JUDICIAL COMPLAINT

 

I DO MY BEST TO KEEP THIS UP TO DATE:  

ALL BLOGPOSTS ARE IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER HERE:  https://thunderflower2021.blogpost.com/2021/10/table-of-contents.html?m=1 

TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR THIS BLOG:  ALPHEBETIZED 

You can toggle back and forth this way. 

http://www.PubliusRoots.com/2018/04/TABLE-of-contents.html?m=1

U

Update 9/18/2021

I am blocked from attaching my letter to this. I will try something else.

m

There was NOT a shadow like this and the picture was clear.  Thank the crooked TECHNOCRACY - the ones who cover up Americans murdered Americans on 9/11; the ones who cover up the constant Washington DC crimes; including FAKE PANDEMIC - the word itself means world-wide, not disease and if you look up the medical coding, you will notice they play by their own rules, there is no structure - not any more!  Making an adjective into a noun, changing the name of the SAME alleged disease over and over - to mess with people's heads as a way to justify their FAKE agenda - since the real mass murder bioweapon was seized in WUHAN! They made it in North Carolina! 

Update 19Aug2021: I finally got the complaint finished, submitted via Priority Mail. I will be deleting what I have here and paste the main portion of the complaint. 

         The complaint was pasted and my notebook was HACKED in retaliation!  The morons removed my Google account and put a different on.  I changed it back which was difficult because Google is making EVERYTHING difficult if it doesn't fit their tyrannical agenda of the Illuminati, the ORGANIZED CRIME that SAVOR DEATH AND DESTRUCTION LIKE HITLER DID.  

FACTS: 

1.  I called the Judicial Review Board and spoke to Mr. Dunn

      He said "no hurry about sending that complaint. You got a year

    WTF - he just wanted to intercept my efforts 

2. He said the fax number they provide is for communications - not the complaint

3. I faxed him communications, including a preliminary of the complaint - not the appendix

4. My complaint was STOLEN out of my apartment AFTER that - I can't go down the street because they illegally enter my apartment - which they never changed the lock on, which they never did an inspection on, yet told me it would be done in a couple days, I could move in right away, so I gave my prior landlord a 30 day notice and THIS landlord kept telling me after this that the inspection was not done to prevent me from moving in, physically causing me harm since it is difficult to accomplish because of injuries I sustained when a sander truck driver tried to kill me, which no one ever cared about because they are apathetic to to corruption and are even part of it!  

5. I had to recreate the complaint and mailed all 103 pages on 8/19

6. The Judicial Review Council then mailed back my fax (despite faxes are not considered anything more than communication, he said) alluding that they were returning my complaint because "you have to follow our process" - which is BS, because I followed the Rules of Practice Book!  The fax was no more than 15 pages. 

7. I sent them a letter telling them I am very aware they backdated a letter they mailed the day they got my priority mail, to allude that was all they had.  I did not get their backdated letter of August 9 (the day I faxed their office) until August 26 or 27!  I checked my mail August 25 and it was not in my mail!  Their BS about COVID causing slowness is mail is a SCAM!  Their letters arrive timely from the city only 1/2 hr away!  

8. THEY are covering up the corruption of the courts - they have nothing to do with reviewing. And their BS about "we don't discipline" is affirmation of the intent of their office!  Which leaves no one in charge of accountability.  You join their gang, you're in.  Doesn't matter what you do, unless you dare administer the law!   

9. Making a fraudulent collection - a weapon against me, a targeted person because I expect the law to be administered.  THEY ARE ERODING THIS GOVERNMENT AND CAUSING THE COUNTRY TO IMPLODE. But they don't care - they will just mass murder pushing buttons some other way! 

Below, I pasted documents here the day or day after I mailed my Judicial Complaint.  Right after this, I could not access my scanned complaint, I had such terrible problems, I made the mistake of calling my contracted remote service through Best Buy and was diverted to a THIRD PARTY instead!  They wanted me to agree to their stipulations and I told them I have already got a contract and their adding a third party was breach of contract!  I said, "Get off my computer!" and they proceeded to swipe whatever they could from my notebook (not a computer, it replaced my computer since my computer was cyber attacked by the Phoenix Corporation, which I did not have any service contract with) 

They are doing whatever the hell they want! The judicial complaint had no law references, which is required by official forms. The judicial complaint did not have a barcode, which are on official forms.  Mr. Dunn did not mail me anything after I spoke to him. I got nothing the two weeks after that!  He is making things up as he goes along - to cover up the organized crime in the courts!  

They not only stole my documents in my apartment but they also altered this court case records to cover up their crimes - it only EXPOSES more crimes!  Yet they play DEVIL's CHESSBOARD, finding "their people" to push out the forthright and push in the crooks - like Trump did when he erroneously fired Rex Tillerson in a tweet when he was out of the country - to get emergency immunity for CIA Director Mike Pompeo, who owned obvious CIA front Thayer Aerospace and DISSOLVED it to cover up his criminal activity within the company, obviously! John B Thayer III promoted himself as jumping off the 5th floor of the Titanic, into the water and survived, DRAWING pictures on the Carpathia just hours later rather than being medically rehabilitated if their was even a chance he could survive.  No one who jumped (and about 40 jumped because of the explosions) survived!  He obviously looted the ship with others that worked for JP Morgan and Bruce Ismay and the planned boat from the Carpathia picked them up in the back - people saw it, though the lights were out and the ship was sinking.  He helped found SYNCHRONY Bank.  SINK-rony....just consider that!  They have been lying about when that bank started ever since!  

STATE OF CONNECTICUT 

JUDICIAL REVIEW COUNCIL 

COMPLAINT FORM

August 17, 2021

COMPLAINT AGAINST A JUDGE

ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS

1. Letter to Judge Patrick Connelly - notarized

2. COMPLAINANT'S AFFIDAVITS  - ___30__ PAGES 

3. MOTION TO DISQUALIFY AND REMOVE JUDICIAL AUTHORITY - ENTERED ON AFORESAID CASE, NNH-CV20-6105010-5   (Attached for emphasis)

3. ADDITIONAL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS 

REFERRING TO THE SECTION ON THIS FORM TO WHICH IT IS SUPPORTING

4. TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING OF MAY 20, 2021 NOTARIZED - ___17__ PAGES 

This form is designed to provide the Council with information necessary to review your complaint.  PLEASE READ THE GUIDELINES FOR COMPLETING THIS FORM REFERENCED IN THE ACCOMPANYING BROCHURE AND REFER TO THE ACCOMPANYING INFORMATION HANDBOOK EXPLAINING THE COUNCIL'S FUNCTION, JURISDICTION, AND PROCEDURES BEFORE ATTEMPTING TO COMPLETE THIS FORM. TOTAL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:  ___103_______

Complainant would like to interject nothing was mailed to her and she is referring to the RULES OF COURT, VERSION 2016. She has called the Judicial Review Council over two weeks ago and they did not tell her she needed to receive their packet - nor did they offer to send her anything. The last time her post office box mail was checked was ten days after calling them.  They have not sent anything to her residency. 

9/2/2021 update: On the 25th I had no mail. On the 27th I got a backdated letter Aug 10th, from JRC - they obviously mailed it after they got my priority mail hard copy on or before the 20th.

My computer was compromised. I had to get a new service. Internet is EXTREMELY slow, obviously caused by the nefarious technocrats. aka COVIDOCRACY, who cover for the 130 Americans who took direct part in mass-murdering Americans on 9/11/2001. (End of insert)

PLEASE NOTE:  COMPLAINT MUST BE TYPED OR LEGIBLY HAND PRINTED, DATED, SIGNED AND NOTARIZED BEFORE IT WILL BE CONSIDERED.  RETAIN A COPY FOR YOUR RECORDS, AS COMPLAINTS AND DOCUMENTATION SHALL BECOME THE PROPERTY OF THE COUNCIL AND CANNOT BE RETURNED.  

1. Person making complaint

Bradley, Anne M.    dob: 3/24/1959

PO Box 206514, New Haven, CT 06520 (mail only)

360 State Street, New Haven, CT 06510 (residence) 

Phone: 203-909-9131

2. Person against whom complaint is made

KAMP, MICHAEL, P. - Judge

NOTE: ALL JUDGES INVOLVED WITH AFOREMENTIONED CASE ARE CULPABLE AND SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, PARTICULARLY JUDGE KAMP SINCE HE NEFARIOUSLY HEARD THE CASE

Note, Juris Number is marked INACTIVE 

3. STATEMENT OF FACTS 

1. Attorney's Oath 

OATH OF ADMISSION TO THE BAR 

This oath has been violated by Judge Kamp, who has to be an attorney to be a judge.  Oddly, his Juris number is inactive.  I have not seen another judge's Juris number marked inactive.  

You solemly swear or solemnly and sincerely affirm, as the case may be, that you will do nothing dishonest (a) and will not knowingly allow anything dishonest to be done (b) in court, and that you will inform the court of any dishonesty of which you have knowledge (c); that you will not knowingly maintain or assist in maintaining any cause of action that is false (d) or unlawful (e); that  you will not obstruct any cause of action for personal gain (e) or malice (f); but that you will exercise the office of attorney, in any court in which you may practice, according to the best of your learning and judgment, faithfully, to both your client and the court (g) so help you God or upon penalty of perjury (h)

 CGS 1-25 and annotations

Rule 8.1 MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROFESSION 

Rule 8.2 CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT 

Rule 8.3 REPORTING PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT 

Rule 8.4 MISCONDUCT 

Rule 8.5 DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY CHOICE OF LAW 

 

Both the Attorney's Oath and the following Oathhave been violated by Judge Kamp:

 (CGS 1-25)

Judicial's Oath 

UNIVERSAL CITATION FOR MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS)

You do solemnly swear of affirm, as the case may be, that you will support the Constitution of the United States (i), and the Constitution of the state of Connecticut (k), so long as you continue a citizen thereof; and that you will faithfuly discharge, according to law, the duties of the office of (k) .... to the best of your abilities, so help you God.  

FOR NOTARY PUBLIC. 

NOTATIONS

(a) Despite Defendant making several arguments about certain dishonest tacticts taking place in this case in pretrial motions, Judge Kamp gave them no consideration and was disrespectful at the very mention of these incidences despite the diligence of the wrongfully-sued defendant by a deliberately dishonest plaintiff using a Small Claim Form claiming MEDICAL EXPENSES; using fraudulent documents; to include an affidavit of sale of the defendant's alleged open account (thought it was paid in full by 2017) with a disclaimer requiring the defenant had to be a citizen of California! 

Ref:  Page _58___   Case Document:  ____Appendix to ANSWER/COUNTERCLAIM___(to be versified, since my computer was compromise and documents were stolen out of my apartment ._____________________

 Defendant never lived in California!  There would be no jurisidiction in Connecticut!  Yet the court kept this case going anyway! Rule 8.4, 8.1

(b) Judge Kamp not only allowed certain clerks in the courthouse to nefariously enter documents (such as "AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM" when counterclaim was never amended - but continously allowed the dishonest practices of the Stillman Law Firm to take precedence over the law. Rule 8.3

(c) Judge Kamp has consistently proven that he not only overlooks dishonest practices of the plaintiff, et al - but deliberately conspires with them! Rule 8.4

(d) This judge has no intentions of holding corruption accountable because he takes part in it and covers it up.  Rule 8.4

(e) and (f) MALACE AND FORETHOUGHT would reflect the numerous proofs that defendant-complainant is a targeted person.  The judge only wanted to cover it up - no doubt for personal gain which had nothing to do with matters of principle.  Rule 8.1, 8.2

(g) Committing perjury is so commonplace that those who, like Judge Kamp, do it have complete disregard for the law, for principles, for integrity. Rule  8.1, 8.2, 8.4.

(h) Overall, the oath which this judge has taken is worth less to him than scrap paper  Rule 8.1

(i) The Constitution of the United States includes, among many other decrees, the right to DUE PROCESS.  This case was not even heard.  The judge had an attitude that the defendant-complainant lost NO MATTER WHAT, NO MATTER HOW OBVIOUS IT WAS THE BALANCE WAS PAID IN FULL, THE PLAINTIFF WITHHELD EVIDENCE TO PROVE IT WAS PAID IN FULL, THAT 

THE VERY FACT THAT THIS CASE IS NOT BEING HEARD ON MEDICAL EXPENSES, which was invoked by the plaintiff-attorney 

DID NOT EVEN MATTER.  NOTHING MATTERED EXCEPT A PRE-PLANNED RULING IN PLAINTIFF'S FAVOR NO MATTER WHAT.  Rule 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4

(j) The Constitution of the State of Connecticut was again -  no matter which this judge considered to administer!  Our rights to property and liberty was not the issue.  Defendant claimed: You only care about taking money, not making money.  This was clearly an issue of theft, a common practice by the technocrats and others in this society.  Thus, this complaint will likely hold no value as it pertains to this case.  Rule 8.1 

(k) Duties of office are not held accountable.  This judge as well as the others in this courthouse and state, just play the game rather than stand up for what is right.  If someone like defendant-complainant is targeted, they will keep on targeting, going along with the nefarious Secret Society Crowd, which has no regard for the law.  Rule 8.1

CGS 51-81b

Any person entered in the BAR, has to have an annual review

OCCUPATIONAL TAXES vs FRAUDULENT  Pro Hac Vice APPEARANCES

TAXES DUE vs UNLAWFUL PRACTICE 

VIOLATED:  THE JUDGE ALLOWED THE PLAINTIFF TO HAVE AN ILLEGAL APPEARANCE. - MOST LIKELY A WAY TO EVADE TAXES SINCE HE IS A CONNECTICUT ATTORNEY.   Rule 8.3, 8.4

MILITARY AFFIDAVITS ARE TO BE COMPLETED BY THE DEFENDANT AT THE DEFENDANT'S WILL, NOT THE PLAINTIFF!  THE MILITARY AFFIDAVIT IS ILLEGAL; IT WAS ARGUED, THIS JUDGE DID NOT CARE ABOUT THE LAW.  Rule 8.1

IN ADDITION

1.  Judge Kamp was NOT fair or impartial.  As you can see from the transcript of the May 20 hearing enclosed, the judge defended the plaintiff several times. He said he would NOT hear motions as separately entered, that he would COMBINE THEM, which is deliberately dishonest and illegal.  

This is "catch me if you can" politics, behavior.  Many cases are similarly-situated which Judge Kamp has ruled on.  People have refused to appear on cases which they were not served by Stillman Law Office, which instead of producing actual proof of delivery, make up a proof of delivery and notarize it as if a notarization is a guarantee they will get off producing lie after lie.  Landlords could be contacted to validate tenants in apartment complexes, for instance.  There is none of this.  In fact, it wouldn't be surprising to find out that half the cases are on non-existent people to launder money through the court.  

2. THERE WAS NO DUE PROCESS. The judge intentionally said he would not allow Due Process when he refused to hear the separate motions, he refused to conduct a fair hearing.  He had only one motive:  THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. To help the plaintiff win no matter how illogical, nefarious he was.  

CANON 2:  A Judge shall perform the duties of Judicial Office impartially, competently, AND Diligently

This judge did not even care about the continuous lack of diligence by the plaintiff! Its only pleading (no objections were entered on any of the defendant's motions!) was a MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIM, with a happhazzard History, no FACTS, no LAW, no SUMMARY, not even a WHEREFORE - yet Bardos was supposed to have been on the honor roll at Quinnipiac University! 

Judge Kamp denied the plaintiff's motion to dismiss counterclaim. 

Yet the counterclaim was not even heard! 

 I claim he is obviously a transhuman, microchipped just like Rod Solomon, who cheated his way through Stanford University as a History Major, yet someone intercepted his efforts in getting a degree - yet he was entered in the Washington DC Bar and allowed to create a MTW Program attached to Section 8 as a parastic effort to drain money for no valid reason - which only a very few Section 8 administrators would agree to participate in.  It is completely illogical for a homeless person to MOVE TO WORK as if they were a doctor or other high profession! 

3. ILLEGAL APPEARANCE BY  PLAINTIFF WAS NEVER CURED YET IT WAS ARGUED IN ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM.

4. DEFENDANT NEVER MOTIONED TO DISMISS.  SHE COUNTERCLAIMED.  YET THE COURT NEFARIOUSLY ENTERED THAT SHE HAD THE COURT TO DISMISS AS AN OBVIOUS MEANS TO DISTRACT HIS DENIAL OF THE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS.  DECEPTION WAS A CONSTANT TOOL BY JUDGE KAMP AS WELL AS THE NEW HAVEN COURT ADMINISTRATION WHICH PROCESSED THIS CASE! THE JUDGE HAS THE POWER TO CURE!  INSTEAD, JUDGE KAMP ORCHESTRATED THE CORRUPTION! 

5. This judge was disrespectful, falsified facts to help the plaintiff - and even when it was so obvious that the plaintiff's small claim had no merit, he still helped the plaintiff.  THAT IS FRAUDULENT, ILLEGAL.  

CANON 1:  A Judge shall uphold and promote the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the Judiciary, and shall avoid impropiety and the appearance of impropriety 

The transcript will easily prove this complaint.  The documents on the case speak for themselves.  Plaintiff showed no diligence or competency.  Neither issue mattered.  All that mattered was going after a TARGETED PERSON, THE DEFENDANT-COMPLAINANT.  

6. If a case has no foundation for argument, it has to be thrown out and defaulted to the defendant if a counterclaim has been entered!  The plaintiff was reliant on the judge CONSPIRING.  

7. THIS COMPLAINT HAD TO BE REWRITTEN DUE TO MANY DOCUMENTS TAKEN OUT OF MY APARTMENT, DESPITE HIDING THEM.   I HAD TO LEAVE FOR ABOUT AN HOUR TO RUN ERRANDS.  The landlord where I live enjoys using their "security" system as a spy system to enable them to illegally enter my apartment when they want to take something,vandalize, and more.  

8. MAIL FRAUD - Illegally mailed the service process from a company not registered in Connecticut, from an out of state Address:  Kellerman Investigations, near Chicago, Illinois.  THE PRIORITY ENVELOPE WAS PUT IN MY MAIL BOX - not by the mailman, but someone else who helped Stillman Law Office.  Obviously done by the owner of the apartment building of defendant-complainant.

a. Note, there are several other cases which STILLMAN LAW OFFICE has done similar things to people, with no proof delivery.  Their affidavit is only proof how much they lie.  There was no printed delivery confirmation, no printed USPS tracking information on any of these cases.  Because defendant's apartment complex has videos everywhere,  it could be proven that the Priority Mail was not delivered.  Most likely they had someone dress as a USPS mailclerk and took it to the concierge, and the landlord had it placed in defendant's mailbox for aforesaid matter.  In the case of other circumstances, for those places which did not have videos, the Priority Mail was most likely never even delivered.  There is no tracking information for the cases involving Kellerman Investigations in Illinois which defendant had happened to find!   Nevertheless, THE SERVICE IS ILLEGAL EVEN IF IT WAS PROVEN TO BE DELIVERED.  IT IS AGAINST THE RULES OF COURT, THE CONNECTICUT STATUTES. SERVICE HAS TO BE MADE FROM A PLAINTIFF WITH JURISDICTION.  IT WAS NEITHER MADE BY THE PLAINTIFF NOR MADE BY A PARTY WITH JURISDICTION!  

9. Canon 3: A judge may conduct his personal and extrajudicial activities, EXCEPT AS PROHIBITED BY LAW. 

 REQUEST TO INVESTIGATE.  It is easily known that another Judge on this aforesaid case not only nefariously has TWO juris numbers but also PRACTICES LAW - both of which are outright illegal yet RIGHT IN PLAIN SIGHT.  Judge Kamp had a responsibility to REPORT the illegal activities of that judge, who also ruled on motions on aforesaid case; yet ignored it.  Maybe he practices law as well!  Nevertheless, he should not have an inactive Juris Number since he is an attorney and obligated to the oath he made to the BAR Association.  Rule 8.3 

10. Canon 4.  A judge shall not engage in political or campaign activity  that is inconsistent with the Independence, integrity, or impartiality of the judiciary.  

I would like to emphasize:  THIS INTEGRITY, IMPARTIALITY, AND ADHERENCE TO LAWS OF THE JUDICIARY IS NOT UPHELD OFTENTIMES AND THIS STATE JUST PLAYS A GAME OF "CATCH ME IF YOU CAN" - RELAYING ON EVEN THE US SUPREME COURT TO COVER FOR THEM, WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN AS A MATTER OF PRACTICE OUTSIDE OF THE LAW.  THAT MEANS THEY BREAK THE LAWS AND GET AWAY WITH IT.  AND THEREFORE THIS JUDGE WILL ARGUE A "If I'm going down, so are the rest of you" and therefore, no action will be taken, I expect!  

11. Plaintiff used illegal witness who was obviously an attorney and hid her title from the court, yet said she was "me" and that she REPRESENTED LVNV.  Defendant-complainant requested to know her name and JUDGE KAMP COVERED IT UP! 

=============================================================

4. Additional Information

(a) When and where did the alleged judicial misconduct occur? 

First Misconduct:  FRAUDULENT PROCESSING OF THE SMALL CLAIM.  The court should have taken it off the docket.  Christopher Moylan's address is right near the Wethersfield Court Operations, which manages the small claims for the state of Connecticut.  Their attorney is a fraud.  She blocked my approved, registered e-filing as I was trying to upload my first document.  She made up a rule telling me I had to go to their office with my license to prove my identification - THAT WAS A FRAUDULENT RULE SHE MADE UP and thus showing malicious and vexatious intent!  

Hearing took place May 20, 2021. The judge deliberately delayed this hearing to last so he could rush it along, claiming it was the end of the day.  This was a remote hearing by phone for the defendant yet it was obvious the judge nefariously had a video hearing with the defendants or communicated secretly through email - since IMPARTIALITY was out of the question for this court! 

Note!  As already stated in the enclosed copy of the letter to Judge Patrick Carroll III, NINE days after this hearing, defendant's niece's home was destroyed by four explosions, her niece's 18 year old daughter and father were killed; and shortly before this her niece's brother's home was destroyed by fire and he was killed by blood poisoning.  (Former FBI Section Chief Ted Gunderson, who also served in New Haven FBI as part of his career, died from blood poisoning - caused by arsenic. I am sure a CIA job and John DeCamp was a CIA man like other politicians who basically are traitors to this country - John DeCamp represented Johnny Gosh in a lawsuit; and $1 million was won on the case and DeCamp REFUSED TO COLLECT FOR JOHNNY GOSH)

(b) CASE NAME AND NUMBER

LVNV FUNDING, LLC ASSIGNEE OF SYNCHRONY BANK

VS

ANNE M. BRADLEY

NNH-CV20-6105010-5

(c) I am making a Pro Se appearance on this complaint, as I did with aforesaid case.

(d) EVIDENCE:  ALL CASE INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTS; AS WELL AS EMPHASIS ON ATTACHED DOCUMENTS TO THIS COMPLAINT:  NOTARIZED TRANSCRIPT, MOTION TO REMOVE AND DISQUALIFY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY; SMALL CLAIM FORMS TO COMPARE (since the plaintiff, as defendant claims, "they pop them out like candy - using the same jargon in Section 11 which is NOT ARGUABLE; and invokes the law on MEDICAL EXPENSES, which should be an AUTOMATIC REASON FOR THE COURT TO DISMISS THE CASE; BUT, as defendant has claimed and proved throughout, the underlying reason has nothing to do with the law, she is a TARGETED PERSON BY MANY CORRUPTED POLITICIANS AND BUREAUCRATS. Other documents may be attached as well.  An Appendix may be created - yet bare in mind, the defendant had to recreate this whole complaint due to documents taken out of her apartment when she had to run an errand that took an hour.  

NOTARY

I declare, under the penalties of perjury, that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the statements made above and on any attached pages are true and correct.  

I have prepared this judicial complaint to the best of my ability. I retyped this JRC form since they provide no template online to complete one.  

Number of pages of this form:  _______

Number of pages with this complaint form:  __________

Signed: ________________________________

Anne M. Bradley 

Subscribed and sorn to before me this   _______ day of _____________________

Month            Year 

___________________________________________

Notary Public

Commissioner of the Superior Court

Or

Justice of the Peace

TO BE MAILED TO 

JUDICIAL REVIEW COUNCIL

505 HUDSON STREET, ROOM 116

HARTFORD, CT 06106

copied revised form:  July 22, 2019 - by Complainant 

 

                                               #SunriseCT

I JUST FINISHED RECREATING MY JUDICIAL COMPLAINT.  It is edited to the best of my ability.  I am anxious to put this whole complaint together, have proper documents notarized/re-notarized since documents are missing, and get it mailed TODAY.  I want to get this behind me.  

One judge who ruled on my pretrial motions has two juris numbers and practices law.  He is obviously a patsy for the politicians.  From the Middle East - so if all else fails, they can blame the Middle East.  It is a Game of Devil's Chessboard.  

      Update:  Looks like the RECORDS FRAUD occurred again, they removed that judge from my case and replaced his name with another judge's name. 

ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS

      1.  LETTER TO JUDGE PATRICK CARROLL III

Anne M. Bradley

PO Box 206514

New Haven, CT 06520

August 4, 2021

Judge Patrick J. Carroll III

Chief Court Administrator

Supreme Court Building

231 Capitol Avenue

Hartford, CT 06106

Dear Hon. Carroll,

Re:  Case No. NNH-CV-20-6105010-S

Due Process and administration of justice are never experienced by me in the court system.  

I have been targeted by the courts ever since I was illicitly arrested on June 6, 2016 at the University of New Haven - where Mike Lawlor, another political partner in crime - was teaching until the university couldn't get away with it anymore!  To say I am fed up would be an understatement!  I was hired by the IRS, expecting things were finally going my way, and hired Attorney Jerald Barber to represent me so I could continue with my job.  Particularly since Jerald Barber insisted the case had no merit.  I was falsely arrested and he would sue the police department as well - all deliberately calculated lies to steal my $2300 which he required as a retainer - the only money I had in my savings - how deliberately convenient to come up with such an odd amount to require a retainer on, particularly since he claimed a motion to dismiss was all that was needed.  There was no probable cause.  Most likely Prosecutor Mark Hurley and other organized crime collaborators paid off Barber.  I removed him from the case after the first hearing he attended. There was no Motion for Dismissal as he promised. There was NOTHING he entered but his appearance, which equated to no more than urinating on a fire hydrant!  

A current, aforesaid, FRAUDULENT COLLECTION case against me is now in progress yet despite all the obvious ILLEGALITIES, including the nefarious handling by the New Haven Superior Court of this case, a hearing was still docketed!  The Connecticut attorney entered himself as Pro Hac Vice.  The plaintiff address was nefariously entered as a PO Box, which is also against court rules - they have to enter a physical address.  The plaintiff had no jurisdiction.  The plaintiff attorney was so incompetent, most likely a failed transhuman project since he claimed to be on the Honor Society at Quinnipiac yet cannot even write a motion or respond to allegations I made in my pleadings or in court.  The judge conspired rather than do his job - acting as a prosecutor for the incompetent plaintiff, to "hold his pants up" even though he could not even create a sufficient Motion To Dismiss.  A 12-year old would have done a better job!  

To say I am fed up would be an understatement!  Your courts fail to assure accountability and most likely target the innocent as a matter of practice, rather than just administer the law!  

Transcript of the Small Claim Hearing is attached.

May 20, 2021

A female attorney said she was "me" at 4min 36 seconds on my recorded version, that she represented LVNV on the case against Anne Bradley.  Thanks to Aritificial Intelligence, programmed by technocratic crooks, that was altered to reflect this female attorney representd one LVNV case with no case name.  I contested lack of appearance and transparency at 4 min 36 seconds, saying "Oh, that's great. I don't know who "me" is.  The judge said to me, "Don't talk".  There was no response to me regarding the identification of this female, nor was there ever a cure! 

A hearing is structured to identify the names of those who appear.  Yet this court never abides by its obligations, as has been my experience.  Nor are they held accountable!  

Red flags should go up, but no, this state's judicial system only helps the criminals such as Lawrence Mark Hurley, who was arrested on over 180 counts of EMBEZZLEMENT from not only the courthouse but the prosecutors union.  Hurley needed time to devise a reason once he knew that he was stuck in a bed of TRUTH. So he said he had a gambling problem.  Did anyone investigate whether he really did?  Of course not!  They could have investigated his activity, his payments, his purchases, and so forth.  No, they did not!  He created FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTS USING PURCHASED CARDS which he added more money to - yet no one cared!  Did the Dowe-Frank Act also protect him from this, since that act was unconstitutional on its face yet served the self-serving politicians in Washington?  One of the writers of that Act was from Connecticut!  

LVNV vs FIDNGO - no one responded when the judge called that case out, which should have been called out by the clerk WITH at least the case number.  

Thereafter, the male attorney who failed to identify himself said at 5 min 59 seconds, "I'm here to represent the LVNV cases, Your Honor.  I JUST WALKED IN.  He walked in the same room as the female attorney who said she was "me" and said she was representing LVNV!  Why were they in the same room, where were they, and could the judge have been holding a partial video hearing, which would be NEFARIOUS for logical reasons?  

Therefore, this attorney, who I discovered was Attorney Bardos, through no help of his own in disclosing, was in the same location at attorney "me".  

Cases they said were marked for this recording were:

Pascarelli

FIDNGO

Coleman

Bradley

(inaudible)..."I have LVNV vs "Platt" .  The "Attorney Me" says "We have an agreement" at 6:07

Then he says, "LVNV Funding vs Awandas" which is not even listed also.  Granted was for the plaintiff, $1,223.13 with payments of $70/month. Defendant, who may have been the voice of  "Attorney Me" then said she made 2 payments.  "Attorney Me" said she didn't have the debit card payment...Thg judge then referred to this case as "Wanda Sweet" 

Most likely the case was fake and may have been a means to launder crime money through the court!

LVNV vs FINGO (as pronounced and spelled) 8:56 min.  Now he spells it differently.  Attorney Bardos said there was a problem serving that address - not saying the service process was returned to validate what he was talking about - most likely his "mother bee" in his transhuman beehive was telling him to say that.  He certainly did not know what he was talking about most of the time.  Case was continued.  Look it up.  THERE IS NO CASE WITH THE NAME FINGO, FIDNGO - nothing for search on FID or FIN that would reflect this hearing!  Of course your magic, nefarious AI can take care of that, can't it?  

Nest case:  Portfolio Recovery vs (inaudible, sounds like "Mack") This //was not audible and was continued to 8/26/2021.  Almost 3,000 cases show when I do a search for "mack" in New Haven.  My opinion is, it was made deliberately inaudible by their magic AI.  

At 11:28 min is referenced the Pascarelli case.  THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE. No indication of attempts calling Pascarelli, yet if you call the number, it is not only a working number but identified as Pascarelli, unless the magic of AI alters the voicemail to aid and abet the nefarious court!  Nevertheless, Bardos obviously says what his transhuman handler tells him to say and Judge Kamp goes along with it rather than ask why he doesn't call him even! 

Pascarelli's Answer indicated he was going through CANCER TREATMENT.  Yet Bardos fails to bring that up!  How much of this is FAKE?  Is this case even real?  Are they laundering money that was FRAUDED from the fake SANDY HOOK SHOOTING - which occurred one month after the hurricane they named Hurricane Sandy?  And what does the New Jersey Peninsula have to do with all this nefarious underground activity?  It was named SANDY HOOK.  It was the main portal for ships to enter New York City.  It may also be the main portal, I don't know.  It was renamed HANCOCK apparently.  As a peninsula, it has a LIGHThouse - which must really fascinate the Illuminati sociopaths, who are indeed domestic as well as foreign terrorists, attempting to strangle the world with their idiopathic idealogy, including justifying mass murders, MIND CONTROLLED shooting, and so on!  There is a place in Africa which has monkeys actually going to towns and attacking people, yet show no signs of rabies.  I presume it is a MIND CONTROL experiment which they want to roll out on the public to get people to kill each other.  

Despite not having a hearing and granting a continuance, the court entered $50/month starting July 1 as a decision on the Pascarelli case!  

at 14:20 minutes the case referred to is Scott Sousa vs Guilford Auto...so why does the judge commence the hearing and then interrupts it?  Did they raise a sign on the screen to remind him that Attorney Me and Bardos need to be interjected for nefarious courtplay?  

Judge:  Before we get to this, Mr. Sousa, what are you here on? 

STRATIGICALLY REFERRED TO TO ALTER RECORDS, MIX IT UP.  

Responder is the female, who sounds like "Attorney Me": I am the records custodian for LVNV Funding for the LVNV vs Anne Bradley matter

Anne Bradley (myself) said, "I'm sorry but I didn't catch the attorney's name please? 

Judge did NOT DENY she was an attorney.  He only said, "We'll get to you on that" 

But did he?  only in part!  

Anne Bradley:  I don't recall this as it was stated - said on the recording of the recording because logically I would have asked why he even brought it up on a different hearing.  Were they relying on the orders of AI techs, who wanted to alter the recording a certain way so he "needed" to 

bring that up then?

This case dragged on for a half hour so they could use lapse of time as an excuse when they got to my case.  Was it disposed of even?  Of course not!  Look it up!

And I made a comment at 25 minutes.  

At approximately 29 minutes they finally get to my hearing, LVNV Funding Assignee of Synchrony Bank vs Anne Bradley

It is really odd and strategic that they add the "assignee of Synchrony Bank" when no other case is like that!  Check it out for yourself. They obviously use these tactics as secret codes.  What they mean is unknown to me. I can only speculate.  

The woman's voice in the prior case, as "me", attorney for LVNV, is the same as Victoria Mason, who fails to mention where she works.  Upon my own discovery, she apparently is located in South Carolina and Pamela Johnson, AN ATTORNEY WHO FAILS TO IDENTIFY HERSELF AS AN ATTORNEY WHEN SIGNING LEGAL DOCUMENTS, gets a notary in Greenville, SC to sign documents.  I looked up the info on the notary who signed her document which they claimed was WHY I owed money to LVNV Funding.  Her affidavit was signed by a hotel employee who happened to have a notary certification, who accused her husband of assault with no proof, who divorced her husband and was probably cheating on him at the Indian Reservation.  This notary was listed as INACTIVE when I looked her up!  Yet once again, the court could care less about validating anything!  The notary at the New Haven Courthouse now tells me, Anne Bradley, that he REFUSES TO NOTARIZE ANY OF MY DOCUMENTS. As a paid state employee, he was obviously told to tell me that by his superiors, which is ILLEGAL.  This took place after I complimented him for catching the fact I accidently completed a fee waiver for family court, rather than a civil case matter. I searched it the same way and did not realize it was a different form.  Had he notarized it, it would have been an opportunity for these proven administrators to FRAUD RECORDS, allude I had a family matter, etc. etc. as a means of distraction.  

Yeah, I know all about distractions!  An attorney who represented me on 2 personal injury lawsuits falsified records using the medical records of a different Anne Bradley, who worked for General Electric in Plainville.  I was hired as a temp there and had the opportunity to contact her when I realized she was a listed employee as I was seeking emails to send to specific employees at GE.  I told her they were using HER medical records on my case and I fired the attorneys, "Rome And Katz" Law Office, which I joked were like "roaming cats with Alzheimers".  My cat was poisoned and killed by an intruder who dumpeed my nail polish remover down her throat!  Most likely more!  At least half of my bottle of nail polish was gone.  It was most likely done by the animal control officer, cosnpiring with a lieutenant who was put on the maximum length of administrative leave without pay for abuse to me.  I knew there was no sense in trying to sue that firm because I could not find a decent attorney for anything I was a victim of.  I settled out of court on the two personal injuries, involving the daughter of the Chief of Police in Berlin, CT - right down the road from where I had my postal box.  And also involving an employee who was on the job, which originally I retained Attorney Paul Levin to represent me on (and he failed to bring a lawsuit up against the company also since he was on the job and also treated me abusively as I was in his office suffering from a concussion, with a large black and blue mark on my forehead.  I had to continue to work because the my car insurance could no longer discuss my rights since Paul Levin intercepted and made backdoor deals with the medical company....and later, I was illicitly arrested for Reckless Endangermant, a misdemeanor, the Milford Judge Karen Sequino nefariously marked the case for TRIAL BY JURY to scare me and I said repeatedly I wanted trial but refused to plea because there was no probable cause, no Long Form Information.  TWO YEARS LATER, ONE YEAR PAST THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, AND AFTER LAWRENCE MARK HURLEY IS ARRESTED ON 180 COUNTS OF EMBEZZELEMENT (which the superior court judges covered up as one count larceny and one count forgery, when they knew damn well he altered court documents the same way with his nifty ink=erasing formula which he always kept on hand and probably still does since they still allow him to work in law practice and he is now working near his colleague Kevin Russo, who was rewarded with this judicial assignment for nefariously prosecuting the case against me, which was ONE YEAR PAST THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS - but never fear, Attorney General RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, who I mistakjngly wrote to to get my rights since the case had no merit and was past the statute of limitations, instead conspired with them to add more charges to my case, breaking the law right in plain sight! And even when I was acquitted Judge Levin, father of Attorney Paul Levin, allowed an appeal - foregoing the "One Bite Of The Apple" Law which is part of Due Process and a Constitutional right! I'm sure these people are all your friends and it doesn't matter what I say.  To hell with me.  Keep me as a targeted person because HATE makes GREAT.  That is what the Muslim Community in the Middle East, particularly Iran, has observed as the behavior of American Law and Politics.  THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS.  Mass murder thousands of people and blame another country!  I know of some of those circumstances:  Spanish flu (the bioweapon was created in South Carolina),  WW2 (USA protecting the NAZIs and inciting war with Japan, which never would have ordered their comma kazi pilots to bomb Paris Island had it not been for MORSE CODE MANIPULATIONS, and Titanic was sunk by Bruce Ismay and JP Morgan who hired conspirators to include the Irish engineers who took a bolt out of Boiler Room 6 and more, to cause it to combust and explode when they were told by Captain Smith to maximize the coal feeding to power up the enginines so they could turn the ship away from the iceberg rather than reduce speed and just bump the iceberg IF ONE EVEN WAS IN THEIR PATH, which I don't believe there was!  The stories conflict and some include blaming black ice, yet the ship was built with a cutter in the front to remove black ice!  This ship was so mammoth that in no way would lives have been lost if it had bumped into an iceberg.  The Carpathia was 5 miles away and could have easily picked up their signal, yet conveniently said the morse code operator was sleeping, and he was their only operator, they did not have 24 hr watch operators which compromised the safety of their own passengers yet conveniently helped the plans of Bruce Ismay and JP Morgan.  One of them was owner of the White Star Line, which included the Carpathia AND Titanic!  The USA was funding the NAZIs and wanted to use Japan as a distraction for a WW2.  And that they did!  Japan sentenced its emporer to death for taking part in the the -USA-planned escapade.  As a backdoor "reward" the USA got Japan to develop its own Central Bank system and Japan became No. 2 World Economic leader, second to USA, from juggling numberes, recycling the same dollar to inflate its value!  September 11 was another mass murder caused by Americans, blaming the Middle East to incite war with the Middle East.  That little plan went amuck whil Colin Powell was Secretary of State, for he obviously would not agree to it and may have even realized the GW Bush, Dick Cheney, Hillary Clinton and John McCain were planning this - along with an entourage of about 125 people, including the one who was making all the secret purchases from the agency which was created during the Jimmy Carter Administration, the Senior Executive Service was not accountable to anyone!  How they convinced President Carter of this is unknown to me.  He may have been convinced that they WERE accountable to Congress and Senate and revoked it after he served as President.  They used Jimmy Carter as an image so they could put their wheels in motion to destroy the USA, by taking it over.  Plan after plan has failed yet they keep trying and crippling this country AND NO ONE HOLDS THESE EVIL ORGANIZED CRIMINALS WHO ARE OFTEN EMPLOYED BY THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE ENOUGH TO ERADICATE THEIR ORGANIZED CRIME!  That includes the failure of the US Supreme Court to do its job, yet they invested time to proselytize peadophilia!  I submitted a petition to remove every one of them in the US Supreme Court for doing so! The word peadophile was CRAFTED BY USA.  They used two Greek words, Peado (which means child) and Phileos (which means love) as a cover up of their child-trafficking!  Even molesting children right at the White House!  White House rhymes with Light House, which is another reason I suspect they will use lighthouses and the Coast Guard and whoever else they can muster to create a takedown of the US Government becuase "Yes We can!"  ideology, chanted by CIA man himself, Barack Obama, whose student ID's at Occidental College and even Columbia University were marked as FOREIGN.  Frankly, I believe Obama was the real son of Malcolm X since Ann Dunham arrived late at the Hawain university because she wanted to see Malcolm X at the United Nations.  Malcolm X started rolling out his sex cult ideology, which Jeffrey Epstein took to a higher level - to impregnate as many woman as he can to get them to follow his ideopathic, sociopathic ideology!  

Yes, I am fed up with the corruption and how can people stand for all this?  the Cornavirus was created in South Carolina and taken to Wuhan because Olympians were there and they were attracting a lot of people and it was opportunity to mass murder at least millions and blame China.  IT BACKFIRED, OBVIOUSLY AND  WAS REPLACED WITH THE CORONAVIRUS GERMS.  That is on the back of over the counter cold medicine but Bill Gates and his minions figured that they could rely on their magic Artificial Intelligence PROGRAMMED BY MAN, computer to devise a way out of it.  They then created a test kit that was fake which served two purposes:  1) kill people, 2) nefariously test people positive for Cornavirus, which is the flu 3) but change Coronavirus to COVID-19, WHICH HAS NO SCIENTIFIC VALUE BUT IS A PSY OP TO FREAK PEOPLE OUT EVEN THOUGH IT IS ILLEGAL TO CHANGE THE NAME OF PATENTED germ/bioweapon - whatever the scientific term is.  The book OVID was written in the 13th century and translated and distributed in USA, used to promote cults, barbaric type thinking, and more!  19 represents the fact 19 years prior to this fake Quaranting 2020 was September 11 mass murder!  

And what about Paradise, CA?  Burned to shambles by obvious laser weapons - which Donald Trump got the Pentagon to secretly purchase 5 months before he had Paradise attacked and tried to call it a CAMPFIRE.  When he realized that was not successful, he then BLAMED CHINA for transporting lasers to the USA!  This sociopathic foreign relations is backfiring indeed and the USA will implode on itself unless we hold this organized crime accountable!  

It is a TANGLED WEB, indeed and affects every one of us due to the wide-range of econonic harm and the rich who are getting richer are oftentimes the corrupted underworld run by organized crime!  

That is why I bring it up now in this letter.  

Referring back to this recording of May 20, a woman's voice in the prior case, who referred to herself as "Me" now says she is Victoria Mason.  The judge continued that prior case involving Scott Sousa vs the auto repair shop, which implied or outright stated for no longer a month from then.  Yet upon looking at this case, there is nothing on record for May 20 hearing and on May 21 a continuance was crafted - and today it is continued to August 5, 2021.  

At 29:23 minutes my hearing began, which I am providing a transcipt of, made by me, based on my recording of it.  It is enxlosed with this letter.  

One more thing I would like to point out which is significant to this nefarious, satanic behavior, which forner FBI Section Chief Dr. Ted Gunderson, claimed to be the SATANIC UNDERGROUND - is the fact that the University of New Haven rewarded an obviously-lying homeless woman to accuse William Dong of pointing his gun at her as she walked down the street in front of the University of New Haven, I went to as many hearings as I could since William's parents were owners of a successful Chinese Restaurant chain in New York City and spoke broken English since they had authentic Chinese cooks for their restaurants for customers to enjoy.  William pleaded NOT GUILTY, which pissed off his own defense attorney, who was ripping off his parents with heaped up charges and failing to do his job as a defense attorney!  I asked that first attorney one question:  "Why do you think it is okay for the University of New Haven to reward $23,000 to this homeless woman for just saying "William Dong pointed his gun at me" when she didn't know William was a student at the university yet went to the university police rather than call 911 - and she claimed in her testimony and probably her letter of complaint that he was in the parking lot of the supermarket across the street - so how the hell would she know he was a student there?"  That defense attorney said their crafted answer in circumstances like that, because they can further use it to deceive on record, "It's none of my business"  I said, "Of course it's your business!"  Yet he can say later that it was none of MY business, I'm sure!  William Dong was NOT GUILTY yet they violated the Double Jeopardy rules and also charged him for the same damn thing in federal court, with a lame federal judge staiing on record that "It is highly unusual for us to prosecute someone for the same thing as in superior court"  

It was more than "highly unusual" - it was a CRIME!  Forcing an honest, hard working young man in prison for a full year is a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY.  And these courts do this repetively, holding cases nefariously rather than abiding  by their own laws.  There are so many crooked attorneys, they all conspire and help each other and follow a Devil's Chessboard of tricks to serve THE ENDS JUSTIFIES THE MEANS agendas!  Raymond Clark did not kill his friend and co-worker Annie Le!  The court made the hearings closed to further manipulate what was going on, only allowing her mother, who could only speak Vietnamese and had no knowledge of the law!  She was made to believe Raymond did it no matter how botched up the crooked local police were in handling the investigation!  Leaving the science lab building open, claiming they could not find her yet voila, she is chopped up inside a maintenance tool box which they never opened for five days - yet get lying mainstream media to say they found her inside a wall as if this new buildings wall was smashed in - all by one person, Raymond Clark, who was never arrested before and had a masters degree from Yale University and may have been pursuing a doctorate degree.  THIS IS ANOTHER CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY.  The real murderers are at large and obviously enjoyed draining her blood for adrenachrome since she was going to be married the next day. Raymond Clark was invited and Annie Le was also invited to his wedding, which was scheduled for when Annie Le returned from her honeymoon!  THIS BARBARISM HAS TO STOP.  RAYMOND CLARK HAS BEEN ILLICITLY FORCED IN PRISON AND WHEN I SENT A LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT OF YALE UNIVERSITY, THEY took my letters which I sent to Raymond and had them mailed back to me and may have even punished this young man who I did not even know.  The fact he was engaged to a Russian woman was a strategic move to somehow BLAME RUSSIA, as they did with the Petit murders in Cheshire, CT - the mother who had MS (which could have been induced on her by a sociopathic medical person) and her daughters were all burned to death while alive!  They were tortured, including raped also!  I went to both trials, which should have been held as ONE TRIAL.  Both Joshua Komisarjevsky, an American who was adopted by well-meaning Russians, and his conspirator Steven Hayes - were taught the business of criminal activity, etc - who confidently enjoyed their being at the hearings, since they obviously knew the attorneys involved with organized crime would get them off.  

This concludes my letter reflecting the criminal activity in the court system of Connecticut.  I could even say much more, to include illegal evictions against me and even when I submitted an Emergency Motion into the US Supreme Court, Ruth Ginsberg REFUSED to rule on it.  I called and called.  They had the motion. They would do nothing. The waited for a marshal to smash in my door and turn off my ADT system with a code (which meant he could burglarize any home which had an ADT system!) to keep the police from coming out despite the fact the alarm signal WAS sent to police and police never even called me - and why?  I AM A TARGETED PERSON FOR DESPISING ORGANIZED CRIME WHICH HAS RUINED MY LIFE DREAMS, MY LEGAL RIGHTS, AND NEARLY KILLED ME AS A VICTIM OF ATTEMPTED MURDER.  

Sincerely,

FOR THE DEFENDANT, PRO SE

___________________

Anne M. Bradley 

       2.    COMPLAINANT'S AFFIDAVITS 

Case No. NNH-CV-20-6105010-S : State of Connecticut

LVNV Funding, LLC : Superior Court

Vs : Court of New Haven

Anne M. Bradley : AUGUST 19, 2021

DEFENDANT'S 

AFFIDAVIT 

With a few Interrogatories

THE CASE HAS NO FOUNDATION!

 IT IS ILLEGALLY ADJUDICATED

NO ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

 IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT 

 MOTION TO OPEN

JUDICIAL COMPLAINT 

 1. Illegally-prepared Small Claim Form - should have been rejected by the court!

2. Affidavit of Debt is FRAUDULENT, no court should have allowed it as "proof"/probable cause, without any purchase/payment history!

3. IMPROPER SERVICE BY PLAINTIFF

It is illegal for a company not registered in Connecticut, not made party to this case, to mail service to the defendant in Connecticut. 

4. MAIL FRAUD

In fact, the Priority Mail was not even mailed through the USPS.  Plaintiff purchased a Priority Mail label WITHOUT any mailing information.  That is what the tracking information determined.  Defendant has submitted all this in court in the Appendix with her ANSWER AND SPECIAL DEFENSES

5. RECORDS FRAUD BY THE COURT

a. There was no AMENDED ANSWER AND SPECIAL DEFENSES; THERE WAS ONLY AN ORIGINAL!  THE  COURT DID THIS TO EVADE FROM JUSTICE, to use as excuse for not viewing the 300+ page Appendix!  There was no remedy even when defendant submitted a Motion to Correct Record!  It was also not heard!  

-ANSWER AND SPECIAL DEFENSES WAS DUE EVEN THOUGH IT WAS TIMELY SUBMITTED AND CERTAINLY REFLECTED ON THE HARM CAUSED TO DEFENDANT BY HAVING ONLY THREE DAYS TO COMPLETE IT!  THEY WOULD NOT MODIFY THE DUE DATE WHEN DEFENDANT CALLED THE DAY IT WAS IN HER MAIL.  

 

6. Judge Kamp is INACTIVE as an attorney in Juris lookup.  Whereas, Judge N Nawaz Wahla is ACTIVE.  A judge cannot be an inactive attorney because only attorneys can be judges!  

a. Case No. NNH-CV-20-6108234-S was found during researching for this aforesaid case.  Synopsis.  Plaintiff sued defendant for contract violations.  Defendant did NOT enter a timely Answer and Special Defense, which was even extended to January 4, 2021.  Plaintiff entered Motion for Default for Failure to Plead. IT WAS NOT OBJECTED.  Defendant entered Answer THEREAFTER, on 2/4/2021.  There was no application of the law on this issue.  My conclusion:  backdoor deals.  

b. Judge Wahla is not only an ACTIVE attorney but has a practice 

M NAWAZ WAHLA

(Admitted:05/20/1999)

Current Status: Active

THE LAW FIRM OF

WAHLA & ASSOCIATES PC

429 CAPITOL AVE.

HARTFORD, CT 06106

7. Defendant could not transfer to Regular Docket because the court did not issued ANSWER DATE three days fron delivery of the Small Clai AND REFUSED TO CHANGE THE DATE.  PB Sec 24-21. Defendant claimed that transfer to regular docket should be a matter of right. 

8. Plaintiff's expert witness said her name was Victoria Mason, yet most likely was the alleged attorney who said she was "me" in the same room as Attorney Bardos, unknown location.  Bardos actually entered the room saying he forgot about the hearing or something like that.  

a.  Mason, who is obviously an attorney 

9. MODUS OPERANDI.  Upon researching cases before and after this aforesaid case, I, the defendant discovered repeated offenses of fraud, illegal appearance, lack of DUE PROCESS OF THE LAW, and judicial conspiring with plaintiff.  Due to constant nefarious abuses on my computer, scanner, and printer, I can only list a few to validate.  Additionally, I believe that some of the plaintiffs in cases - possibly many - are fake and this is an opportunity to launder money and conduct other criminal activity.  

a. David Pascarelli Case, which was also covered on May 20 by Judge Kamp.  At the hearing, he told the plaintiff to just mail a notice to this person again, though there was no mention of  ruling in defendant's favor, as the case showed right afterward!  Why would a judge tell the attorney to do such a simple task?  Why didn't the judge ask for proof that the mail was not received?  Attorney Bardos did not even state that the mail was returned.  He just said he was having a problem mailing him a notice, mentioned no effort calling him.  Anything Bardos did was like he was a robot who couldn't think for himself.  Judge Kamp's ruling makes no sense at all yet this is not the only case!    

b. Literally every case brought up had deliberate, fraudulent actions take place in some manner.

c. Numerous cases on the docket have no basis for argument!  As defendant had relayed throughout, the plaintiff "pops these small claims out like candy"  - they use the same jargon in Section 11 - that is no basis for argument!  That section is supposed to be case-specific!  It is notarized for a reason!  And no attorney who uses a Pro Hac Vice Appearance can sign as a Commissioner of the Court!  Yet Bardos has done this repeatedly!  Defendant wanted to produce copies of these cases and through pen markings specify.  Yet her scanner is inoperable and she is struggling with an illness which creates more discomfort.  

10. This affidavit is being signed without a notary in order to get it mailed with the complaint today, August 18, 2021.  A modified one may be submitted forthwith if necessary.  Other documents, including the complaint have been notarized.  

11. Defendant emphasizes, this case was not heard.  The documents had to be submitted repeatedly because the court plays a "catch me if you can" dynamic; ignoring what was submitted before.  Additionally, to point out, THERE WAS NO AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM.  There was a supplement only.  The court altered the records on this case - no doubt that is why they nefariously blocked defendant's efiling, even though she was properly registered and uploaded her document, yet the Wethersfield Office abused power and blocked it from being entered on the docket.  They take more care about corrupting cases than they do managing them.  

12. Why is it that corruption exists and they do it so commonplace as if the law doesn't exist?  LVNV  Cases are repeatedly described as MEDICAL EXPENSES DUE yet they are CitiBank and others who are claiming that defendant's owe.  They have used Kellerman Investigations, located in Chicago (not registered in Connecticut, not a party to the case) as the return address - yet there is never any tracking information on these so-called mailings and the judge cares nothing about validating anything!  He just rules in their favor! How much money does he get behind closed doors for that constant corruption? Will they now backdate records and sneak them in as if they existed all along - like they do frequently now? 

a. Why is it that I filed a supplement to the Answer and Special Defenses on August 7, 2020 - yet the court did not file it?  This document was reprinted and included in Section 3 and as a reminder I, the defendant, filed copies in the Appendix to the Answer and Special Defenses/Counterclaim to make sure everything was part of the file since this courthouse has a habit of nefarious selectivity when it comes to uploading files.  That activity is something they enjoy, which is why they enjoyed the Wethersfield Office blocking my REGISTERED efiling, nefariously telling me I had to bring my drivers license ID to their office, making up protocol off the seat of their pants to humor themselves and have control over what and when I submit documents for filing.  Why is that they get away with this activity on a continuous basis? 

13. Cases are not audited as they are supposed to be yet they obviously pay auditors anyway.    

14. This affidavit was prepared by me, the defendant on this case. 

Prepared and Submitted,

______________________

Anne M. Bradley 

Case No. NNH-CV-20-6105010-S : State of Connecticut

LVNV Funding, LLC : Superior Court

Vs : Court of New Haven

Anne M. Bradley : June 12, 2021

Submitting for Judicial Complaint 8/17/2021

DEFENDANT'S AFFIDAVIT - MOTION TO OPEN  5/21/2021

1. My name is Anne M. Bradley and I am defendant on aforesaid case. 

a. THERE IS ONLY ONE MOTION TO OPEN. The clerk refused to apply my fee waiver to the replacement of this same motion.  The first fee waiver.should have been voided. But they didn't and are processing both, which is wrongful. They took Page 7 out of my Appendix and CREATED a fraudulent AMENDED Answer & Counterclaim IN FILE NO 103, which should only be an AMENDED TIMELINE. 

b. I  placed my MOTION TO OPEN in the document door slot of the clerk's office on May 21, 2021,  On May 24, Monday, I returned to the court with a proper fee waiver to replace the other one.  The clerk allowed me to replace the prior fee waiver I submitted on May 21. I said she would be updating the motion as well, but to "please take this one to show my efforts in getting my rights, since I have already served it on the plaintiff." The replacement was promptly submitted after being served on the defendant.

c.The Motion To Open was CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY and since it was not scanned into court, I, the defendant requested to withdraw or replace it; yet they refused and also requested a separate fee waiver even though it was for the same motion. 

d. I, the Defendant,  was told by the clerk's office on June 8 that BOTH motions would be marked for a hearing.  I said that was ridiculous, that there was only one motion and the court should have replaced it.  The plaintiff was served both copies.  The call was useless, having contended with someone who was obviously told what to say rather than adhere to the law. Number of business days since serving and filing: 14, 

e. Plaintiff has not motioned for Extension of Time to submit its objection. It has not objected to any of my pleadings and illegally submitted its Answer to Counterclaim several months past the 45 day limit according to Rules of Court. 

2. I have repeatedly claimed this case is solely an action of fraud, that it even had no merit to be docketed.  I REPEATEDLY CLAIMED THAT MY COUNTERCLAIM IS MORE THAN VALID AND I SHOULD WIN THE COUNTERCLAIM, DESERVING TO BE COMPENSATED FOR FIGHTING THIS CORRUPTION.  My affidavit of May 21, 2021 emphasizes this.  The hearing was on May 20, 2021.  It was badly litigated by a court which only cared about helping the plaintiff, who prepared this case to serve the wants of Donald Trump, et al - since I am a targeted person and Trump resented my publically claiming he murdered General Soleimani, he murdered many in Paradise, CA using the Boeing laser weapons which he purchased 5 months prior to the torching of Paradise, CA. Blackstone Intelligence on YouTube timely-reported that purchase.

3, As an update of this case, the court only covers up the obvious proofs that this case has no merit and I deserve to be fully compensated in my counterclaim, 

The attorneys who appeared at the hearing of  May 20, 2021:

a.  She just said she was "me" and the presider of this hearing, who the court claimed thereafter was "Judge Kamp"  (Appendix Page 1-7; Note, his Juris number is NOT FOUND; dates of orders are frauded on court records)  claimed that she did not need to identify herself, it was not necessary

b. Attorney Bardos - WHO LIVES AND WORKS IN CONNECTICUT, NOT MICHIGAN AND HAS NO MICHIGAN membership of their Bar Association, appeared for the hearing from a separate location (Appendix Page 8-10)

i. I conclude Attorney Bardos is has no competency. For him to attain "Honor Roll" status at Quinnipiac University only reflects one thing:  HE CHEATED ON HIS HOMEWORK AND EXAMS.  Frankly, I consider him to be a complete idiot who can barely write his name.

c. Neither attorney identified where they were located

d. STILLMAN LAW OFFICE IS  NO LONGER REGISTERED IN CONNECTICUT (Appendix Page 11)

i. I conclude that these two attorneys, one which failed to make her appearance and was just there as "me", as well as illegally testifying as an expert witness - had absolutley no legal right to be on this case and their designed plan was with MALICE AND FORETHOUGHT. 

e.  PRO HAC VICE appearance was completely, deliberately illegal.  Not only is it clearly defined in the Black's Law Dictionary, it has been acknowledged as a "one time only" appearance for out of state attorneys who are not registered in Connecticut -

Attorney Bardos was not even registered at a bar of another state, let alone be able to claim he was in good standing.  It is illegal for him to use a Pro Hac Vice appearance.  

As emphasized in documentation as well as at the hearing, the Juris Number was ILLEGITAMATELY ISSUED.  IT IS FRAUDULENTLY USED BY A CONNECTICUT ATTORNEY. 

Sec. 2-16. ATTORNEY APPEARING PRO HAC VICE

An attorney who is in good standing at the bar of another state, the District of Columbia, or the commonwealth of Puerto Rico, may, upon special and infrequent occasion and for good cause shown upon written application presented by a member of the bar of this state, be permitted in the discretion of the court to participate to such extent as the court may prescribe in the presentation of a cause or appeal in any state court or a proceeding before any municipal or state agency, commission, board or tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘proceeding’’) in this state; provided, however, that

(1) such application shall be accompanied by the affidavit of the applicant (a) certifying whether such applicant has a grievance pending against him or her in any other jurisdiction, has ever been reprimanded, suspended, placed on inactive status, disbarred, or otherwise disciplined, or has ever resigned from the practice of law and, if so, setting forth the circumstances concerning such action, (b) certifying that the applicant has paid the client security fund fee due for the calendar year in which the application has been made, 

(c) designating the chief clerk of the superior court for the judicial district in which the attorney will be appearing as his or her agent upon whom process and service of notice may be served, 

(d) agreeing to register with the statewide grievance committee in accordance with the provisions of this chapter while appearing in the matter in this state and for two years after the completion of the matter in which the attorney appeared, and to notify the statewide grievance committee of the expiration of the two year period, (e) identifying the number of times the attorney has appeared pro hac vice in the superior court or in any other proceedings of this state since the attorney first appeared pro hac vice in this state, listing each such case or proceeding by name and docket number, as applicable, and (f) providing any previously assigned juris number and

The applicant has to be accompanied by a member of the bar of this state!  They cannot be a member themselves! Stillman Law Office is no longer registered in Connecticut. (Appendix, Page 12-13)

The applicant has to disclose OTHER PRO HAC VICE APPEARANCES! THEY ARE AN APPLICANT FOR ONE TIME APPEARANCE!  THAT IS WHAT PRO HAC VICE MEANS IN LATIN! (Appendix Page 14-18)

(2) unless excused by the judicial authority, a member of the bar of this state must be present at all proceedings, including depositions in a proceeding, and must sign all pleadings, briefs and other papers filed with the court, local or state administrative agency, commission, board or tribunal, and assume full responsibility for them and for the conduct of the cause or proceeding and of the attorney to whom such privilege is accorded. Any such application shall be made on a form prescribed by the chief court administrator. Where feasible, the application shall be made to the judge before whom such case is likely to be tried. If not feasible, or if no case is pending before the superior court, the application shall be made to the administrative judge in the judicial district where the matter is to be tried or the proceeding is to be conducted. Good cause for according such privilege shall be limited to facts or circumstances affecting the personal or financial welfare of the client and not the attorney. Such facts may include a showing that by reason of a longstanding attorney-client relationship predating the cause of action or subject matter of the litigation at bar, or proceeding, the attorney has acquired a specialized skill or knowledge with respect to the client’s affairs important to the trial of the cause or presentation of the proceeding, or that the litigant is unable to secure the services of Connecticut counsel. Upon the granting of an application to appear pro hac vice, the clerk of the court in which the application is granted shall immediately notify the statewide grievance committee of such action. Any person granted permission to appear in a cause, appeal or proceeding pursuant to this section shall comply with the requirements of Sections 2-68 and 2-70 (Appendix Page 19-20) and shall pay such fee when due as prescribed by those sections for each year such person appears in the matter. If the clerk for the judicial district or appellate court in which the matter is pending is notified that such person has failed to pay the fee as required by this section, the court shall determine after a hearing the appropriate sanction, which may include termination of the privilege of appearing in the cause, appeal or proceeding.

ii. CONNECTICUT LAW REVIEW:  Volume 36, Winter 2004, Number 2:  Connecticut Unauthorized Practice Laws and Some Options For Their Reform  by Quintin Johnstone, who is now deceased, who had serve the Bush Administration and was on a pricing agency attached to FEMA, to dictate/control price gouging.  That agency was removed in a few years at which time pricing escalated grately, and no doubt made the rich-richer, poor-poorer. 

Sec. 2-68. Client Security Fund Established

Note, the following is all that pastes upon copying the online version of 2-68 to 2-70.  MORE TECHNOCRATIC TRICKS WHICH ARE FRAUDULENT, DECEPTIVE, MANIPULATIVE! (Appendix Page 19-20)

a) A client security fund is hereby established

the attorney has been admitted to the bar of this to promote public confidence in the judicial system

and the integrity of the legal profession by reim- state, has registered with the statewide grievance

bursing clients, to the extent provided for by these committee in compliance with Section 2-27 (d),

rules, for losses resulting from the dishonest con- and is not under suspension, on inactive status, duct of attorneys practicing law in this state in the disbarred, or resigned from the bar.

course of the attorney-client relationship and by (P.B. 1978-1997, Sec. 46C.) providing crisis intervention and referral assisSec. 2-66. Practice by Court Officials tance to attorneys admitted to the practice of law

in this state who suffer from alcohol or other sub- (a) No lawyer who is a judge of the supreme stance abuse problems or gambling problems, or court, appellate court or superior court shall prac- who have behavioral health problems. tice law in any state or federal court. (b) It is the obligation of all attorneys admitted

(b) The chief public defender, the deputy chief to the practice of law in this state to participate in

public defender, public defenders, assistant public the collective effort to reimburse clients who have

defenders, deputy assistant public defenders, the lost money or property as the result of the unethichief state’s attorney, the deputy chief state’s cal and dishonest conduct of other attorneys and

attorney, state’s attorneys, assistant state’s attor- to provide crisis intervention and referral assisneys and deputy assistant state’s attorneys who tance to attorneys admitted to the practice of law

have been appointed on a full-time basis will in this state who suffer from alcohol or other subdevote their full time to the duties of their offices, stance abuse problems or gambling problems, or

will not engage in the private practice of law, either who have behavioral health problems.

civil or criminal, and will not be connected in any (c) The client security fund is provided as a

way with any attorney or law firm engaged in the public service to persons using the legal services

private practice of law. of attorneys practicing in this state and as a means

of providing crisis intervention and referral assis- (c) No state’s attorney or assistant state’s attortance to impaired attorneys. All moneys and ney, no partner or associate of a law firm of which

assets of the fund shall constitute a trust. any of the aforementioned court officials is a part- (d) The establishment, administration and oper- ner or associate, shall appear as counsel in any ation of the fund shall not impose or create any criminal case in behalf of any accused in any state obligation, expectation of recovery from or liability or federal court. of the fund to any claimant or attorney, and all (d) No chief clerk, deputy chief clerk, clerk, dep- reimbursements therefrom shall be a matter of

uty clerk or assistant clerk who has been grace and not of right.

appointed on a full-time basis shall appear as (Adopted June 29, 1998, to take effect Jan. 1, 1999;

counsel in any civil or criminal case in any state amended May 3, 2005, to take effect May 17, 2005.)

or federal court. Such persons may otherwise Sec. 2-68A. —Crisis Intervention and Referengage in the practice of law as permitted by ral Assistance

established judicial branch policy. (a) The chief court administrator may enter into (e) No chief public defender, deputy chief public any contracts and take such other action as may

defender, public defender, assistant public be reasonably necessary to provide for crisis interdefender or deputy assistant public defender shall vention and referral assistance to attorneys admitappear in behalf of the state in any criminal case. ted to the practice of law in this state who suffer

(P.B. 1978-1997, Sec. 47.) from alcohol or other substance abuse problems

or gambling problems, or who have behavioral Sec. 2-67. Payment of Attorneys by Bank health problems. and Trust Companies (b) The crisis intervention and referral assis-

(a) No attorney shall directly or indirectly receive tance shall be provided with the assistance of an

payment from any bank or trust company for legal advisory committee appointed by the chief court

services rendered to others in the preparation of administrator that shall include one or more

wills, codicils or drafts of such behavioral health professionals. instruments or for

(Adopted May 3, 2005, to take effect May 17, 2005.) advising others as to legal rights under existing

or proposed instruments of that character. Sec. 2-69. —Definition of Dishonest

(b) The violation of this section by an attorney Conduct

may be cause for grievance proceedings. (a) As used in Sections 2-68 through 2-81, inclu-

(P.B. 1978-1997, Sec. 48.) sive, ‘‘dishonest conduct’’ means wrongful acts

127

 -----WHICH IS OMITTED WHEN THE SECTION IS COPIED TO PASTE! THUS REFLECTING MORE ABUSE OF PROCEDURE, USING TECHNOCRATIC TRICKS AS AN ASSIST TO FRAUD, DEPRIVE RIGHTS. 

ATTACHED IS THE PRINTOUT OF SECTIONS 2-68 AND 2-70  (Appendix Page 19-20) THEY ARE NOT EVEN LISTED IN THE JUDICIAL BRANCH WEBSITE YET ARE ALLUDED TO BEING SIGNIFICANT IN QUALIFYING FOR PRO HAC VICE APPEARANCE. THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH QUALIFYING! IT IS JUST THE ALLOCATION OF THE FEE THEY PAY UPON QUALIFYING.  THIS CLIENT SECURITY FUND IS FAKE, MANIPULATED TO SERVE WHIMS - NOT TO ABIDE BY LAWS OF PRACTICE!  I know all too well, since Jerald S. Barber stole my $2300 for a retainer!  I removed him from the case before the second hearing took place!  He violated my trust!  He said he would make sure to Motion To Dismiss the case, that the case had no merit - plus he would file a lawsuit against the arresting police department in West Haven, CT.  He did NOTHING and also was a key figure in intercepting my employment with the IRS!  I was hired!  After retaining Barber, they said they withdrew their hiring me!  I mentioned the fraud of Jerald Barber in my Timeline.  Yet it is conceivable that this court fails to review documents and just says, "It is not significant to this case"  when indeed it is! I have been a targeted person in Connecticut since I moved here!  It is the same dynamic as I had in Upstate New York, which I never wanted to return to when I left in 1994!  

 Copyrighted by the Secretary of the State of the Sta te of Connecticut

Sec. 2-69 SUPERIOR COURT—GENERAL PROVISIONS

committed by an attorney, in an attorney-client Nov. 17, 1999, on an interim basis pursuant to Section 1-9

(c), to take effect Jan.1, 2000, and amendment adopted June relationship or in a fiduciary capacity arising out

26, 2000, to take effect Jan. 1, 2001; amended June 21, 2004, of an attorney-client relationship, in the nature of to take effect July 13, 2004; amended May 3, 2005, to take theft or embezzlement of money or the wrongful effect May 17, 2005; amended June 20, 2005, to take effect taking or conversion of money, property, or other Jan. 1, 2006.)

things of value, including, but not limited to refusal

to refund unearned fees received in advance as Sec. 2-71. —Eligible Claims

required by Rule 1.16 (d) of the Rules of Profes- (a) A claim for reimbursement of a loss must be

sional Conduct. based upon the dishonest conduct of an attorney

(b) ‘‘Dishonest conduct’’ does not include such who, in connection with the defalcation upon

wrongful acts committed in connection with the which the claim is based, was a member of the

provision of investment services to the claimant Connecticut bar and engaged in the practice of by the attorney. law in this state. (Adopted June 29, 1998, to take effect Jan. 1, 1999.) (b) The claim shall not be eligible for reimburseSec. 2-70. —Client Security Fund Fee ment unless:

(a) The judges of the superior court shall assess (1) the attorney was acting as an attorney or

an annual fee in an amount adequate for the fiduciary in the matter in which the loss arose;

proper payment of claims and the provision of (2) the attorney has died, been adjudged incacrisis intervention and referral assistance under pable, not competent or insane, been disbarred

these rules and the costs of administering the or suspended from the practice of law in Connecticlient security fund. Such fee, which the judges cut, been placed on probation or inactive status

of the superior court have set at $110, shall be by a Connecticut court, resigned from the Conpaid by each attorney admitted to the practice of necticut bar, or become the judgment debtor of

law in this state and each judge, judge trial referee, the claimant with respect to such claim; and

state referee, family support magistrate, family (3) the claim is presented within four years of

support referee and workers’ compensation com- the time when the claimant discovered or first

missioner in this state. Notwithstanding the above, reasonably should have discovered the dishonest

an attorney who is disbarred, retired, resigned, or acts and the resulting losses or the claim was serving on active duty with the armed forces of pending before the Connecticut Bar Association’s the United States for more than six months in client security fund committee as of the effective such year shall be exempt from payment of the date of this rule. fee, and an attorney who does not engage in the (c) Except as provided by subsection (d) of this practice of law as an occupation and receives less section, the following losses shall not be eligible than $450 in legal fees or other compensation for for reimbursement: services involving the practice of law during the (1) losses incurred by spouses, children, par- calendar year shall be obligated to pay one-half

ents, grandparents, siblings, partners, associates of such fee. No attorney who is disbarred, retired

and employees of the attorney causing the losses; or resigned shall be reinstated pursuant to Sections 2-53 or 2-55 until such time as the attorney (2) losses covered by any bond, surety

has paid agreement, or insurance contract to the extent the fee due for the year in which the

attorney retired, resigned or was disbarred. covered thereby, including any loss to which any

(b) An attorney or family support referee who bonding agent, surety or insurer is subrogated, to

fails to pay the client security fund fee in accord- the extent of that subrogated interest;

ance with this section shall be administratively (3) losses incurred by any financial institution

suspended from the practice of law in this state which are recoverable under a ‘‘banker’s blanket

pursuant to Section 2-79 of these rules until such bond’’ or similar commonly available insurance or

payment has been made. An attorney or family surety contract;

support referee who is under suspension for (4) losses incurred by any business entity conanother reason at the time he or she fails to pay trolled by the attorney, any person or entity

the fee, shall be the subject of an additional sus- described in subdivisions (c) (1), (2), or (3) herein; pension which shall continue until the fee is paid. (5) losses incurred by any governmental entity (c) A judge, judge trial referee, state referee, or agency. family support magistrate or workers’ compensa- (d) In cases of extreme hardship or special and tion commissioner who fails to pay the client secu- unusual circumstances, the client security fund rity fund fee in accordance with this section shall

be referred to the judicial review council. committee may, in its discretion, consider a claim

(Adopted June 29, 1998, to take effect Jan. 1, 1999; eligible for reimbursement which would otherwise

amended June 28, 1999, to take effect Jan.1, 2000; amended

 Attorney Quintin Johnstone never published any opposition or even the harm caused by the removal of the office he worked in. He was employed at locations well known to be hotbeds for COMMUNISM: Chicago - Kansas - Washington; just like Barack Obama and others who were particularly linked to CIA operations.   My impression is that he was "just there for the ride" and most likely member to one or more SECRET SOCIETY and/or CIA, which often control and dictate the activity of the United States Government.  

This is an obituary covering Quintin Johnstone - and maybe that wasn't even his real name since there are many tricks that the Satanic Underground use to manipulate, excuse, and use MIND CONTROL methods.  Johnson and Stone are two known names of families deeply embedded in the NAZI movement/government takeover plans.  

Born at home in Chicago, Illinois, in 1915, Johnstone grew up in the Hyde Park area of Chicago, and attended the University of Chicago from kindergarten (at the Lab school) through Law School. He spent the WWII years as an Enforcement Attorney in the U.S. Office of Price Administration, supervising a large team of “secret shoppers” to ensure that businesses were adhering to war time laws, and prosecuting those that were not. He began his law teaching career in 1947 at Willamette University Law School, moved on to the University of Kansas Law School, finally arriving at Yale Law School as a visiting professor in 1955. The following year he began his full-time career at Yale where he remained for the rest of his life. From 1985 to 2000, he also was a professor at New York Law School and became professor emeritus in 2000. His academic influence reached across the globe to Ethiopia where for two years he was Dean at the Haile Selassie I University Law School (now Addis Ababa University School of Law). He was also very active in recruiting foreign students to apply to Yale, and visited law schools around the world encouraging exchange and cooperation. Johnstone served on the editorial board of Connecticut Law Tribune’s editorial board for many years, and was an active long-time member of both the Connecticut Bar Association (CBA) and the Connecticut Bar Foundation (CBF), winning awards for his leadership and contributions. An academic remembrance can be found on the Yale Law School Web site at: http://www.law.yale.edu/news/18560.htm A life-long athlete, he was captain of both high school and college teams, and kept active throughout his life. Johnstone was predeceased by his wife, Nancy. He is survived by two children, Robert Dale Johnstone and Katherine Mary Johnstone. A graveside service will be held at 11:30 a.m. on Thursday, July 10th at Grove Street Cemetery, 227 Grove St, New Haven, CT 06511 (across the street from Yale Law School). In lieu of flowers, memorial donations may be directed to the Quintin Johnstone Scholarship Fund and mailed to: Yale Law School Fund, P.O. Box 208341, New Haven, CT 06520-8341. To sign the online guestbook please visit hawleylincolnmemorial.com. 

WexLaw fails to even clarify what Pro Hac Vice is, in order to fit their whims - yet they are not the be-all, end-all of law or diction: 

Pro hac vice is a legal term for adding an attorney to a case in a jurisdiction in which he or she is not licensed to practice in such a way that the attorney does not commit unauthorized practice of law.

Pro hac vice | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institutehttps://www.law.cornell.edu

Black's Law Dictionary CURRENTLY states this:

According to Black's Law Dictionary, a Pro Hac Vice motion is a motion requesting permission for a lawyer to appear in a jurisdiction wherein he/she is not a licensed attorney. The Latin translation is: “for this turn; for this one particular occasion.”Sep 17, 2020

Yet TWO ATTORNEYS, ONE WHICH TESTIFIED AS AN EXPERT WITNESS, WHICH IS ILLEGAL FOR A RETAINED ATTORNEY TO DO, USE A PRO HAC VICE APPEARANCE WHICH IS ILLEGAL!  

The NAZI-Communists gravitate to Connecticut to attain their plan of a GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER, since Connecticut is where the US Constitution was signed.  

i. Source:  https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_5_5_unauthorized_practice_of_law_multijurisdictional_practice_of_law/ 

(a) A lawyer shall not practice law 

in a jurisdiction

 in violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction

or assist another in doing so.....

NO ATTORNEY CAN PRACTICE LAW IN A JURISDICTION OF WHICH HE OR SHE IS NOT REGISTERED - EXCEPT WHEN THEY RECEIVE ONE-TIME PERMISSION FROM THE COURT OF THAT JURISDICTION - SO WHY IS THIS RULE SO SEGMENTED, DISTORTED NOW?  SO IT CANNOT BE LITIGATED?  THERE IS NOT ONE MENTION OF THE PRO HAC VICE TERM IN THE RULE! 

ii. Source:  https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/prohac_admin_rules.pdf 

Rules of the Superior Court Regulating Admission to the Bar: Sec. 2-16. Appearing

Pro Hac Vice

http://www.jud.ct.gov/cbec/rules.htm#2-16 

NOTE, THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS SECTION WHICH COVERS Pro Hac Vice Appearances by Attorneys from other jurisdictions in the USA.  This is completely nefarious what the Bar Association is allowing or turning a Blind Eye to! 

4. MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT ON COUNTERSUIT - No Objection submitting by the Plaintiff.  Instead, THE COURT AGAIN FRAUDED RECORDS BY SENDING A CRAFTED  ANSWER REQUEST ILLEGALLY DELAYED TO HELP THE PLAINTIFF BE RECORDED IN COMPLIANCE, thus violating the Rule Of Court which states exactly how long the plaintiff has in Answering the Counterclaim - no longer than 45 days from issuance of the Counterclaim, which was served timely on the plaintiff even though they have an insufficient appearance (Appendix Page 29-32)

a. Note, a few typographical errors exist, yet this motion was never heard or argued.  Page 1/29:  omit "the"; Page 2/30: insert (Marshall) Robert Miller; Page 3/31: insert "to"; Page 4/32: "lesser" should OBVIOUSLY be "greater" ) 

b. Note, Defendant's Statement, Hearing by Phone Instructions, was NOT ENTERED on record! (Appendix Page 33-44)

5. As I have already stated, THIS CASE HAS NO MERIT. THE COURT aNEFARIOUSLY ADJUDICATED AN UNLAWFUL SMALL CLAIM FORM.. Below is a summary and attached is the Small Claim Form marked with reference numbers

(Appendix Page 21-27; Chapter 24 of Connecticut Practice Book, Small Claims)

REFERANCE NUMBERS 1 - 15

Appendix Page 45- 58

1. The Small Claims Writ is required to abide by CGS 51-16, 51-345 - which are both cited on the form. They fail to cite the very practice rule book, Chapter 24, which is obviously for nefarious purposes - like changing a rule after the the small claim was initiated by a fraudulent attorney, to cover for the fraudulent attorney.  

CGS 51-16

More fraud!  Though these forms are reprinted on a regular basis, they left the cited laws the same even though: 

2016 Connecticut General Statutes

Title 51 - Courts

Chapter 870 - Judicial Department

Section 51-16 - Transferred

Universal Citation: CT Gen Stat § 51-16 (2016)

Transferred to Chapter 883b, Sec. 51-216a.

yet the law has NO RELEVANCE TO THE FORM!  IT IS SIMPLY AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE LAW, WITHIN THE COURT SYSTEM, NOT PROCESSING THE FORM!  

Sec. 51-216a. (Formerly Sec. 51-16). Commission on Official Legal Publications. Publications. Copyrights. (a) The Commission on Official Legal Publications shall be an agency of the Judicial Branch and shall be composed of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who shall be chairperson, ex officio; the Chief Court Administrator, ex officio; a judge or former judge of the Supreme Court and a state referee, both of whom shall be appointed by the Chief Justice; the Reporter of Judicial Decisions; and one other employee of the Judicial Branch appointed by the Chief Justice.

(b) The commission shall acquire, publish, distribute and maintain for the benefit of the state a sufficient supply of the official legal publications, which shall consist of: (1) The Connecticut Reports consisting of the reports of cases determined by the Supreme Court as prepared for publication by the Reporter of Judicial Decisions, (2) reports of cases determined by the Appellate Court as prepared for publication by the Reporter of Judicial Decisions, (3) the Connecticut Law Journal, (4) the Connecticut Practice Book and cumulative supplements thereto, and (5) such additional publications pertaining to the state Judicial Branch, the Supreme Court, the Appellate Court, the Superior Court and the practice of law as may be assigned to the commission. The commission may publish, maintain and distribute the official legal publications in available alternative formats. An alternative format includes an electronic format and may be the sole method for the publication, maintenance and distribution of all official legal publications and all archived official legal publications.

(c) The commission shall publish in the Connecticut Law Journal except as they may be incorporated into any revision of the Connecticut Practice Book: (1) Rules adopted by the judges of the Supreme Court, including, but not limited to, the rules adopted by the Supreme Court for the courts of probate, (2) the rules of the Appellate Court, and (3) the rules of the Superior Court.

(d) The commission may publish in the Connecticut Law Journal, or prepare for separate publication and publish, such other documents and information as in its opinion are proper or of sufficient importance to warrant publication.

(e) The commission may establish an electronic bulletin board to provide information to members of the public upon such terms as it deems to be in the best interest of the state.

(f) The commission shall, to the extent it finds it desirable to do so, cause official legal publications to be copyrighted in the name of the Secretary of the State for the benefit of the people of the state.

(g) If printed, all official legal publications published by the commission pursuant to this section shall be printed on paper that meets or exceeds the American National Standards Institute standards for permanent paper, unless such paper is not available.

CGS 51-345

ANOTHER FRAUDULENT CITING!  

2005 Connecticut Code - Chapter 890 — Judicial Districts, Geographical Areas, Civil andCriminal Venue, Filing and Designation of Court Location (contains Secs. 51-342 to 51-353b)

Sec. 51-342. (Formerly Sec. 51-140). County construed as judicial district for purpose of venue.

Sec. 51-343. Definitions.

Sec. 51-344. Judicial districts established.

Sec. 51-344a. Term "judicial district of Hartford-New Britain" deemed to refer to "judicial district of Hartford" on and after September 1, 1998.

Sec. 51-344b. Term "judicial district of New Britain" substituted for "judicial district of Hartford", when.

Sec. 51-345. (Formerly Sec. 52-42). Venue in civil actions. Return of civil process.

2005 Connecticut Code - Sec. 51-345. (Formerly Sec. 52-42). Venue in civil actions. Return of civil process.

      Sec. 51-345. (Formerly Sec. 52-42). Venue in civil actions. Return of civil process. (a) Actions in general. Except as provided in section 51-348 and subsections (b) to (g), inclusive, of this section, all civil process shall be made returnable to a judicial district, as follows:

      (1) If all the parties reside outside this state, to the judicial district where (A) the injury occurred, (B) the transaction occurred, or (C) the property is located or lawfully attached.

      (2) If the defendant is not a resident, to the judicial district where the attached property is located.

      (3) If either or both the plaintiff or defendant are residents of this state, to the judicial district where either the plaintiff or defendant resides, except:

      (A) If either the plaintiff or the defendant resides in the town of Manchester, East Windsor, South Windsor or Enfield, the action may be made returnable at the option of the plaintiff to either the judicial district of Hartford or the judicial district of Tolland.

      (B) If either the plaintiff or the defendant resides in the town of Plymouth, the action may be made returnable at the option of the plaintiff to either the judicial district of New Britain or the judicial district of Waterbury.

      (C) If either the plaintiff or the defendant resides in the town of Bethany, Milford, West Haven or Woodbridge, the action may be made returnable at the option of the plaintiff to either the judicial district of New Haven or the judicial district of Ansonia-Milford.

In fact, the plaintiff on this case failed to even present proof of service to the court and pay the fee - IN PERSON, as required!  As I have already stated, THE COURT ALLOWS THEM TO POP THESE FRAUDULENT COLLECTIONS OUT LIKE CANDY!  THE SMALL CLAIM FORM IS NOT EVEN STAMPED IN!  AT THE LEAST, THEY SHOULD HAVE MAILED IT TO THE COURT WITH PAYMENT, TO STAMP IN AND ENTER AS A CASE!  BECAUSE ATTY MOYL'S ADDRESS IS RIGHT BY THE COURT OPERATIONS CENTER IN WETHERSFIELD, THEY CONSPIRED WITH MOYLAN, WHO NEFARIOUSLY SIGNED PROOF OF SERVICE COMING FROM ILLINOISHE - NOT MICHIGAN - WHICH IS THE SKIRT THEY HIDE BEHIND!   THE WEATHERSFIELD OFFICE CHOSE TO HELP THEM STEAL MONEY FROM ME!  THEY CONSIDER THEMSELVES ABOVE THE LAW!  THEY BLOCKED MY E-FILING EVEN THOUGH I WAS REGISTERED - TELLING ME I HAD TO PHYSICALLY GO TO THEIR OFFICE IN WETHERSFIELD AND PROVIDE MY ID - DURING QUARANTINE!  THIS IS NOT EVEN A REQUIREMENT WHEN THERE WAS NO QUARANTINE! 

Sec. 51-345a. (Formerly Sec. 52-17). Land lying in two or more judicial districts.

Sec. 51-345b. Venue in actions involving administrative decisions of municipal agencies.

Sec. 51-346. (Formerly Sec. 52-24). Location in judicial district where civil process may be made returnable. Trial locations.

Sec. 51-346a. Jury trial in the judicial district of Ansonia-Milford.

Sec. 51-347. (Formerly Sec. 52-47). Where writs may be filed.

Sec. 51-347a. (Formerly Sec. 52-30). Transfer of jury causes to other judicial districts.

Sec. 51-347b. (Formerly Sec. 52-31). Transfer of causes by court, motion or agreement. Transfer by Chief Court Administrator.

Sec. 51-347c. Last day for filing next business day if clerk's office closed.

Sec. 51-348. Geographical areas. Venue. Courthouse use. Housing docket. Hearing of infractions and violations by magistrate.

Sec. 51-348a. (Formerly Sec. 54-27). Prosecution for nonsupport in geographical area.

Sec. 51-349. Where actions commenced in geographical areas.

Sec. 51-350. Filing in a geographical area.

Sec. 51-351. Return to improper locations.

Sec. 51-351a. (Formerly Sec. 52-32a). Failure to state proper forum.

Sec. 51-351b. Short title: Uniform Transboundary Pollution Reciprocal Access Act.

Sec. 51-352. (Formerly Sec. 54-77). Venue in criminal actions.

Sec. 51-352a. (Formerly Sec. 54-77b). Venue for offenses committed prior to April 22, 1975.

Sec. 51-352b. (Formerly Sec. 54-28). Jurisdiction of crimes committed on water.

Sec. 51-352c. (Formerly Sec. 54-41). Jurisdiction of various offenses.

Sec. 51-353. (Formerly Sec. 54-78). Change of venue in criminal case.

Sec. 51-353a. (Formerly Sec. 54-18). Transfer of criminal cases between and within judicial districts.

Sec. 51-353b. (Formerly Sec. 54-79). Files in transferred cases.

2. No address of the court!  The court should have refused it as insufficient!

3. No physical address OR phone number of the Plaintiff! 

4. LISTED AS A CORPORATION, YET REPEATEDLY CLAIMED THEY WERE LLC, FULLY KNOWING THEY WERE INDEED LIABLE FOR FRAUD AND BREAKING NUMEROUS FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS - NONE OF WHICH THE NEW HAVEN COURTHOUSE LITIGATED, AND ONLY CONSPIRED! 

5. Out-of-State Office with ILLEGAL PRO HAC VICE APPEARANCE!  THEY HAD NO JURISDICTION!  THEY USED STILLMAN LAW OFFICE IN CONNECTICUT AS CONTACT INFORMATION, TELLING ME TO CALL THE LOCAL OFFICE, TO EMAIL THE LOCAL OFFICE - IT IS ALSO RIGHT IN THE PRELIMINARY DOCUMENTATION WHCH THEY OBVIOUSLY FAILED TO SUBMIT TO THE COURT AND HAVE STAMPED IN, RATHER PULL STRINGS WITH WETHERSFIELD TO MAKE IT A CASE!  A LOT OF PEOPLE SHOULD BE ARRESTED WITHIN THE JUDICIAL BRANCH IN CONNECTICUT!  THOSE FEW WHO REALLY WORK DILIGENTLY TO HELP PEOPLE GET THEIR RIGHTS HAVE GREAT STRUGGLES, PERSONALLY AND PROFESSIONALLY!  

6. ATTORNEY JURIS NUMBER IS ILLEGAL! FRAUDULENT!  

7. The plaintiff's motive in documenting my, the defendant's, address as my physical address was to EXPLOIT ME, to frame me - yet they frame themselves as frauds - they fraudulently placed a Priority Mail envelope in my mailbox using a return address of Illinois - this is all presented in my Answer and Special Defenses and Counterclaim!  For the one who presided over this hearing, who failed to identify himself, and allowed the female attorney to just identify herself as "ME" - to deliberately evade from the law on such obvious matters - is only reflective of CRIMINAL INTENT! THEY HAVE CERTAINLY HARMED ME FOR MANY YEARS, RUNNING THIS STATE AS A CRIMINAL OPERATION! 

8. Their claim that "Defendant's last payment was 7/5/2017" was because the account was MORE THAN PAID IN FULL.  AS STATED AT THE HEARING - I PAID OVER $1,000 JUST FROM 2014 TO 2017 AND YET THEY REDUCED MY CREDIT TO $710!  They only relied on FORCE AND ABUSE OF PROCEDURE TO HELP THEM WIN THIS MERITLESS CASE! 

9. THERE WAS NO MAILING ON 3/16/2020 - AND THEY PROOF OF SERVICE WAS CLEARLY FRAUDULENT, REFLECTIVE OF FEDERAL CRIME, SINCE THE POSTAL CLERK WOULD HAVE NEVER PLACED IT IN MY MAILBOX BEFORE SCANNING AND UPON SCANNING WITH NO TRACKING INFORMATION, THE POSTAL CLERK WOULD HAVE RETURNED IT TO THE POSTAL BRANCH, UNDELIVERED DUE TO INSUFFICIENCIES! 

10. THE AMOUNT CLAIMED WAS CONCOCTED, NOT SUPPORTED WITH ANY INFORMATION EVEN THOUGH MY ANSWER, SPECIAL DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIM WERE VERY CLEAR THIS CASE HAS NO MERIT. THEY HAD A YEAR TO PRODUCE RECORDS!  THE LETTER COMPRISING OF 39 PAGES SENT TO AMAZON, GE MONEY, AND SYNCHRONY BANK WAS A LEDGER I HAD TO CREATE SINCE SYNCHRONY BANK FAILED TO!  THOUGH SYNCHRONY GREATLY DAMAGED GENERAL ELECTRIC WITH THEIR FRAUDULENT MANAGEMENT OF ACCOUNTS, MOST LIKELY GE TOLD THEM TO DROP THEIR NEFARIOUS ATTEMPT TO STEAL MONEY FROM ME!  THREE YEARS LATER, THEY CLAIM THE RIGHT TO ABUSE POWER, FRAUD - ALL BECAUSE I CLAIMED TRUMP IS A CAREER CRIMINAL, MURDERING GENERAL SOLEIMANI IN IRAN, AND SO MUCH MORE, INCLUDING ERRONEOUSLY FIRING GREAT PEOPLE IN HIS CABINET YET PROTECTING THE CROOKS LIKE ROD ROSENSTEIN, SON OF HEINRICH HIMLER, EVEN THOUGH HE COMPLAINED THAT THE DEPT OF JUSTICE CREATED A RUSSIAN COLLUSION CASE AGAINST HIM.  President Putin knows what a pathetic liar he is, and it is indeed an expectation of a US President, among many other deep violations of the law.  Yet President Putin, siding with Iran, has emphasized, if the USA doesn't fix itself, he will not have to do anything, they will implode on themselves!  

11. The very fact that this stated complaint is popped out like candy - even word-for-word on other cases, which are probably on fake people, or people who are in such obvious distress like having cancer treatment, they congratulate themselves for being absolutle bullying criminals and getting away with it!  I have provided a printout of an example of a Small Claims Writ, even on a case mentioned that very same day during that very same call!  They commit crimes right in plain sight and just figure their "muscle" will enforce their crimes! 

12. Attorney Bardos apparently signed this, failing to appropriately type his name, title - does he even have a law degree from Quinnipiac University?  If so, he most certainly cheated his way through school, resulting in a complete bafoon who deserves nothing but being charged for his crimes!  

13. The small claim form was signed 5/5/2020 - IT IS ILLEGAL ON ITS FACE!  It was obviously backdated in an effort to "prove" that they had been working on this all along - rather than targeting me to help Trump cause me harm whatever way they can!  After all, the avulsion injury to my knee was not successful in taking me out of society!  The erroneous arrests and other attacks, including poisoning and badly tearing my hamstring - were all unsuccessful, and result only in framing themselves, along with harming me for being a law-abiding person! According to Practice Book Chapter 24, the small claim has to be properly prepared, signed, and submitted TIMELY - nothing of which was obviously done! 

14. This form was supposed to have been stamped in before it was uploaded as a c

15. The Commissioner of the New Haven Superior Court failed to identify his or herself and no doubt this signature is a forgery - a common practice of Lawrence Mark Hurley and most likely many others in this state, since the JUDGES CONSPIRED WITH CAREER CRIMINAL LAWRENCE MARK HURLEY!  

In conclusion, the above has already been presented to the court, but I have to continue submitting documents and reminding them just how criminal this case is, since they only care about covering up the crimes and aiding and abetting!  

Appendix

1-2 Order on ? "Judgment for Plaintiff" dated 5/20/2021

a. 4 SAME ORDER, DIFFERENT DATE 5/25/2021

3 Search on Judge Kamp's Juris Number - NOT FOUND!

5 Order on "reply to special defenses and counterclaim" 

Judgment for the counterclaim defendant  dated 5/20/2021

6 Order: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS - DENIED 5/20/2021

7 Order: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS - DENIED 5/25/2021

8 JURIS NO OF ATTORNEY BARDOS IS 435165/CONNECTICUT ONLY

JURIS TYPE:  A

9-10 SEARCH ON BARDOS IN MICHIGAN BAR ASSOC. - NOT FOUND!

11 WHAT IS JURIS NO. 438732 IN CONNECTICUT? BAR ASSOC ALLOWS A MICHIGAN ADDRESS TO DEFINE STILLMAN LAW OFFICE - WTF 

12-13 STATUS OF STILLMAN LAW OFFICE:  WITHDRAWN IN CONNECTICUT

14-18 PRO HAC VICE INFO 

19-29 SEC 68-70  COVERING CLIENT SECURITY FUND

21-27 CHAPTER 24, CONNECTICUT PRACTICE BOOK, ON SMALL CLAIMS

28 PLAINTIFF'S INEPT APPEARANCE ON NOTICE 1/7/2021

PASCARELLI CASE 

ILLEGALLY USING BOTH CONNECTICUT AND MICHIGAN CONTACT INFO 

29-32 DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

33-44 DEFENDANT'S STATEMENT WAS STAMPED IN YET NOT UPLOADED TO CASE 

45 SMALL CLAIM FORM ON AFOREMENTIONED CASE WITH MARKINGS FOR ELABORATION IN AFFIDAVIT 

46 SMALL CLAIM FORM ON PASCARELLI CASE; EXACT SAME JARGON AS ACTION TAKEN AGAINST ME, DEFENDANT ON AFOREMENTIONED CASE, WORD FOR WORD, IN COMPLAINT! amt:  $2130.09

46a - JUDGE KAMPF SIGNED ORDER, JURIS NUMBER IS INACTIVE

47. ANSWER ON PASCARELLI SMALL CLAIM CASE - HE IS BEING TREATED FOR DIAGNOSED CANCER 

47a Order dated 5/20 judgment Amount $2238.24

48. FLORIDA Affidavit, submitted as plaintiff's "evidence". Signed by a Media representative with no address or other contact information. Notary, Efrain Sanchez - employee of Synchrony Bank. NOTE:  THIS AFFIDAVIT WAS CREATED AFTER THE  SMALL CLAIMS CASE WAS FILED BY PLAINTIFF.  27th Day of August 2020; stating the following:  

BEFORE ME, on the day and date set forth below, the undersigned Notary, being qualified and commissioned in and for the county and state aforesaid, personally came and appeared Candy Hernandez, who being duly swron, did depose and say:

Affiant is an Affidavit Documentation Specialist at Synchrony Bank formerly known as GE Capital Retail Bank.

On June 2, 2014, GE Capital Retail Bank formeally changed its name to Synchrony Bank ("Bank")  9034 (the "Account") made by ANNE BRADLEY (the "Debtor") made payable to Synchrony

Bank is the issuer of the relevant consumer transaction/credit card 

I have reviewed the information below regarding the debt 9034 (the "Account) made by ANNE BRADLEY (the "Debtor") made payable to Synchrony Bank and subsequently sold to Sherman Originator, LLC 

The amount owed on the account on 2/22/2019, $875.90, was sold to Sherman Originator III LLC and is reflected in the system of Synchrony Bank formerly known as GE Capital Retail Bank

The following statement pertains if the debtor referenced above is  a state of California resident. I certify under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of California that the foregoing is rue and correct. 

Executed this 27th day of August, 2020

Signed by CANDY HERNANDEZ, DESCRIBING HERSELF ONLY AS A MEDIA REPRESENTATIVE WITH NO CONTACT INFORMATION. 

SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS 27TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2020

NOTARY PUBLIC:  EFRAIN SANCHES, #GG 293154

WTF! 

49 Last page of Defendant's original TIMELINE, page 20 with statement:  Due to abuse of procedure and restraint of time the court has issued on this fraudulent collection of debt, defendant reserves the right to amend this document if necessary. 7/9/2020

50-58 The court's fraudulent entry of AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM, which I never submitted. They mashed documents together to alter the case! 

Prepared and Submitted,

FOR THE DEFENDANT

_____________________

Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se

 6/14//2021

Notarized:   

Faxed to fraudulent, out of state,  Plaintiff, Stillman Law Firm, Michigan address 

443-588-0417

248-851-6029

248-865-7409

________________________

Anne M. Bradley  

Case No. NNH-CV-2-6105010-S : State of Connecticut

LVNV Funding, LLC : Superior Court

Vs : Court of New Haven

Anne M. Bradley : May 20, 2021

Reprinted for JUDICIAL COMPLAINT 8/17/2021

DEFENDANT'S Affidavit to Attach to Small Claim Action

ACTION TAKEN:  MOTION TO OPEN

BASED ON ARBITRATOR'S VERBAL RULING

1. My oath is already on file for this case and redundant to repeat.

1) The court used ABUSE OF PROCESS by not informing me of this Small Claim until THREE DAYS FROM THE ANSWER DATE.  The Deputy Clerk argued he couldn't help it, that is what the computer sets - despite the fact the COURT BROKE THE RULES BY ALLOWING THE PLAINTIFF THREE MONTHS TO SUBMIT AN ANSWER TO THE COUNTERCLAIM ONLY AFTER THE PLAINTIFF ANSWERED, WHICH HAD ABSOLUTELY NO SUBSTANCE, DID NOT RESPOND TO ANYTHING IN MY COUNTERCLAIM.  YET I RESPONDED TO THE PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT, INCLUDING PROVIDING SPECIFIC PROOF THAT THIS BEHAVIOUR IS REFLECTIVE OF ME BEING A TARGETED PERSON IN THIS STATE SINCE I MOVED HERE.  

1) I filed a proper and timely COUNTERCLAIM demanding $5,000 for costs, according to PB 24-19,  despite the deliberate insufficiency of court forms. 

a) The arbitrator at this hearing stated MOTION TO DISMISS IS DENIED; I, the Defendant, emphasized that the only one who motioned to dismiss was the plaintiff, on COUNTERCLAIM, and neither that motion or the MOTIONS TO STRIKE WERE NOT EVEN HEARD. 

b) The arbitrator nefariously entered "Judgment for Plaintiff" without even properly hearing this case, resenting the fact that I, the Defendant, relayed many valid of what I had already documented in this case, that this case had absolutely NO MERIT AND SHOULD NOT HAVE EVEN BEEN DOCKETED due to fraudulent claims in its complaint, fraudulent documents such as the MILITARY AFFIDAVIT, AND fraudulent appearance by the plaintiff!  The fraudulent spin only increased the reasons to rule in my favor thereafter! 

2. Today, at 3:45, aforesaid case was heard.  Those Present: 

1) Arbitrator who would not relay his name

2) Female attorney who only described herself as "me" and again would not relay her name for appearance purposes and the arbitrator allowed this dynamic on this and other issues.

3) Male attorney who would also not relay his name but I, the defendant, presumed it was Matthew Bardos since he admitted to creating the Small Claim Form and more.  

4) Victoria Mason, acclaimed witness who had not submitted any document on this case.  Employed by Resurgent, not LVNV 

a) Yet she claims to be Records Administrator for LVNV

b) I, the Defendant was not given opportunity to question about this and other matters due to the happhazzard way the arbitrator conducted the case, including allowing her to testify on Exhibits which were part of my, the defendant's,  MOTION TO STRIKE. This was not corrected even though I, the Defendant, claimed it was wrong and violated Due Process.  

5) Judge allowed "witness" to testify on documents she had with her, which violated the case proceedings.  For the judge to ask the witness to read what he can read right on record for this case was absurd and  illogical - ONLY asking to verify the my, the Defendant's, address!   I, the Defendant, emphasized it was irrelevant to verify her residence over and over.  I, the Defendant, emphasized, "How can she be witness to contested documents?" The arbitrator ignored defendant's insistence that no document can be discussed until MOTIONS TO STRIKE  was heard.  NEITHER MOTION TO STRIKE were heard.  Nor was the Plaintiff's MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIM heard - yet I, the Defendant, made sure I stated that the Motion to Dismiss could only be argued upon what he already submitted - WHICH WAS NOTHING - a frivolous motion that even a highschool student would do better creating.  No Facts, No History, No Law, No Summary!  Even the motion itself was haphazzard. Arguing this motion was like expecting a car with flat tires to go down the highway at 55 mph!  

6) Witness described Pamela Johnson as her "co-worker" yet I, the defendant, did not get a chance to ask her more about this since Pamela Johnson is an actor and attorney so would be this witness an actor or attorney IF THEY REALLY WERE CO-WORKERS; and also where did they work together, etc.  

7) I, the Defendant, emphasized this case is based on a haphazzard complaint which DICTATES what they are allowed to argue in court, including claiming I, the Defendant, owed MEDICAL BALANCE, invoking CGS 37-3a.

8) No matter how matter-of-fact that I, the Defendant, argued, this arbitrator paid no attention to what she was saying and changed the subject. 

a) I, the Defendant, claimed in pleadings as well as at this poorly-managed hearing that I paid for my purchases; I stopped making purchases due to the fraudulent billing activity; that I obviously paid $30 a month for three years with only a $710 allowed credit due to the nefarious reduction on my balance by Synchrony Bank Manager who was is a fraud.  I, the Defendant, emphasized the August 2017 letter I sent to Amazon referring to a 39 page Ledger of Purchases, Payments, and Running Balance resulting in ZERO BALANCE BY THE TIME I MADE THE LAST PAYMENT

  - EVEN INCLUDING THE NEPHARIOUS CHARGES BY SYNCHRONY EVEN THOUGH I DID NOT EXCEED THE CREDIT LIMIT, YET THEY WOULD REDUCE THE CREDIT LIMIT UNDER WHAT I PURCHASED TO ADD MORE CHARGES FOR NO REASON OTHER THAN FRAUD -  

that I created since Synchrony failed to cooperate with one due to their fraudulent activity.  I, the Defendant, emphasized 36 months time of making payments of $30 is over $1,000 yet they reduced the credit to $710, cheating me out of over $300.  

b) The arbItrator interfered with my, the Defendant,  speaking; the arbitrator ignored the facts, the arbitrator did not hold a fair hearing DELIBERATELY.  

9) I, the Defendant, emphasized the following, having to be very firm because the arbitrator and the male attorney of LVNV were interrupting me: 

a) The witness is not even a proven witness on the case 

b) The case began with FALSE INFORMATION; the arbitrator only kept saying, "You purchased things from Amazon, didn't you?....Where do you live?" 

c) ARBITRATOR FAILED TO PREPARE FOR THIS CASE!. I, the Defendant, relayed what I had documented (which obviously the arbitrator did not even read) - about the illegal appearances of the plaintiff, that the plaintiff failed to abide by the credit agreement that GE Money had, they were frauding accounts and not giving revolving credit as GE Money gave, Not even serving me, the defendant, their haphazzard and untimely EXHIBITS which this arbitrator gave as precedence even though a Motion To Strike was issued for each one by the plaintiff and THE PLAINTIFF DID NOT OBJECT TO THE MOTIONS TO STRIKE; I, the Defendant, also emphasized the fraudulent Military Affidavit is illegal because the plaintiff had no legal right to enter an affidavit on defendant as if they were her attorney (being chief, cook, and bottle washer) No Motion To Strike was heard; and more.  There were many more arguments made by me, the Defendant, which this arbitrator did not hear nor did he obviously prepare for because the agenda was to TARGET ANNE BRADLEY, as she has relayed, and they only proved with their ignorant lack of doing their jobs, placing corruption as first and foremost.   

3. This was no hearing. It was reflective of "The Ends Justify The Means" - a Devil's Chessboard of false information and doing everything in their power to suppress the HARMED DEFENDANT, myself!  

1) Despite the fact plaintiff, female attorney who did not say her name, complained that I, the defendant, was not sworn in - as a last minute trick while the judge was ruling in the plaintiff's favor, they even had the Oath which I took and had notarized.  The court's deliberate failure to upload those documents is secondary to the fact that I did mail them via Federal Express, which were GUARANTEED TO BE RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE HEARING ON MAY 20.  Yet the arbitrator would do nothing and not allow me, the defendant to speak.  In fact, MANY TIMES I WAS INTERRUPTED BY THE RUDE PLAINTIFF OR ARBITRATOR - WHO HAD NO INTENT OF ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK AT ALL IF HE COULD HELP IT! 

4. I have been greatly violated!  I deserve way more than the $5,000 in the COUNTERCLAIM because of all of this corruption and having to defend myself on a case without merit, arguing fraudulent plaintiffs who have shown no allegience to the Law, let alone administer it!

5. The documents which this plaintiff claimed validated this witness were moved to be stricken since they FIRST were not served on the defendant, myself, they were only documents of fraud.  The witness only worked for LVNV for 3 years, not showing her job history or any accreditations.  In Fact, she was probable "Vicki Mason" who was an Operations Manager of AMAZON - of all places, NEVADA - the hotbed of CIA corruption.  Dr. Ted Gunderson, retired FBI Section Chief, moved there, leaving his family BECAUSE HE SERVED A HIGHER PURPOSE AND WANTED HIS FAMILY TO BE PROUD OF HIM - and that was to eradicate the Satanic Underground that was sex trafficking children, murdering people, FRAUDING, EMBEZZLING, and all other crimes relating to RACKETEERING. I, the Defendant, could not question the witness in a proper way. The arbitrator only allowed me to ask her one question and he obviously resented that because his mission was to help them win, not hear the case!  The arbitrator scheduled me for last so he could evade from justice, and rule in plaintiff's favor, who I suspect he probably has nefarious deals with since Sherman Companies is at the least as crooked as ENRON was.  

6. ATTACHED TO THIS MOTION TO OPEN ALSO are printed case information on aforesaid case for 5/20/2021 at 5:56 pm and10:52 pm; and now for 5/21/2021 at 11;09 am. NO DISPOSITION HAS BEEN ENTERED DESPITE WHAT THE ARBITRATOR SAID IN COURT. 

Prepared and Submitted, 

            FOR THE DEFENDANT

__________________________

Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se  5/21/2021

PO Box 206514

New Haven, CT 06520

Ph.  203-909-9131

Notarized:  

CERTIFIED MAILING

PLAINTIFF HAS BEEN NOTIFIED BY EMAIL THAT MOTION TO OPEN IS BEING ENTERED TODAY IN COURT, AS WITH OTHER PRIOR PLEADINGS IN THE PAST TEN DAYS.  COPIES OF EMAILS ARE PROVIDED.  THE SEARCH ON LVN IN DEFENDANT'S EMAIL ALSO PROVES THAT THE ATTORNEY FOR LVNV WAS LYING ABOUT PROOF OF SERVICE, NOTHING OF WHICH WAS EVEN PROFERED TO COURT ANYWAY, YET THE ARBITRATOR SIDED WITH THE LYING PLAINTIFF. 

A copy of this aforesaid DEFENDANT'S STATEMENT, to be entered into court,  dated May 21, 2021, has been mailed to the following: 

Stillman Law Office

alias:  Stillman, PC

30057 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 200, Farmington Hills, MI 48334 

___________________________

Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se Defendant  

If I missed adding in another affidavit, rest assured, it was a repeat of what I already relayed to the court, which the court has ignored.  

3.   MOTION TO DISQUALIFY AND REMOVE JUDGE

Case No. NNH-CV-20-6105010-S : State of Connecticut

LVNV Funding, LLC : Superior Court

Vs : Court of New Haven

Anne M. Bradley : AUGUST 4, 2021

DEFENDANT'S 

MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDiCIAL AUTHORITY

JUDGE MICHAEL P. KAMP 

Pursuant to PB 1-23, Defendant, Pro Se,  motions this court to DISQUALIFY ALL ACTIONS TAKEN BY JUDGE KAMP AND IMMEDIATELY REMOVE HIM ON AFORESAID CASE.

HISTORY

Plaintiff entered a Small Claim against defendant  on MEDICAL BILLING, as a Pro Hac Vice attorney, who claimed gets paid by a firm in Michigan which also was operating a Connecticut Office with attorneys who only had jurisdiction in Connecticut.  Additionally, he signed the Small Claim Form not only as a Pro Hac Vice but also as a Commissioner of Court.  Defendant relayed numerous other fraudulent circumstances which caused the Small Claims form alone to be defective and fraudulent on many counts, which would reflect the court's responsibility to remove this case from the docket since it was not hearable.  Defendant claimed that the court administration acts on one premise, to target the defendant as it has consistently done, depriving her of her LEGAL RIGHTS for numerous years in this state.  Defendant elaborated on the numerous ways the court has targeted her with an ENDS JUSTIFIES THE MEANS processing rather than DUE PROCESS OF LAW.  Numerous pleadings were entered due to the plaintiff's lack of diligence.  They were not heard and defendant claims those which were denied were not heard according to the standards and practices of the US Constitution, the American Bar ASsociation and the Rules of Court in Connecticut - which cannot create any rule which conflicts with federal rights rooted in the US Constitution.  Hearing on May 20, 2021 took place.  Plaintif CLAIMED defendant paid $30/month on a balance due Synchrony Bank from 2014 to 2017.  Plaintiff admitted that the credit line was decreased to $710; thus reflecting that the balance exceeded pay-off by $300 and thus they were overpaid yet still argued for more money without substantiating with any ledger of payments and purchases.  Defendant referred to the 2014 letter presented to the court, telling Synchrony Bank she refused to use the card anymore and would only pay off the balance due to their FRAUDULENT MANAGEMENT OF THE ACCOUNT. At no point in over a year's time did the plaintiff produce account activity showing payments and purchases activity since the defendant entered into an agreement with GE Money for this Amazon card.  Nevertheless, defendant relayed over and over that the case had no merit and should not have even been heard due to the fraudulent small claim form.  Judge Kamp did not regard the Small Claim form information as important yet claimed he thoroughly read it.  No matter how much defendant relayed all the fraudulent actions, this judge refused to respond.  This case was recorded by the defendant and uploaded to anchor.fm/terra-cotta to affirm defendant's rights.  Judge Kamp claimed he wanted to continue the case to allow the plaintiff more time to come up with proof.  Defendant claimed he was conspiring with the plaintiff who had plenty of time to disclose any proof, entered false information on the small claim, had an illegal appearance, and also nefariously entered a MILITARY AFFIDAVIT which is the responsibility of the defendant and only used at the defendant's discretion. The hearing did not include Motions in any orderly way and defendant claimed the judge had no intent from the beginning of the hearing to properly hear the case. Superior Court Judge Kamp ruled in favor of the plaintiff, at which time the defendant was angry and said they were not going to get a penny; that they take money, they don't make it, but collaborate in a criminal manner. 

Defendant promptly filed for MOTION TO OPEN which the court administrator allowed Judge Kamp to hear despite his deliberate nefarious acts.

No ruling on this motion took place until after defendant filed Motion For Default in her favor due to the fact plaintiff remained not diligent on the case by filing objection.  Additionally a Memorandum of Law was noted to be forthcoming.  Defendant attempted to submit a Memorandum of Law on Thursday, July 22, after having numerous problems with online hacking, etc - having to obtain remote assistance to get her laptop to function again.  The Memorandum of Law noted that there was no change to the case on July 22, 2021.   Upon going to the courthouse at 4:45 p.m., fully prepared to enter this motion in court,  they called the fire department for a drill and closed it.  

On Friday, July 23, defendant attempted to modify the motion to reflect this circumstance and elaborate more on the issues, yet her laptop was dysfunctioning again.  The Memorandum of Law was emailed to the plaintiff, along with the prepared statement which could also be attached.  Due to the dysfunction of her Canon scanner, blocking defendant from making pdf files for multiple page documents, she could not attach a complete Memorandum of Law.  

Memorandum of Law was received by the court on Monday,   July 26 comprising of 114 pages.  FAX confirmation that it was sent completely to the plaintiff was provided due to the fact that the Court Service Center would not allow the defendant to make copies of the sections she was unable to scan at home. There was no change in the case.

Thereafter, the court isssued a backdated ruling, dated July 21, indicating that the MOTION TO OPEN was denied despite the plaintiff's lack of due diligence and the case had no merit.  

Today, August 4, this Motion To DISQUALIFY AND Remove Judicial Authority is being presented.  

FACTS

1.  GOOD CAUSE SHOWN:  DEFENDANT WAS WITHHELD FROM KNOWING WHAT JUDGE WOULD HEAR THE CASE UNTIL AFTER THE CASE WAS HEARD.  HE WOULD NOT IDENTIFY HIMSELF OR ANY OTHER PARTY INVOLVED AT THE HEARING.  DEFENDANT DISCOVERED ON HER OWN THAT THE MALE ATTORNEY WAS ATTORNEY BARDOS. THE FEMALE ATTORNEY, WHO SAID SHE WAS "ME" WAS NEVER IDENTIFIED AND MOST LIKELY THE SO-CALLED EXPERT WITNESS, WHO WAS A PRIOR EMPLOYEE OF AMAZON AND POSSIBLY HOLDS A POSITION WITH MGM, WHICH JEFF BEZOS RECENTLY PURCHASED.  

Defendant was send a anonymous letter from someone who identified theirself as "Me" only telling her that her sister's daughter's 18-year old daugher and her sister's husband were killed by four explosions to her nieces home.  That letter is included in this Appendix.  Defendant submitted a letter to the Gatlinburg police department claiming this destruction of her niece's home was obviously a crime scene since her sister had an untimely death in 2018 and her sister's youngest son's home was burned down and he died of blood poisoning two weeks later.  Instead of assuring defendant they were considering those issues in their investigation, a detective left a voicemail for the defendant, accusing her of sending numerous letter to their department, demanding the defendant, Anne Bradley, call this lying detective.  Defendant did NOT return the call and considered this detective to have illicit motives rather than just do her job as a detective.  

During the proceedings of this case, defendant brought up the several illegal acts committed by this superior court processing of this case, emphasizing the case had no merit, the Small Claim was not in compliance with the Rules of Court or satisfying its claim that Defendant owed for MEDICAL EXPENSES. This judge, who was later identified as Judge Michael P. Kamp, fully understood the fraud and did nothing to adjudicate or administer the law.  

2. Rather that hear this case, the judge rushed it, saying he was going to hear all motions at once, which is literally impossible and showed a deliberate lack of administration of Justice, along with intent to rule in favor of the plaintiff before the case was heard.  

3. Motions to Strike were not heard.  Motion For Default Judgment on CounterClaim was not heard. Previously, the court ruled DENIAL on plaintiff's Motion For Dismissal on COUNTERCLAIM, which was not even prepared legally, without any Facts/Argument, Law, or Summary or even a sufficient History.  Yet this Attorney Bardos claimed to have been one of the highest ranking, in the Honor Society at Qunnipiac University and all he proved was he was able to write his name.  

4. Defendant is indigent, has prepared fee waivers to sustain her rights.  Changing courts would be an additional hardship on her and had she motioned for this, it is her experience that the court administration plays a "Devils Chessboard" and assigns even more nefarious judges, because THE COURTS HAVE TARGETED THE DEFENDANT, as already established in her Answer and Special Defenses and Counterclaim.  

5. The Small Claim was improperly served reflecting MAIL FRAUD.  The Priority Mail package was placed in the defendant's mailbox at her residence with a return address of a third party which is not adjoined to this case, let alone the PLAINTIFF AS REQUIRED BY THE RULES OF COURT,  an alleged detective service.  It was not properly served by the mailman who is frequently assigned to deliver mail to this location.  The mailman assured defendant that upon scanning it the machine would show that it was deficient, if he had it in his system.  Defendant reported this to FBI, providing results on the tracking, NO TRACKING INFORMATION, and only confirming that the printed postage was paid for, which can be done by machine or possibly by a postal account online.  

6. Attached is a marked up Small Claim form, as previously presented to the court, to show the areas in which the small claim form is defective.  This includes even the most basic issues, that the plaintiff accused defendant of not paying medical expense which was not even disclosed, that the plaintiff entered an illegal appearance as Pro Hac Vice when it is a Connecticut Attorney, not a member of the Bar in Michigan.  The fact that the was another issue, and there were more as already preplaintiff had no jurisdiction in Connecticut sented - and deliberately ignored by Judge Kamp ALONG WITH MANY OTHER VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW.  

7. The fact that the plaintiff agreed that the defendant's credit was reduced to $710, admitted defendant paid $30 a month for three years, and defendant stopped making purchases on this account for 2014 to 2017 (those same years) also showed the AMAZON account was paid in EXCESS by $300.  A simple "Do The Math" on this case this was relayed to the judge, who was aggressively and nefariously helping the plaintiff to prosecute with NO JUST CAUSE.  Attached is a copy of the plaintiff's billing that indicated defendant's credit line was reduced to $710 by Synchrony Bank (one of many reasons defendant stopped using the card in 2014) AND another billing document for even the same time period, which nefariously indicates credit line to be $610 - just another reflection of just how fraudulent the plaintiff is.  

8. THE SMALL CLAIM HAS NO MERIT, NO STANDING.  The plaintiff committed fraud. The judge committed fraud by conspiring with the plaintiff rather than hear the case, which the court was responsible for recording and retaining record of.  Defendant has her own recording, should the court request it, claiming "defective equipment", which at this point would only be considered a lame, not reasonable excuse.  

9. PLAINTIFF SHOWED NO DILIGENCE, NO COMPETENCE, AND  IS OBVIOUSLY NOT A REAL ATTORNEY.  Thus making this case also lack merit for that count as well.  

10. DEFENDANT DESERVES FULL COMPENSATION OF $5,000 plus court costs for legal expenses of which has already modestly been set forth, exceeding $550.

11.  Motion for Articulation on ruling (Should the court fail to assign a new judge) and Motion for Reconsideration (for a newly-assigned judge) is also being presented to the court.  

12. Defendant was not able to request reassignment of the case to civil court and increase amoumt adding punitive damages, more detailed costs, and emphasis on the nefarious activity of Synchrony Bank and LVNV Funding - due to the fact the court only allowed her three days to complete it from the day this small claim was received in the mail.  

13.  As an attorney, the plaintiff WAS OBLIGATED TO KNOW the length of time to Answer Counterclaim, yet failed to do so.  Defendant submitted a Motion for Default Judgment and THEREAFTER THE COURT MODIFIED DUE DATE OF THE PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO EXCEED THE CONNECTICUT RULES OF COURT BY TWO MONTHS, DESPITE NO REQUEST BY THE PLAINTIFF FOR THIS TIME.  This was nothing more than a nefarious trick, aiding and abetting the plaintiff.   

14. Defendant filed e-filing appearance.  She used her PO Box due to obviousl MAIL FRAUD of the notice of small claim - which was marked as having been sent from a third party, not party to this case, in Illinois - which is another just reason this case has no merit. The e-filing was disrupted by the Court Operations Center, which blocked her first upload even after her registration was complete online.  The Operations Center would not notify her of why they disrupted her upload and defendant had to keep calling to get answers, which they were reluctant to provide.  Eventually, their attorney got on the phone and claimed the defendant had to give them her identification in person before they would recognize her as the same person.  THIS WAS ABUSE OF POWER, MAKING UP RULES AS THEY GO ALONG, TO IMPEDE JUSTICE.  THERE WAS NO SOLUTION WITH JUDGE KAMP.  HE ONLY WENT ALONG WITH THIS NEFARIOUS ACTIVITY RATHER THAN ASSURE DUE PROCESS.

15. Copy of the email sent to the plaintiff, attaching the Memorandum Of Law, is also atteched to this motion.   

LAW

PB 1-23 MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY.  

A motion to disqualify a judicial authority shall be in writing and shall be accompanied by an affidavit setting forth the facts relied upon to show the grounds for disqualification and a certificate of counsel of record that the motion is made in good faith.  The motion shall be filed no less than ten days before the time the case is called for trial or hearing, UNLESS GOOD CAUSE IS SHOWN FOR FAILURE TO FILE WITHIN SUCH TIME.  

PB 24-12: The Answer Date shall  NOT be less than 15 NOR MORE THAN 45 DAYS AFTER THE WRIT AND ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS ARE FILED IN THE COURT.  

PB 24-10: Service of Small Claim Writ and Notice of Suit

Sec. 24-10. —Service of Small Claims Writ

and Notice of Suit

(Amended June 26, 2000, to take effect Jan. 1, 2001.)

(a) The plaintiff, or representative, shall cause

service of the writ and notice of suit separately

on each defendant by priority mail with delivery

confirmation, by certified mail with return receipt

requested or with electronic delivery confirmation,

by a nationally recognized courier service providing delivery confirmation, or by a proper officer in

the manner in which a writ of summons is served

in a civil action. The plaintiff, or representative,

shall include any information required by the

Office of the Chief Court Administrator. A statement of how service has been made, together

with the delivery confirmation or return receipt or

electronic delivery confirmation and the original

writ and notice of suit shall be filed with the clerk.

The writ and notice of suit and the statement of

service shall be returned to the court not later than

one month after the date of service.

Defendant is NOT out-of-state entity and therefore removed (b) from this Motion. 

SUMMARY

This case has no merit.  It was not administered properly. It should not have been allowed to be docketed.  The plaintiff is a FRAUD.  The court aided and abeted the plaintiff despite the OBVIOUS LACK OF MERIT.  The judge aided and abeted by not holding a proper hearing, not hearing the motions that were even assigned.  Refusing to respond to the fact that the Small Claim was "popped out like candy" - typed exactly as the Pascerelli case - with no amended claim despite the fact that the defendant emphasized all of the reasons for its lack of merit.  It is obvious that the plaintiff relied on ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE to alter the records, etc. - as its only means to end as an END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS, rather than properly administer justice.  Defendant deserves to be fully compensated for the great amount of work and expense she has set forth to prove her points on this pointless case.  The court has wasted a great amount of time and government money - all to conspire with a plaintiff which is nothing but a deliberate FRAUD.  

Appendix Attached 

WHEREFORE, the defendant motions this court for DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE KAMP, REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT IN ORDER TO ASSURE DUE PROCESS OF LAW AND RECONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER. 

Prepared and Submitted,

FOR THE DEFENDANT, PRO SE

_________________________ 

Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se 

Address and Phone on Appearance

RULING

THE COURT, HAVING HEARD AFORESAID MOTION, HAS RULED

GRANTED/DENIED

CERTIFICATION OF MAILING

Aforesaid motion on this State of Connecticut case has been FAXED this day, August 4, 2021, to the out-of-state-plaintiff:

Stillman Law Office

30057 Orchard Lake Road

Suite 200 Department 100

Farmington Hills, MI 48334

FAX Number:  443-588-6417

______________________

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS 

      (this is only a partial - these are documents I could paste here ; total pages to this complaint:  103)  

    Had I not added a copy of this affidavit to my Original Appendix, this would have been never made part of the record because the original was trashed by the court.

Supplement to Complaint: 

Case No. NNH-CV-20-6105010-S : State of Connecticut

LNV FUNDING, LLC ASSIGNEE OF 

SYNCHRONY BANK : SMALL CLAIMS COURT

VS

ANNE M. BRADLEY :JUNE 29, 2020 August 7, 2020

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER AND SPECIAL DEFENSES 

Append to July 9 Answer and Special Defenses 

This document is to be scanned in with JD-CV108 Form and prepared attachments submitted

 July 9, 2020 - which the court has not scanned in to this day.  

1. Plaintiff failed to serve the defendant according to PB 24-1 to PB 24-10.

a. Priority Mail did not have and delivery information when defendant looked up the tracking number.  Conclusion: Someone other than the mailclerk who delivers mail to defendant’s residence placed it in defendant’s mailbox.  The mailman or woman has to scan it as delivered. Defendant is confident they never waiver on their duties. It was not even entered as being sent according to tracking information.  Defendant reported this to a federal authority and mailed the information.  Defendant scanned in an 82-page document.  A false alarm causing tenants to evacuate the building resulted in that scanned document to have pages which only print all black.    

(i) The management reported the false alarm was due to an employee “accidentally” pulling the fire alarm in the store which has been operating for ten years.  No one called authorities to explain it was a false alarm even though there are some severely disabled people in this building, and defendant saw a personal care assistant making her patient struggle down several flights of stairs even though he was very weak and shaking and using just a cane.  There was also a couple who had to bring their baby outside. 

b. The alleged Priority Mail had a return address of a company titled KELLERMAN INVESTIGATIONS, LTD – located in Glen Carbon, IL. The only tracking information was a confirmation that the stamp had been purchased.  It is against postal law to allow a customer to purchase a priority mail sticker unless it is being delivered that day.  If they mail it another day, they have to get a new sticker, which may be replaced and not re-purchased upon explaining circumstances to the postal clerk.  Most likely someone purchased it through their mail machine yet the machine would require both sender and receiver information.  Note, a Certification of Service is required to be included in the Priority Mail  the date which a mailing is sent to the receiver/defendant.  There is no Certification of Service which provides that statement with the documents which were in the Priority Mail envelope. The printout showing defendant’s results when typing in the tracking number ON APRIL 23, 2020 has been submitted to the court.  A copy of the Amended Timeline dated 7/13/2020 (which is also used to serve as Appendix to documents served to the Plaintiff and Court on 7/13/2020) is attached to this Revised Submission, which should be scanned in with the FORM which Defendant Prepared, attachments to the form, no stapled due to the court’s ABUSE OF PROCESS.  PLAINTIFF CLAIMS THE PRIORITY MAIL WAS DELIVERED TO HER RESIDENCE ON APRIL 9, WHICH IS FALSE. 

(i) Note, both the Small Claim Writ Form and Affidavit are required to be the same date iaw PB 24-24.  Small Claim Writ Form was signed by Connecticut Attorney who uses Michigan Law Office as Juris Number, claiming to be a Commissioner of the Court – WHICH IS NOT A NOTARY.  Attached is a Supplement to this Appended Document to Answer And Special Defenses. Only if a Writ AND Notice of Suit is Notarized may a plaintiff forego submitting a separate Affidavit of Debt.  Yet in this case, the plaintiff deliberately submitted an illegal Affidavit of Debt – not only fraudulent yet not even dated properly – of which is ANOTHER reason which the court should have acted in its duties by removing this case from the docket since it has no merit.  

(ii) Note, although Defendant’s appearance includes filing electronically AS A MATTER OF RIGHT, the state’s Small Claims Dept. intercepted her processing by adding-on another requirement despite the fact that the defendant was ALREADY REGISTERED and attempting to upload her first document.  Defendant claims this is not just ABUSE OF PROCESS.  IT IS ALSO FRAUD.  An acclaimed attorney in the Small Claims Dept. claimed she added this request and the only way she would allow defendant to send her a copy of defendant’s PICTURE ID is through internet – not US Mail, not FAX – which is a deliberate violation of the defendant’s privacy AND RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS.    

c. According to the court on aforesaid case,  the plaintiff is LVNV Funding with no address of record on the Court Form JD-CV-40A1 – which is supposed to be an ANSWER FORM which ONLY THE DEFENDANT COMPLETES.  LVNV WAS NOT REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT, YET AFTER DEFENDANT MENTIONED THIS THROUGH HER EMAIL TO CONTACTS SHE KEEPS IN TOUCH WITH, THE SECRETARY OF STATE ALTERED THE RECORD TO INCLUDE LVNV FUNDING LLC with a main address as Las Vegas, Nevada, and a secondary address as the state of Delaware – neither address of which is a PO Box in Greenville, SC, which is ILLEGALLLY on the Small Claim Form.   Defendant has submitted the very proof that her search on LVNV resulted in no information, yet the website was working fine for all other information which defendant made searches on.  The ANSWER AND SPECIAL DEFENSES is a form that defendant should be completing. Not the court.  According to the Small Claims Writ as well as Rules of court and Statutes of Connecticut, the plaintiff has an address which SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN IN BY THE COURT:  PO Boxes are not places of operation or residency.  Additionally, this address is located in Greenville, SC – and the plaintiff on the Small Claim is not registered in the state of Connecticut; and if it was, could not use that address for the record.  There is nothing in the short affidavit, used as a Complaint, which explains why it used a PO Box for address of record.  Defendant can only speculate, due to the hundreds of Small Claims filings by LVNV Funding in Connecticut, that certain politicians allow this nefarious company to prosecute as plaintiff without being registered in Connecticut because they or other politicians in Washington, DC probably make money off them as investors, and most likely are used to propagate the Satanic Underground’s New World Order Agenda.  Additionally, a person by the name of Matthew Bardos signed this small claim without identifying who he is.  A SCRIBBLE was made under his name, claiming to be a Commissioner of the Court, SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN, with no stamp of when Commission Expires along with name on the stamp.  The Small Claims Writ Form which was in the Priority Mail flat-rate envelope to defendant - from the nefarious company in Illinois - in June 2020 is not even stamped by the court, which is another defective matter on this case.  A Writ is an Order By The Court. This is a definition in the Black’s Law Dictionary, which cannot be questioned.  

(i) On June 29, 2020, defendant printed the tracking information since her 82-page scanned document had certain pages blacked-out, replacing what was actually scanned in. (Cyber Crime occurred the same time there was a false fire alarm in the building requiring all tenants to leave the building – tenants were not told to walk back up even though management was well aware of the supposed accidental pulling of the fire alarm.  The pages still exist and don’t just print as blank white pages, thus reflecting the document had been altered..  They come out completely black with ink, reflecting the document had been deliberately altered by someone who accessed that file remotely or directly on defendant’s laptop - which reflects one of many issues of CYBER CRIME on this case. 

c. The Statement of Service, was prepared AFTER the plaintiff claims to have mailed the PRIORITY MAIL FROM ILLINOIS (proving that this certification was non Compliant – another reason this case has no merit)   It is signed by a person with no identity, not title, rather than being consistent by using Kellerman, who is not even a party to this case and has never been a party to a case in Connecticut according to a records search made by the Defendant. This only damages the credibility of this case all the more.  The person apparently is an attorney, Christopher Moylan, with a Juris No. of 402604. Defendant attempted to locate this Juris No. though there is no indication in this Small Claim paperwork where this attorney practices.  

(i) Upon doing a search of this Juris Number, Defendant discovered that this attorney has an Active Status and is marked with “A”, rather than “F” for Pro Hac Vice, as the Stillman Law Office used when submitting this small claim electronically.  This attorney’s address is at the Stillman Law Office at 41 Kenosha Ave, Suite 302, Danbury, CT 06810 with a Business ID of 1166757   He had no authority to prepare a Certification of Service for a company located in Illinois.  Additionally, the Stillman Law Office which is referred to by the court on the only document which the court gave the defendant  (Pre-prepared Defendant’s Answer and Special Defenses) is located at 30057 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 200 Dept 100, Farmington Hills, Michigan 48334. Their Business ID is 438732. Refer to Supplement to this Appended Document since upon discovery, the plaintiff-attorneys (both Moylan and Bardos) have false identities online.  

2. “Affidavit of Facts and Purchase Of Account” By Plaintiff was included in paperwork and NEVER mailed to the defendant PRIOR to entering the small claim case.  Plaintiff made another false statement regarding it served defendant this affidavit.  Upon viewing the case information, the court ADDED pages to this affidavit, titled “Notice of Suit” which is outright fraudulent.  Logically speaking, Notice of Suit is required to be sent 4 weeks prior to mailing a Small Claim.  This was a “fudging of records” to cover up the signed Small Claim of 5/5/2020 yet not entered into court until two months later, despite the fact attorneys in Connecticut can electronically file cases right from their work locations  online.  

3. The only reason defendant is not submitting an immediate MOTION TO DISMISS AND EXPUNGE is because the Defendant claims a right to COUNTERSUE, of which was submitted, to the fullest amount for a Small Claim – yet this amount would certainly be increased if this case was made a Civil Lawsuit since this case does not have a Small Claims Number, but a Civil Case Number.  An application for Fee Waiver was submitted timely.  The court claimed defendant could not have it signed by them because she could not go to their office. Therefore, defendant entered “No Clerk available due to COVID Agenda”.  Rather than tell the defendant to resubmit a fee waiver and they would meet her by the Marshall’s workstation, the court returned a selected group of papers, strategically claiming they could not accept them because the fee waiver had to be signed by their office clerk.  Defendant was not called about this, they simply took the liberty of violating Due Process.  Defendant immediately returned them upon getting them in the mail, claiming ABUSE OF PROCEDURE.  There was already a fee waiver entered in court, signed by their Deputy Chief Clerk, by the time these documents were received in THIRD CLASS MAIL (another opportunity to abuse procedure, to slow the process) since the defendant had called the court by chance, and they told her they mailed those documents to her that same day (no doubt having the ability to remove them from the mail) and defendant said that was completely illogical since a new fee waiver would have to be submitted if they wanted the deputy chief clerk to sign it at the marshall’s workstation – which was an added-on requirement AFTER defendant called them and informed them she would be submitting a fee waiver for the filing and processing (including service process) of the COUNTERSUIT – ALL OF WHICH WERE ELECTRONICALLY SERVED ON THE PLAINTIFF THROUGH EMAIL, WITH VERBAL CONFIRMATION BY THEIR OFFICE THAT THE EMAIL WAS RECEIVED.  

Prepared and submitted

FOR THE DEFENDANT PRO SE

_________________________

Case No. NNH-CV-20-6105010-S : State of Connecticut

LNV FUNDING, LLC ASSIGNEE OF 

SYNCHRONY BANK : SMALL CLAIMS COURT

VS

ANNE M. BRADLEY :       August 7, 2020

DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT ON THE COURT’S

 FAILURE TO DUE PROCESS 

AND RETURN ONLY SELECTED DOCUMENTS

TO THE DEFENDANT

WHICH WERE IMMEDIATELY RETURNED BACK VIA PRIORITY MAIL 

1. On July 9, the Defendant timely submitted the following:  Answer, Appearance, Special Defenses, Counterclaim, Fee Waiver Application for cost of filing and serving COUNTERCLAIM, AND Timeline to also serve as APPENDIX for accompanying documents comprising of over 100 pages. Note, despite the fact defendant had not submitted her appearance the court erroneously documented that her appearance was submitted on 6/18/2020 which is ILLEGAL and a violation of privacy!  BURDEN OF PROOF WAS NEVER MET BY THE ILLEGALLY-APPEARING PLAINTIFF.  

2. There was no call from the court.  Defendant called the court the afternoon of the following day, July 10 (copy of gmail referring to Resent Small Claim) dated July 10, 2020).  They confirmed they had everything yet oddly said they were returning “Your fee waiver and the documents your fee waiver is for because you have to bring those back to court and have the Deputy Chief Clerk sign your fee waiver”

3.  Defendant was angry they violated her right to Due Process, emphasizing she previously told them she was submitting a fee waiver and signing it since they will not allow her to get anyone in their office to sign it upon going to the courthouse.  No one disputed this.  Additionally, the returned documents were legitimately submitted and some of them had nothing to do with the fee waiver. Nevertheless, the fee waiver and Counterclaim were separate submissions.  A fee waiver is decided upon based on indigency of the party.  Defendant has a right to Counterclaim and informed the plaintiff by letter that if the plaintiff was so stupid enough to actually file that small claim, she would countersue, claiming they showed malice and forethought. 

4. The following day, defendant – hand-carried a replacement fee waiver to the courthouse after calling them, informing them she would be doing so.  She requested the Deputy Chief Clerk  to make arrangement to sign her document IN PERSON since it is required for them to witness her signature.  They said that could be arranged, to just ask the marshal to call their office at the time she arrived.  Upon arrival a short time thereafter, the marshal refused to call, saying “We don’t do that sort of thing”, at which time defendant demaned it since the court clerk’s office claimed it was okay.  The marshal refused and defendant stepped away and called someone she knew explaining they were manipulating her.  As she was on the phone, the Chief Deputy Clerk came down and retorted it was unnecessary since they returned her her documents to her and to wait.  Defendant said, “Wait for what?  You can’t sign that other form because I signed it already. So sign this and give me a copy.”  The Chief Deputy Clerk signed it and refused to give her a copy.  Defendant took a picture using her cell phone although that picture was deleted by someone who accessed her apartment and unlocked the wooden crate which she placed items in since her apartment is illegally entered frequently.  Unfortunately she only moved one number on the combination so someone may have used that strategy to figure out the combination.  

5. On July 13, Defendant went to the courthouse with resubmitted  and./or appended documents to be submitted on aforesaid case.  The Marshal took them.  

6. On July 23, 2020,  the Court’s returned mail date stamped July 14, 2020,  was received by the defendant.  Defendant can only conclude they deliberately held onto it as a further delay tactic.  

Some of the documents can be listed, yet someone deleted all pictures on Defendant’s cell phone and she was unable to find time to attach all pictures to her email as a backup.  Defendant had locked up her phone in her apartment and waited for the food bank delivery in the lobby for a few hours on Wednesday, August 5.  This was when the pictures were deleted.  The landlord never changed the lock to Defendant’s door before she moved in and bragged about it last year during an illegal process of eviction which the landlord erroneously brought against the defendant, figuring the judge would be successful helping them out to evict her.  The case had no merit and should have been dismissed before a hearing took place.  At that hearing the apartment manager argued, “What do we need to change her lock for?  She can trust us.” Defendant immediately responded with, “Trust?  You’re trying to illegally evict me and you say I can trust you?” The judge then retorted that he would strike that statement and scolded the defendant for not being nice to the manager who made herself look 9 months pregnant and claimed she was due any day. Documents which defendant recalls or retained in Gmail: 

1) Fee Waiver, pages 1-3 (Defendant retained page one and the envelope which the court mailed the returned documents in) This Fee Waiver, the court said, was invalid without the Deputy Clerk’s Signature.  Defendant claimed that nobody could sign a form like that when it had already been signed by the preparer. They would have to create a new one.  

2) Defendant’s Answer Form, submitted and dated July 9, 2020 – which has absolutely nothing to do with the Fee Waiver 

3) Appearance of the Defendant – which has absolutely nothing to do with the Fee Waiver 

4) Counterclaim, which was emphasized to be part of the same case.  

COST OF THE POSTAGE:  $2/00 (copy of envelope from the court is attached)

DATE OF POSTAGE:  July 14, 2020 – defendant emphasizes they deliberately waited 4 days to mail it out AFTER they said they had already mailed it out and “it’s too late” 

5) Return Priority Mail from the defendant, 7/23/2020 . Immediately returned to the courthouse, Tracking number 9505 5124 5061 0206 2765 24 FLAT RATE

(i) So it took from the 14th to the 23d for that envelope to go from the courthouse to Yale Post Office, which was only ½ mile from the courthouse and ½ mile from defendant’s residence – so the courthouse could have told the defendant should could pick it up.  In fact, the day that the defendant went to the courthouse to get the replacement fee waiver signed, THEY HAD NOT EVEN DATE STAMPED THE RETURNED DOCUMENTS! It was completely WRONG for the chief deputy clerk to mail those out AFTER the problem was resolved in the processing of her fee waiver.   

7. Defendant claims that CYBER CRIME is used by the Stillman Law Office, including corrupting the emailed documents sent to their office.  Upon attempting to copy them for her own references, she frequently got the following message on a portion of her documents:  unexpected error is keeping you from copying the file…search error code to search the problem:  0x80070571 – Defendant has not had time to search those manipulative codes due to the many problems she has from corruption, though has reported this and other tricks which the court and plaintiff enjoy using.  

8. Copy of tracking information of Priority Mail from Glen Carbon, Il.  (Printed information which the Yale Post Office obtained for the Defendant on 6/19/2020)  “Delivered at mailbox on 6/9/2020 at 12:46 New Haven 06510) 

9. Defendant was refused copies of the case file when she requested it to ensure the court clerk’s office was not tampering with the documents she submitted.  

10. Defendant affirms she does not owe either Synchrony Bank or another account which LVNV is harassing her about.  HARASSMENT IS UNWANTED CONTACT BY A HARASSER WHO HAS NO RIGHT TO CONTACT A PERSON.  

11.  This is Modus Operandi with LVNV and as already stated, part of a large New World Order operation globally – even though the FOUNDATION HAS NO NO GROUNDS.  THE COMPANY IS ILLEGITAMATE. THE COURT IS HELPING THE COMPANY, NOT DOING ITS JOB BY ADMINISTERING THE LAW.  

12. Defendant can only hope that a positive change of course will take place on this case.  That does not include illegally entering her apartment and frauding records – a favorite way of life by Brett Kavanaugh, which is no doubt why he was backed by Donald Trump, who defendant claims to be another Deceiver-In-Chief.  

13.  The United States still has laws, still has a Constitution, still has rules and regulations – no matter how much the politicians nefariously switch words and processes to serve their pockets.  Most likely if they simply administered the law like they are supposed to be doing, rather than make it a requirement to be corrupted to work in Washington DC – they would have made a great profit in being part of the solution!  Those who are corrupting Washington DC need to be held accountable! Face Justice!  They waste a tremendous amount of money with their criminal operations!  

Prepared and Submitted, 

FOR THE DEFENDANT PRO SE

______________________

Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se 

Phone and address on Appearance 

CERTIFICATION OF MAILING

The aforesaid ‘Statement On Violation of Due Process and more’ is served on the plaintiff of record, (who has not entered an appearance yet documents a Michigan address for office of operation and use Connecticut attorneys who use their juris number which defendant claims is fraudulent) as stated on the expired Small Claim form which the State of Connecticut allowed to be entered into court: 

Stillman Law Office 

30067 Orchard Lake Road

Suite 200 Dept 100

Farmington Hills, MI 48334 

_______________________

Anne M. Bradley 

I think that is all I can add...frankly, I don't feel like verifying.  I am tired of standing up to the DEVIL'S CHESSBOARD.  This should not even be called a courthouse. 

   ADDITIONALLY, THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE HEARING WAS PASTED IN A SEPARATE BLOGPOST - I USED A SKUNK PICTURE FOR IDENTIFICATION. 

GOD BLESS. 

Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se 

CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE

AFORESAID “Appended Document to “Defendant’s Answer And Special Defenses”, comprising of SIX PAGES, along with Supplement of TWENTY-FOUR  PAGES,  is NOT being electronically served on the plaintiff due to the abuse of process, CYBER CRIME, and deceptive manner in which the Stillman Law Firm claim only by phone verbally they received those documents (copies of current email, etc. included in Supplement)  in the email at the time defendant called their 800 number on the appearance form – refusing to tell the defendant where they were actually located, which no doubt is  NOT where the address of record on the Small Claims Form was.  These papers are being mailed today from the Yale Post Office if their machine is available to pay for postage.  Otherwise, the papers will be mailed at Yale Post Office, THIRD CLASS MAIL, tomorrow, Saturday. Due to reduced hours of operation, defendant is unable to send them today unless their machine is operating.  The counter closes at 2p.m. Mon-Friday and is open 9-12 on Saturdays.  A copy of the proof will be retained – unlike what the plaintiff did when mailing the Priority Mail flat, with a printout from USPS.  Instead, they created an Affidavit with unverified information and at the time where USPS indicated there was absolutely no tracking on that number. The stamp had only been purchased.  

________________________

Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se  

         MY LAST COMMENT WAS REMOVED BY A HACKER. 

LAST DOCUMENT ENCLOSED TO THIS JUDICIAL COMPLAINT WAS THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE HEARING OF MAY 20, 2021.  

THAT TRANSCRIPT IS ON THIS BLOG AS A SEPARATE BLOGPOST. IT HAS A SKUNK PICTURE TO LOCATE IT EASIER.  TITLE OF THE BLOGPOST HAS TRANSCRIPT IN IT.