, al-Hakim took his seat at the plaintiff’s table. Tigar acknowledged the receipt of the challenge and as a legal motion that removed his jurisdiction until the challenge was stricken or answered, he could not rule on the motions and therefore continued the case until the following day at 1:30 p.m. to give him time to properly answer.
Tigar’s Mental Meltdown at The November 20, 2008 Hearing
At the November 20, 2008 hearing on the motions to vacate the bereavement and trial ending orders, the case was called and al-Hakim took his seat at the plaintiff’s table along with his know process server, Jason Miller. The court was aware that the presence of the process server was notice that a legal motion was going to be served.
Tigar attempted to rush right into the matter as if there was no preliminary business of establishing his legal standing relative to his unanswered latest sixth disqualification filed by al-Hakim the day before. al-Hakim stopped the proceeding and requested Tigar’s establish his legal standing in the case. Tigar responded that he had served the order striking his sixth challenge by mail and posted it on the web the day before, November 19, 2008. al-Hakim responded that he had not received any such notice in response to the challenge allegedly filed and served the day before.
At that time al-Hakim had Jason Miller serve Tigar with his Seventh Challenge for Cause and Tigar immediately tried to avoid it by continuing into the case. Again al-Hakim stopped Tigar and reiterated that he had been legally served wherein Tigar paused and stated that he was not denying the service and asked what was different about this challenge from the last one served on him. al-Hakim informed Tigar that this was a vastly different document, that the last one was 219 pages with over 500 pages of exhibits where this one makes reference to the 500 page exhibits but is 255 pages of new facts, information, occurrences, arguments, direct questions and proof of the charges contained therein, that he had to read it and truthfully answer it.
Tigar repeated that he wanted to know what was different and if it contained any of the same allegations made in previous challenges. al-Hakim responded that he was unable to recite all the things that were different and would not allow a lapse of memory to serve as Tigar’s way out of answering the challenge, reiterating that Tigar had to read the challenge and answer it truthfully, that it was a different document with new facts, information, occurrences, arguments, direct questions and proof of the charges contained therein, with 40 additional pages, that also included issues that Tigar had repeatedly failed and refused to answer because it would incriminate him.
Tigar then grabs a law book and begins to hurriedly look for a code to strike the challenge.
Judge Jon Tigar Appointed Thru Nepotism, Cronyism
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYsnaIXLhPw&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1]
The Mental Meltdown
After about 5 minutes of being unable to come up with anything, he starts to meltdown, shaking, babbling and muttering that “al-Hakim said that all the allegations in this challenge are the same as the previous ones, that he doesn’t want to go through another challenge, he wants to make the ruling on the motions, and although the appeals court may not agree, that he was striking the challenge without reading it, al-Hakim can file a writ if he wants and if the appeals court agrees, then al-Hakim will get another hearing”. He then states that the order will be available after the hearing.
al-Hakim corrected Tigar on his self serving comment regarding the statement that “all the allegations in this challenge are the same as the previous ones” with the fact that his comment was libelous, Tigar has previously made the same type of prejudicial erroneous rulings that required al-Hakim to file a writ, and this was a furtherance of his continued perjury, dishonesty and deceit in order to justify his premeditated, predetermined, ongoing legal deprivation of al-Hakim’s rights, and that Tigar had repeatedly failed and refused to answer because it would incriminate him. al-Hakim again stated that Tigar had no legal standing in this case.
Tigar then moved into ruling on the motions as motions for a new trial and al-Hakim argued that the motions were not motions for a new trial, though the granting of one of the motions to vacate would result in a new trial, they were unopposed, uncontroverted, and uncontested by defendants due to their untimely filing of their answer. Defendants continued their argument that the motions were motions for a new trial and thus were untimely. al-Hakim responded that though Tigar had prompted the defendants argument himself with an earlier erroneous ruling on these matters, these simply were not motions for a new trial no matter how Tigar wanted to entitle them, and the motions are still unopposed, uncontroverted, and uncontested so as such, there was nothing from the defendants for the court to consider. Tigar then rules that the motions were not motions for a new trial and that he had not abused his discretion in making the rulings that he made in the matters plead by al-Hakim. He then denied the motions again.
Two Orders Striking Challenges For Cause Dated November 20, 2008
After the hearing al-Hakim requested from the clerk the promised copies of the alleged written orders striking the challenge, and was told to wait for them, so he went to the hallway and waited for the copies of the orders striking the challenge.
The court clerks assistant emerged from the court after about 10-15 minutes, met al-Hakim waiting outside in the hallway with the process server Jason Miller and gave al-Hakim three copies of the same order striking the seventh challenge of that same day. The clerk’s assistant said that they did not have the other order striking the sixth challenge, and repeated it would be mailed. This contradicts the courts allegation when Tigar responded that he had served the order striking his sixth challenge by mail and posted it on the web the day before, November 19, 2008. Click here to View or Download both orders
Jason Miller, as a casual observer and member of the public at large, said he was astonished at hearing the obvious, blatant lies and mischaracterization by Judge Tigar of the statements made by al-Hakim at the hearing. He said he was mortified when he saw that Tigar had written those obvious lies in his order! He said he knew those statements were willingly and knowingly, totally and completely, libelous and slanderous. He said he could feel the courtroom was heavy with an atmosphere of unfairness as Tigar exhibited disdain and a blatant hostility toward al-Hakim and he was convinced that a fair and impartial hearing could never be obtained by anyone that was not in Tigar’s corner. Miller felt he could harbor no doubt that Tigar was biased, prejudice and not on appearance but on fact from his own observation, Tigar had exhibited fraud and corruption that any other person off the street would agree to if they saw and heard the same things. (Click here to View or Download Jason Miller’s declaration)
This is in fact the true test of bias, prejudice and corruption, the spirit of the code that reflects “the court as an impartial forum for the determination of truth”, that “a person aware of the facts might reasonably entertain a doubt that the judge would be able to be impartial” and “how a Judge’s participation in a given case looks to the average person on the street.” Tigar has failed this test miserably!
al-Hakim knew Tigar was predictable, as he had predicted in his blind seventh challenge that Tigar would do just as he did and always had done. al-Hakim had prepared the Seventh Challenge because he knew that Tigar would not and could not answer the Sixth Challenge and would merely give a stock order striking the challenge without any truthful answers. Therefore, al-Hakim stated that Tigar would give the very same answers that he did in order to play the game of “I’m not disqualified, I have standing and I can rule in this matter”. (See Seventh Challenge, Page 9, ¶ 2) al-Hakim knew that Tigar would not serve the order striking on him personally at the hearing and would do anything that he could to get the orders on the motions in as his last acts in legal deprivation al-Hakim and his case.
Tigar’s actions proved every point al-Hakim has made in every one of the challenges filed against Tigar,
that he can not afford to answer any of the charges leveled against him because it will incriminate him and establish that TIGAR IS GUILTY OF ALL THE CHARGES al-Hakim has made.
al-Hakim’s complaints are made and based on grounds that the orders and conduct of Tigar are oppressive, unconscionable, prejudicial, a clear abuse of process and a gross miscarriage of justice. al-Hakim feels that these rulings, conduct and actions by Tigar exhibit a continued patterned of abuse of discretion, bias, prejudice, incongruous to the proper administration of justice, and misconduct on behalf of judge Tigar, that the result of these rulings are prejudicial and if not corrected will result in a miscarriage of justice.
Further, as Judge Tigar is charged with the transgressions listed herein, al-Hakim is convinced that a fair and impartial hearing has been denied in the past and a fair hearing or trial can not be obtained before this judge now or in the future.
Tigar Has Verbally Struck Challenges And Presided
Without Filing A Written Answer Before
At the hearing on February 25, 2008 al-Hakim filed the fourth Challenge For Cause to disqualify Judge Jon Tigar ( Click here to View or Download 4th Challenge For Cause Against Dishonored Judge Jon Tigar For Disqualification) After receiving that disqualification, Tigar gave a verbal order from the bench striking the challenge as conclusionary, did not provide a written answer until March 3, 2008 and remained in the case over al-Hakim’s objections, continuing to make critical evidentiary rulings that negatively impacted the case causing irreparable harm, far beyond simple administrative duties while he submitted his written order 8 days later. His “verified answer”, as is stated in his order, was never intended to be filed–unless “Plaintiff timely seeks a writ and an appellate court determines that an answer to the Challenge should have been timely filed”. Tigar’s attempt here is to subvert the system of justice and force al-Hakim to have the Appeals Court compel Tigar to comply with the laws. Tigar’s efforts were to evade the law and remain in the case unless and until a court of review later determined that the disqualification challenge required that it be heard by a judge and his verified answer became operative. Tigar’s answer did not become effective, was untimely as the record makes it clear that the verified answer was never filed, and he was disqualified to preside at any further proceedings because he failed and refused to file a written order striking the challenge for cause while knowing that he is prohibited from hearing ANY and ALL such motions and had no jurisdiction to enter the orders at the hearings in the matters.
Tigar Did Not Answer Sixth AND Seventh Challenge For Cause
BEFORE Ruling on Matters
Further, both of Tigar’s striking orders to the Sixth AND Seventh Challenge For Cause are dated and file stamped November 20, 2008, as is the proof of service and the envelope is postmarked November 21, 2008. This contradicts the courts allegation when Tigar responded that he had served the order striking his sixth challenge by mail and posted it on the web the day before, November 19, 2008.
It is clear from Tigar’s own testimony he had served the order striking his sixth challenge by mail and posted it on the web the day before, November 19, 2008; the testimony of the court clerks assistant on November 20, 2008 that the copy of the order striking the sixth challenge was not ready and they did not have one; the dates of the filing and serving of ALL the orders striking being November 20, 2008; and the postmark mailing dates of ALL the orders striking being November 21, 2008; Tigar never had standing in this case to rule by virtue of not have timely answered, filed and served properly any acceptable answer to the Sixth AND Seventh Challenge For Cause BEFORE he ruled on the matters at the hearing November 20, 2008.
His actions proved every point al-Hakim has made in every one of the challenges filed against Tigar, that he can not afford to answer any of the charges leveled against him because it will incriminate him and establish that TIGAR IS GUILTY OF ALL THE CHARGES al-Hakim has made.
Tigar’s Nulification of Trial
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9tuXVxGVGs&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1]
How Tigar’s Transgressions “Look To The Average Person On The Street” and Jason Miller’s Certainty of Tigar’s Partiality and Inability To Get A Fair Trial Or Hearing
As sworn and witnessed by Jason Miller, as a casual observer and member of the public at large, said he astonished at hearing the obvious, blatant lies and mischaracterization by Judge Tigar of the statements made by al-Hakim at the hearing. He said he was mortified when he saw that Tigar had written those obvious lies in his order! He said he knew those statements were willingly and knowingly, totally and completely, libelous and slanderous. He said he could feel the courtroom was heavy with an atmosphere of unfairness as Tigar exhibited disdain and a blatant hostility toward al-Hakim and he is convinced that a fair and impartial hearing could never be obtained by anyone that was not in Tigar’s corner. He felt he could harbor no doubt that Tigar was biased, prejudice and not on appearance but on fact from his own observation, Tigar had exhibited fraud and corruption that any other person off the street would agree to if the saw and heard the same things.
This is in fact the true test of bias, prejudice and corruption, the spirit of the code that reflects “the court as an impartial forum for the determination of truth”, that “a person aware of the facts might reasonably entertain a doubt that the judge would be able to be impartial” and “how a Judge’s participation in a given case looks to the average person on the street.”
Use of the word ‘might’ in the statute was intended to indicate that disqualification should follow if the reasonable man, were he to know all the circumstances, would harbor doubts about the judge’s impartiality. Whether a reasonable member of the public at large, aware of all the facts, might fairly question the Court’s impartiality. It represents a legislative judgment that due to the sensitivity of the question and inherent difficulties of proof as well as the importance of public confidence in the judicial system, the issue is not limited to the existence of an actual bias. Rather, if a reasonable man would entertain doubts concerning the judge’s impartiality, disqualification is mandated. “To ensure that the proceedings appear to the public to be impartial and hence worthy of their confidence, the situation must be viewed through the eyes of the objective person.” Tigar has failed this test miserably!
al-Hakim directly proves that Tigar has willfully and repeatedly abused his discretion and he should never be allowed to pass upon his own disqualification for abusing that discretion.
Tigar “Created Public Impression He Had Abandoned Judicial Role”
Indeed, this court must conceded Tigar probably should have” disqualified himself as a result of his actions. Tigar’s conduct and orders as sworn and witnessed by Jason Miller was “particularly destructive of the image of the court as an impartial forum for the determination of truth.” As the appeals court explained in Broadman, “there is a compelling public interest in maintaining a judicial system that both is in fact and is publicly perceived as being fair, impartial, and efficient.” Thus, “judges . . . cannot be advocates for the interests of any parties; they must be, and be perceived to be, neutral arbiters of both fact and law who apply the law uniformly and consistently.”
As according to witness Jason Miller’s sworn affidavits submitted herewith, Tigar’s actions “created the public impression that he had abandoned the judicial role to become an advocate for his own ruling” in striking the challenge without reading it, lying about al-Hakim’s testimony, filing a perjurious order encapsulating that lie and denying al-Hakim’s motion to vacate his prior perjurious orders. “Honesty” is one of the “minimum qualifications which are expected of every judge.”
Tigar’s unfortunate, perjurious, libelous and slanderous comments and perjurious order striking challenge as sworn and witnessed by Jason Miller during the hearing constituted prejudicial misconduct. As was noted, a member of the general public, an innocent bystander expressed “astonishment, mortification, shock and embarrassment” at the comments and conduct Tigar notwithstanding his pledge to uphold the law, support the Constitution, and protect “the peoples’ rights.”
Tigar Committed Deliberate Judicial Dishonesty
In no uncertain terms Tigar had proven the accusations of “deliberate judicial dishonesty.” These actions are not only willfully and intentionally illegal, false, libelous, perjurious, deceptive and fraudulent in violation of al-Hakim’s civil and human rights and right to due process: they are insolent, offensive, insulting, and impugn the integrity of the court. The court can not purge Tigar of the contempt he committed because his unsupported accusations of al-Hakim’s conduct in an attempt to impugned his integrity is irrelevant. Moreover, there is an aggravating factor. Tigar has engaged in a pattern of abuse and judicial misconduct that is patently outrageous.
Tigar Committed Prejudicial Misconduct
You must agree that Tigar committed prejudicial misconduct in responding to his disqualification by lying about al-Hakim’s testimony on the record; deceiving the public and state with such lies; writing, signing and filing a known perjurious order striking the challenge AFTER ruling on the matters at hearing; and publicly criticizing al-Hakim for filing the challenges on the record. Tigar’s inappropriate remarks about al-Hakim was “intemperate, open-court criticism” and he committed misconduct by making “insulting and derogatory comments from the bench impugning the character and competence of al-Hakim”.
Tigar’s Conduct “Gave ‘Rise To Appearance of Impropriety
As sworn and witnessed by Jason Miller, al-Hakim provided clear and convincing evidence to support his charges that Tigar’s conduct “gave ‘rise to an appearance of impropriety”, “could reasonably be considered prejudicial to public esteem for the judicial office,” and “constituted prejudicial conduct.” By statute, a judge “shall be disqualified” if “[f]or any reason (A) the judge believes his or her recusal would further the interests of justice, (B) the judge believes there is a substantial doubt as to his or her capacity to be impartial, or (C) a person aware of the facts might reasonably entertain a doubt that the judge would be able to be impartial.” Tigar is disqualified under this provision as Tigar’s conduct during the hearing fell far short of this standard, bringing the judicial office into disrepute and constitutes prejudicial misconduct.
The Greatest Obstacle to Tigar’s Contempt in His Corrupt and Prejudicial
Misconduct is Not Ignorance ~ It is His Illusion of Knowledge
It is necessary to do miraculous and meticulous work in order to make an argument to defend Tigar, his conduct, actions, and writings, his gross lack of principles and al-Hakim who was subjected and vulnerable to them all. If you do not do that work intellectually, then you make al-Hakim and people whom has been forced to endure this type of oppression even more vulnerable. Tigar and his friendly defense counsel and defendants originated and fueled a rumor orgy and didn’t give the truth or facts. At the same time the court’s corrupt and prejudicial misconduct left out the same and justice for this innocent Black plaintiff with several intentional erroneous rulings consummating this hysteria into a legal lynching.
Tigar’s answers and orders striking challenges were “legally flawed” and “tendentious in substance and tone.” Tigar’s well known, ambitious, self promoted, over inflated self importance is truly the problem with what should have been a simple, fair, and just consideration and execution of a trial for al-Hakim. Whereas now he has too much to protect with his public failures and now as an “elected” official who believes that he, individually and his colleagues he expects to protect him collectively, are above any accountability and are not answerable to their constituents. Tigar and his colleagues he expects to protect him, as our public servants erroneously believe that they are the judicial equivalent of the criminal “teflon Don’s!” impervious and immune to conviction for their transgressions.
al-Hakim’s rights were trampled by these unconstitutional, fraudulent legal rulings supported by Tigar’s willingly and knowingly libelous and slanderous comments on the record; overzealous enforcement of his own baseless, self serving pretexted rulings; and by filing deceiving affidavits to justify his perjurious orders to execute his premeditated, predetermined legal lynching.
“Conduct of this kind by a judge is reprehensible. It cannot be condoned or excused,” al-Hakim deserves to have his name cleared completely and a fair trial on the merits. The evidence is overpowering that the Tigar’s testimony and order is untrue. al-Hakim’s constitutional rights to a fair trial and hearing against unreasonable corrupt and prejudicial misconduct had been breached by Tigar and he now looks to the officers of the disciplinary judicial body to provide him cover for his actions.
al-Hakim and Jason Miller are very credible witness, and their story hangs together and makes sense. This is in stark contrast with any that Tigar could offer, whose own testimony, actions and documents are ALL inconsistent with the evidence and defies common sense. It follows from these conclusions that Tigar, in this case fabricated significant aspects of the evidence in order to make his unconstitutional orders.
Tigar Legal Charges
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh8n6KGp7Jc&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1]
Tigar’s Persistent Willful Corrupt Misconduct, Bad Faith, Disdain, Retaliation and “Atmosphere of Unfairness”
With regards to Judge Tigar, there is an infinite amount of evidence herein to attest to his lying under oath and perjury, misrepresentations, deceit, dishonesty, willful and prejudicial misconduct, bad faith, incompetence, conflicts of interest, bias, calling al-Hakim a liar without any substantiation or justification; instructing al-Hakim not to mention Tigar’s perjury or to speak his own truth; threatened retaliation to charge him with contempt when al-Hakim refused to back off his charges of the judges perjury, deceit; entitling orders for his convenience to deny them and avoid appellate review; entitling orders for his convenience to deny them and issues sanctions; willfully and intentionally withholding filing and serving orders (possibly backdating orders) then acted on the orders after the applicable deadlines for al-Hakim to legally and properly respond, thus forcing al-Hakim to forfeit his civil rights and right to due process; irresponsible failure as a judge to read, interpret, and apply the applicable laws, accusing al-Hakim of attacking judges in open court, has attacked other parties in open court while dressed in civilian clothes yet performing his duties as a judge and his honest refusal to recuse “goes beyond mere negligence”; this conduct falls into the category of willful misconduct by a judge as arising out of conduct which is done in bad faith and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute. The deception practiced by Judge Tigar during these events, as well as his specious actions before al-Hakim on every occasion, are equally antithetical to, and inherently incompatible with, his duties to uphold the law and the search for truth, reflects a gross lack of judicial temperament and a purpose other than the faithful discharge of judicial duty, and is at minimum improper action. Given the above, Judge Tigar’s conduct violated canons 1, 2, 2A, and 2B(2), and constituted both willful and prejudicial misconduct. Judge Tigar treated plaintiff in a rude and demeaning manner, in violation of canons 1, 2A, 3B(2), 3B(4), and 3B(8). He berated, scolded, threatened, and belittled al-Hakim even called him a liar. These improper references of plaintiff’s character and as being untruthful, coupled with his perjury regarding the discovery matters and categorical denial of every discovery issue raised before him reflected a prejudgment of plaintiff’s discovery claims and a lack of impartiality, contrary to canon 3B(5). Judge Tigar’s persistent willful misconduct, bad faith, mistreatment, promised retaliation and “atmosphere of unfairness” determines that there is a high probability he would continue his unethical behavior if he were to continue in a judicial capacity in the future.