TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR THIS BLOG, ALPHEBETIZED
You can toggle back and forth this way on your phone. It should work on a computer also. I need test it. 8/1/2021
http://www.PubliusRoots.com/2018/04/TABLE-of-contents.html?m=1
TRANSCRIPT
Case No. NNH-CV-20-6105010-S : State of Connecticut
LVNV Funding, LLC : Superior Court
Vs : Court of New Haven
Anne M. Bradley : AUGUST 6, 2021
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION AND REMOVAL OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING 20MAY2021
Anchor.fm/terra-cotta
Some sections (inaudible due to pressured speach)
Note, some areas are my notes - they were italicized but the letters changed to all the same when I pasted it - I will make those areas in RED .....
1. Bardps: Yes, Your Honor. Quick Question on Order of Operations. First, we filed a Motion To Dismiss the Defendant's Counterclaim. I don't know if Your Honor would like to entertain that first.
2. Judge: I'm gonna do the whole thing at once (29:44)
3. Bardos: Ok, Your Honor, so we will in that case, uhm present our claim first and, uhm - we have a witness here. Miss Victoria Mason.
4. Mason sworn in. She responds with : I do
5. Bardos: For the record, Ma'am, what is your name, Ma'am?
6. Mason: Victoria Mason. M-A-S-O-N
7. Bardos: Who is your employer?
8. Mason: I am employed with RESURGENT CAPITAL SERVICES. I'm the Records Custondian for LVNV Funding.
9. Bardos: And how long have you been employed there?
10. Mason; uh - 3 1/2 years
11. Bardos: Uh - As part of your duties - are you maintaining and have access to the records of the plaintiff in this mamtter?
12. Mason: I do.
13. Bardos: And are you currently familiar with the policies and procedures regarding credit card accounts?
14. Mason: I do.
15. Bardos: Have you personal knowledge of this matter based on your review of the records in this case?
16. Mason: I have.
17. Bardos: And does the plaintiff have a record of the existence of an account for Anne Bradley?
18. Mason: We do. It's an account that we purchased from Synchrony Bank on an Amazon debtors card - uh, that we purchased, uh February twenty nineteen (2019)
19. Bardos: Perfect, and let's see here, uhm, Have we filed in this case in terms of documents you reviewed that transferred from Synchrony Bank to the plaintiff, LVNV Funding?
20. Mason: Yes, you filed a, uhm, affidavit of debt with the chain of title on it and filed separately the actual redacted portfolio for that chain of title. Also from those files for the business statements the billing statements for the last year of the account and the terms and condition of the account.
21. Bardos: Perfect. And have you had a chance to review the individual billing statements as well?
22. Mason: I have.
23. Bardos:--- uhm, are those types of documents kept in all course of business and created out in here for the time of the events you described?
24. Mason: Yes, for both LVNV Funding and the orginal creditor Synchrony Bank. I have been trained at Synchrony Bank so I understand their billing proceedures.
25. Bardos: Perfect. And uhm Along with the submittals of this case, would there be uhm, payments on the June 27, 2017 statement?
26. Mason: Yes, there was a payment made,specifically on, uhm, Let's see you, uhm, -- notice June 5th, 2017 in the amount of $30
27. Bardos: -- payments on some other, uh, account statements as well --
28. Mason: Yes, we had payments from the February 2017 through the June 2017 Statement.
29. Yet the AI altered her testimony to say WE (she is not LVNV, but is an attorney who abuses power with the brain of a pea) purchased the Synchrony account in 2019 - this is all constant lies.
30. Bardos: Oh, and is the defendant currently in default for -- make payments? 32:47min
31. Mason: Yes.
32. Bardos: And according to the filed statement --- Is the defendant in debt to the plaintiff on this matter $875.90? 33:11min
33. Mason: Yes.
34. Bardos: Uhm , and according to your records, that balance comprises of about charges made by the borrower-- as well as fees and interests? Yet she claimed she had no purchase records and was a CERTIFIED LICENSED BULLSHITTER, aka "Attorney Me" who has no legal right to take the stand since she said she was representing LVNV - she's a liar and the court is lying for her!
35. Mason: Yes (33:29 min)
36. Bardos: Uhm, a final question, uhm, are you seeking, uhm, a reimbursement of the court costs on this matter which are $108.15? Plus post judgment interests --
37. Mason: Yes.
38. Bardos: I have no further questions, Your Honor.
39. Judge: Ms. Mason, is LVNV documents -- and billing address: 360 State or 380 ---
40. Mason: (inaudible sounds)
41. Bradley: May I ask what document that is proferred on the file?
42. Judge: You don't need to know, Ms. Bradley, I just want to clear up this one issue on the file.
43. Mason: I have 360 State Street, Apartment 719, New Haven Court, 06510. Uhm - also on, uh redacted portfolio data string I have 360 State Street, Apartment 719 New Haven Connecticut 06510
44. Judge: Ms. Bradley, do you want to ask this witness any questions based upon what she just said?
45. Bradley: I'd like to know if they were documents that she proferred today in the court.
46. Mason: ( says nothing)
47. Judge: Well, not today, but they had filed previously - filed uh, Exhibits with Affidavit and documents. Answer is yes. Which is illegal!
48. Bradley: What exhibits would that be? Because I motioned to Strike Exhibits that were not certified and not served on me and I, uh - so those are very significant issues for her to testify to when that matter is contested - greatly contested. There were two - uh two documents of exhibits. The second exhibit wasn't even uhm - there was no - there was nothing on it that - that uhm, had any substance to anything. There was no title on it.
49. Bardos (interrupts) inaudible any statements
50. Judge: (inaudible) (also takes part in interrupting)
51. Bradley: How can she be a witness to contested documents? That's my point. Before I ask her any questions, I want to know what she is remarking - what she's uhm, making statements on - because..
52. Judge (interrupts): (inaudible sounds)
53. Bradley: Those documents are contested.
54. Judge: Well, so Ms. Mason, so why don't you describe what documents you are relying on - on your testimony?
55. Mason: Well, first there is the uh, specifically the affidavit and purchase of account by plaintiff.
56. Bradley: What File Number is that?
57. Judge (interrupts with inaudible sounds)
58. Bradley: I would like to know pertaining to this case.
59. Judge --- please. Go ahead, please.
60. Mason: I don't know, Sir. I don't have the affidavit. I have a separate file
61. Bradley: Well, the attorney would.
62. Bardos: If I may, Your Honor. I have the docket sheet in front of me. I can reference -- for Your Honor's help pending on the Docket Number.
63. Bradley: What is it?
64. Judge: Entry 100.3
65. Bradley? 103?
66. Judge: No, one zero zero point three three
67. Bradley: There is no file file entered on this case with that number
68. Judge: Well, if you look at the docket - - that this case CV20-615010, you go to uhm the 4th entry. It's document number 100.33
69. Bradley: Okay. I heard 1003.33
70. Judge: 100.33
71. Bradley: Okay
72. Judge: It's an Affidavit along with statements of the account
73. Bradley: Okay
74. Judge: That's what she relied on, correct, Ms. Mason?
75. Mason: That is one of the documents. That is the affidavit of the facts and purchase that was prepared by my co-worker Pamela Johnson for this matter. We are also, uh, have uhm the redacted data string which was filed separately which is specifically the portfolio itself in a redacted form identifying the account that was purchased. Then there are...
76. Bradley: What Number is that? What file number?
77. Bardos: Your Honor, if I may, uh, give you the numbers. The number of the redacted data string is uhm uhm 116 and the only other thing besides our uhm Motion to Dismiss, well, are uhm additional billing statements, 113, Your Honor
78. Bradley: So, you're using 116, File 116 in referencing File Number 113?
79. Bardos: Those two as well as the initial filing into court including 100.33
80. Bradley: Okay, it's those three documents that you're referring to right now, right?
81. Bardos: Correct
82. Bradley: And not the Actual complaint?
83. Judge: Well, they're referencing the complaint but they're also referencing support of their complaint - the documents identified - REPEATEDLY DEFENDS THE PLAINTIFF WHICH IS ILLEGAL!
84. in defense of the plaintiff - which occures MANY TIMES in this hearing
85. Bradley: Well, the complaint has on it that this case is, uhm, request that the court to apply CGS 37-3a to it. 37-3a.has to do with Medical Expenses and that's just , that's just a piece of the haphazzardness of this case. The filing of this case - It's saying the Issuer issued defendant a credit card and upon that card defendant because - must be became but they would not ever fix that - because after all, they pop these out, you know, like candy - and it says obligated to make timely payments. It says defendant defaulted the issuer assigned its rights to title and ownership - defendants debt to plaintiff?
86. Bardos: interrupts
87. Bradley: NO! The issuer was GE Money!
88. Bardos attempts to talk over Bradley and Bradley kept talking firmly
89. Bradley: GE Money was the issuer. They're falsifying facts of the case to begin with. So...
90. Judge: interrupts Ms Bradley, we -- do you live at 360 State Street?
91. Bradley: Excuse me?
92. Judge: Do you live at 360 State Street, Apartment 719 in New Haven?
93. Bradley: Yes, I do! I've not disputed that. I put it on numerous documents! NOTE, THE JUDGE ONLY ASKS TO STALL FOR TIME, TO INTIMIDATE ME, AND PROBABLY AS A CODE TO THEIR UNDERGROUND TO MURDER ME! MY SISTER, Kathy Davis, HAD AN UNTIMELY DEATH 4/23/2018. She looked like she was poisoned. Her youngest son's home was burned to the ground and he died 2 weeks later of blood poisoning and her daughter's home was destroyed by explosions, killing her 18 year old daughter and father - my brother in law, in Tennessee! The Writ that they created on this case was backdated to 4/23! I found out about my relatives' deaths from an anonymous letter - from "Me" - most likely "Attorney Me" or a collaborator!
94. Judge: You used the credit card..
95. Bradley: Not while I lived at 360 State Street!
96. Judge: No, I'm just saying
97. Bradley: I stopped paying on the Amazon card. I stopped making purchases - that's what I wanted to ask this witness. Do you know the purchase activity of that card? That's what I would like to ask this witness if she --
98. Judge: You can still ask that question.
99. Bradley: Yes
100. Mason: One moment . I'm looking at the portfolio data string. long pause I do not have the statements that have last payments. She just keeps referring to documents that are ILLEGAL, I MOTIONED TO STRIKE AND THE DAMN JUDGE DID NOT EVEN HEAR THE MOTION TO STRIKE, MY OTHER MOTIONS - AND LATER HE REFERS TO THE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS MY COUNTERCLAIM - AS MY MOTION TO DISMISS. THEY DON'T CARE. THEY FIGURE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WILL FIX EVERYTHING!
101. Judge interrupts: makes inaudible sounds
102. Bradley: firmly says I said PURCHASE. I did not say payments. NOTICE HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR THE JUDGE TO EVEN SETTLE ONE ISSUE AND THE BABOON ASKS ME WHAT MY ADDRESS IS OVER AND OVER EVEN THOUGH IT WAS CONFIRMED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE HEARING AS WELL IN DOCUMENTS! HE'S A FAKE! A FRAUD!
103. Mason: I apologize
104. Judge: inaudible sounds
105. Mason: I did not have the statements with your last purchase on it. I only have the last 12 statements.
106. They used Artificial Intelligence to delete a portion here - there is a break in subject matter
107. Bradley: Yeah, even though all through this whole, you know uhm, years of abuse by many companies including True Accord, Resurgent, LVNV--
108. Judge interrupts Miss Bradley, Ms. Bradley, I'm not worried about these other companies. The question is you took out a credit card and incurred expenses. LOOK AT www.lvnv.com - they rigged their website to cover their lying behinds!
109. Bradley: I did not incur expenses that I did not pay for! That's my point! They are - they even reduced - when Synchrony took it over they reduced the credit limit for no valid reason. They also failed to abide by the agreement which I had with GE Money. So if they want to stop the revolving credit, they have to issue a new agreement and they never did - and they should give me the choice of whether I want to agree to -- THE SMALL CLAIMS WRIT WAS BASED ON MEDICAL EXPENSES! SIGNED BY AN ATTORNEY! THEY DON'T GIVE A SHIT! THEY JUST KEEP LYING, FRAUDING!
110. Judge: rudely interrupts to defend plaintiff AGAIN with inaudible sounds which could interrupt train of thought by Bradley
111. Bradley: to their terms, which I would not agree to and I stopped purchasing Amazon - purchasing through that card in 2014. And they're saying I made payments of $30/month and I only became uh-uh defaulted in 2017. Do you realize 36 times 30 is over $1,000? And they reduced my credit line to $710.
112. note Lines 26 27, 28!
113. Judge: How much were the default charges, uhm, Miss Mason? again, only caring about defending the plaintiff!
114. Mason: The average default charge per month was $25. Interest was uhm over $10 a month.
115. Mason did not say that. She responded with the $339.63. She said the monthly payments were $25 and Bradley paid $5 more at the hearing. This was altered by AI.obviously, she would have included this in Lines 26-28. These people are spewing off with whatever fits their whims figuring AI will fix it anyway, to frame the case in favor of the plaintiff - no matter how fraudulent they are.
116. This statement which was crafted in the case only proves more that the balance was paid! SHE ADMITTED BRADLEY PAID $30/MONTH FOR 36 MONTHS, Lines 26-28. WHICH WAS OVER $1,000, WHICH WOULD OVERPAY HER BALANCE IN 2017. She admitted Bradley paid TIMELY until 6 montns after they took over the account in 2017! AI altered her testimony to say they didn't get the account until 2019 - which is contrary to documents, unless AI altered court records also, according to the programmers tricks! They are frauding information and the judge only conspires to help them win a case with no merit, based on MEDICAL EXPENSES!
117. Judge: Right, so $30
118. Bradley: There was no default charge! My point is very clear! I stopped making purchases on that card in 2014! and I said I was paying off the balance and that's it! And I paid off the balance and I stopped their - I told them - well, I told them to stop the card in 2014! And that's what happened. Any Amazon payments that I made, I made alot! I purchased a alot for having a small income. And uhm I purchased them with cash. I did not use that card! And they are frauding records right now by deliberately not telling the court when my last purchases were, what my purchase activity is. They have the burden of proof and they're not proving anything but being FRAUDS.
119. Bardos: Your Honor, if I may - pressured speech, words jumbled - I just wanna point out that the evidence and the Statute 36-a13. We provided much more -
120. Bradley: Now he's using a DIFFERENT STATUTE than what he used in the Small Claim!
121. Bardos: whimpering, whining, bumbling
122. Bradley: He used 37-3a! So he's falsifying information!
123. Judge attempts to defend plaintiff again
124. Bradley: Because he never corrected it - he never corrected it - he could care a less because they push these out like candy and expect the court to just go along with it! Well, I'm not going to agree to that! I think this is fraud! The issuer did not turn over my account! The issuer didn't! The issuer was GE Money - they were the issuer of this account and that's the reason why they didn't put their name on there. This case is very-very wrong, they don't even have a legal appearance. THEY USE A Pro Hac Vice appearance. This attorney is in Connecticut - not in Michigan and I looked up Michigan for the members of the Bar Asosciation and neither Moylan or uhm Bardos are listed. They say they're not found. PRO HAC MEANS HE IS OUT OF STATE ATTORNEY WITH "ONE TIME ONLY" APPEARANCE - SOME OUT OF STATE ATTORNEYS DO HAVE REGISTRATION IN ANOTHER STATE. IN THIS CASE, THIS BIMBO IS A CONNECTICUT ATTORNEY, LIVES IN CONNECTICUT. MOYLAN'S ADDRESS IS RIGHT BY THE COURT SERVICE CENTER IN WETHERSFIELD - AND ABUSED HIS POWER TO GET THEM TO BLOCK MY E-FILING....THAT IS CRIMINAL, BUT THEY DON'T CARE BECAUSE THE COURTS ARE RUN BY ORGANIZED CRIME!
125. Also what was mentioned was the fact of IMPROPER SERVICE to begin with - it has been documented more than once as well, by Bradley. It is obvious this court only wanted to go along with TARGETING ANNE BRADLEY.
126. Judge: completely ignores what is just said and discusses with plaintiff how much defendant owes voice is largely inaudible as if he is video conferencing with the plaintiff (Bardos and a female who said she was "me" represented LVNV and then says she is Victoria Mason as witness) Balance is---default charges
127. Mason: --- last statement that I have here. The charge-off account principle is $536.27 SHE SAID AT THE HEARING "WE PURCHASED THE ACCOUNT FROM SYNCHRONY BANK" 1. She works for Resurgent, but says "We" because she is an attorney illegally testifying as a representative of LVNV! They don't care! It is all "catch me if you can" 2. They didn't purchase the account from Synchrony. LVNV purchased it from Sherman Companies. 3. They purchased it in 2017, that is what she admitted to and artificial intelligence altered what she said to cover their lying a$$es!
128. REMINDER; charge-off was February 2017. That is what this "Attorney Me - aka Victoria Mason" testified as to when LVNV purchased the account from Synchrony Bank, yet this recording was altered by AI and she oddly "says" twenty nineteen, which was unlike how she pronounced the year dates she mentioned!Over $1,000 was paid to Synchrony from 2014 to 2017. Bradley had the GE Money Account since 2011. Synchrony purchased the account from GE Money in 2013. Bradley soon realized their nefarious billing activity had no solution and therefore stopped using the card and paid on the balance. She kept track of what her real balance was because they continued to fraud the billing. This so-called expert witness is lying and caught up in her own lies! And the judge knew that the only strategy he could use is change the subject and ask information already on record. He did this several times to drag out the time with nonsense! And put pressure on Bradley with "we gotta hurry" statements because it was the end of the day! ..and the charge-off account, interest charge, which would include late fees and --is $339.63
129. Judge: So when you stopped making payments, the principal was $536.27?
130. Bradley: I stopped making payments - purchases - in 2014! And they are frauding their records, saying "I don't know when that is" - and I have emphasized that over and over! I mean, this case not even - has no merit - none! I paid off what I owed! What they're doing is FRAUDING! That's what they're doing! I mean, just - just multiply 36 x 30. My minumum due was not $25, it was $30. I paid the minimum due. [note, defendant on this case claims certain segments were deleted by AI - the attorney who said she was representing LVNV and also served as expert witness said specifically that the monthly payments were $25 and I paid $5 more - it didn't fit the programmed artificial intelligence plan so it was deleted!}
131. Judge: kept interrupting with inaudible sounds Can you provide a copy of the payment history? another distraction! not asking for purchase history! AI defeated its purpose! THERE WAS NO MONTHLY DEFAULT CHARGE BECAUSE I WAS NEVER DEFAULTED! I PAID THE MINIMUM AMOUNT DUE, STOPPED USING THE CARD AND WHEN THE BALANCE WAS PAID, I SAID CLOSE THE DAMN CARD! Mason would have said the $25 was monthly default charge - she didn't! She would have elaborated more - she didn't! And of course none of these "figures" makes any sense anyway because they are piling lies on lies! They are not consistent because they are used to being puppets, airheads. She even said the reason why she didn't have all the records because "they didn't give them to me" - they handed her the script she was supposed to say and the papers she was supposed to "use as evidence" which has less value than toiletpaper!
132. Mason: I only have the last 12 statements, Your Honor. I'm sorry. That's all that was provided to me. THE FREAKING BIMBO IDIOT PUPPET ATTORNEY! HOW STUPID CAN SOMEONE BE - SAYING SHE HAD FULL KNOWLEDGE OF THE CASE, OF THE BILLING HISTORY, AND BLURTS OUT THIS AND SAYS HER PRAYERS TO AI TO GET THEM TO FIX THIS ON RECORDING!
133. She said she has MANAGED THE COLLECTIONS ACCOUNT SINCE 2017, WORKED FOR RESURGENT FOR 3 1/2 YEARS, AND NOW SAYS THIS? This "Attorney Me" most likely has scattered her FAKE POSITIONS with other companies and follows agendas, having no regard over the law or even telling the truth!
134. Bardos: Your Honor, I apologize, look at the file. I wanna make sure he sees not only did we file the last activity of charges in the initial complaint --
135. Bradley: I object to that because that is false! He's making false statements. I, uhm, I motioned to strike those two exhibits because they have no relevance to this case and concocting, uhm, a billing history which has absolutely no ledger of purchases and payments on it - just before the hearing is a trick - that's all it is! And I didn't get served! And in the certification he even puts down it was electronically served to PO Box 206514! I mean, they don't even care about doing their jobs! THIS IS FRAUDULENT! And that's why it's just so horrible! I've had to work on this over and over again. The case doesn't even have any merit to begin with! And shouldn't have even been docketed! Yet they even made me respond in three days from the day I received the small claim from the court. I only had three days! And I had to prepare the Answer, Special Defenses, and an Appendix. And that is file No. 103. The court actually frauded - made file No. 104, part of the case and it's total fraud! They took out page 7 of my Appendix and put it as a First Page of 104! I did not submit that! I only amended a document - that's all I did. So I did not amend my Answer or Counterclaim. So this case is being very - I'm not getting Due Process here - they just want to slam dunk me and they're doing that with all kinds of fraud! That's all it is! And uhm, this you know --
136. Judge interrupts Bardos with inaudible sound but probably can see him on a screen - THEY OBVIOUSLY ARE VIDEOSTREAMING EACHOTHER AND YET HAVE ME ON PHONE, WHICH IS FRAUDULENT. ALL PARTIES ARE TO BE HEARD THE SAME WAY.
137. Bardos: Yeah, Your Honor
138. Judge: Your office can file an affidavit showing the purchase history and payment history
139. Bardos: Your Honor, there's two things about that inaudible based on inaudible record. But We --
140. Judge picks up the slack for plaintiff as usual We only want -
141. Bardos: Yeah, I know, Your Honor. but we mumbles with pressured speech my CLIENT is a debt collector, so by right - oh, okay the judge must have gestured to Bardos via video conference - so I just wanna point out Your Honor, just for the record under Statute 36a-uhm a-13 -
142. Bradley: He's using that statute again and the case has 37-3a - that's what their complaint states! So they better stick to it because that's all they can legally argue. And it's the same with the Motion To Dismiss. They don't even have any facts or law on there, yet they want to argue it? Yeah, they cannot argue anything more than what was written! So and there's no substance to it!
143. Judge: again completely ignores what is said charge history and ...
144. Bardos: Well, you said I could provide -
145. more pressured speech...inaudible - no doubt he was hoping the judge would finish his sentence for him
146. Judge: Miss Bradley is making a good point that she made an effort to pay the balance --FREAKING LIAR! I DID NOT MAKE AN EFFORT, I PAID IT! I PAID IT $300 MORE THAN OWED! documents filed, so -- rigged by artificial intelligence! to help the dishonest judge and plaintiff! There was no argument about "making an effort to pay the balance - Bradley claimed all along she paid $300 OVER the balance)
147. Bradley: Well, they - you should dismiss the case, Your Honor! This statement was segmented with the judge's response prematurely, to take it out of context and allude to the Motion To Dismiss to be Bradley's motion when it was the plaintiff's lame motion to dismiss counter claim
148. Judge: I'm not dismissing the case. HE DIDN'T EVEN SAY THAT HERE. I WAS STILL TALKING.
149. Bradley: I've already argued it. I submitted my motion - my counterclaim, all of that! So he had opportuity to ---ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DELETED PART OF WHAT I SAID - any purchasing history. He did not! He chose not to - so that was his choice. This case should be ruled in my favor because of that!
150. Judge makes a popping sound, says nothing
151. Bradley: They're not being diligent. They're not being forthright. This case has no merit! He's not even a Michigan attorney! Yet they use a Pro Hac Vice appearance on this case! And it's not his juris number, nor is it Moylan's juris number.
152. Judge: Your motion to dismiss has no legal basis
153. the freaking motion to dismiss counterclaim was what was marked to be heard - this was crafted with a boost from AI to go along with their criminal agenda, aka Devil's Chessboard, of FRAUD to include using a ganging-up on Bradley approach!
154. Judge: I deny your Motion To Dismiss - the counterclaim you filed.
155. Welcome to AI! Why the hell would Bradley motion to dismiss her own counterclaim and certainly would have said WTF to the judge at this time!
156. Bradley: I'd like to know why you say there's no legal basis to dismiss - either inserted by AI or Bradley was holding the judge accountable for twisting words- I didn't motion to dismiss. I motioned to rule in my favor for the counterclaim, which would be an automatic dismissal of his claim, certainly.
157. Judge: Well, on your counterclaim, you have 350 pages of documents that are not relevant to this case.
158. Bradley: They are certainly relevant! I included the law, I included documents, emails from True Accord, I included emails to- my response to True Accord. As well as Resurgent. None of which LVNV refer to in Anything! None! They're frauds! They're not referred to True Accord - they've not referred to Resurgent - they've not referred to any other company this missing words emails telling me that I owe on an Amazon account which I did not owe. I paid off that card! Like I said, the last time I purchased I made a purchase - was in 2014. At no point would they even interract with me and show me their version of purchases. I even submitted to the court my letter of 2017 and I think it was attached to the objection to dismissal but it was definitely attached to one of my recent pleadings - and it was a letter to Amazon emphasizing I sent a 39 page history of payments and purchases - do they provide that as a response? NO!! They wouldn't even respond to it back then! So I said there's no solution back then. No solution! And I already paid off what was due. I stopped making purchases. So it's all there, Your Honor! He didn't contest it, yet you're gonna give him more time to do what? Make up stuff? I mean, yeah, I have a right to be mad. This has cost me tremendous amount ot time,stress, money. It cost me $50 just to create a document and I had to even get it sent back to me because I found tons of typographical errors that I didn't make. And it's all because of tricks on the computer - through technocrats that were hacking it. You know. I'm just - this is just terrible. This is just a terrible case!
159. Mason: I'm sorry Sir SHE DIDN'T EVEN SAY THAT HERE. HAD, SHE ....
160. completely out of place here and typical of AI - had she said that, I would asked her what the hell she was talking about!
161. Bradley: They had their time! This woman ..
162. referred to like this because I disputed who the hell she was, Attorney Me who was in the same room with Bardos, and now becomes an Account Manager who has no legal right to prosecute yet claims she is prosecuting in her testimony!
163. ... didn't even sign any documents. Why is she being a witness? I contested the woman that did sign a document who had no reference to her competency. missing words information, her phone number, no nothing and yet she claimed to be an expert and she referred to herself as a media specialist. A media specialist! So how can any of this have any substance?
164. Judge: repeatedly interfered with inaudible sounds obviously directed to Bardos who could unfairly see on a screen - yet Bradley continued to talk as much as she could
165. Judge: $536.
166. Bardos: Your Honor ----Quarter to 11 -inaudible - statement
167. He probably said that to infer the hearing took place in the morning, yet they pushed it out to the END, 1/2 hour before the court closed!
168. Judge: I enter judgment in favor of LVNV - HE GETS PAID A SIX FIGURE INCOME TO BE A CROOK!
169. Bradley: That is wrong! I said you don't even care about the fact that there's no purhases - you don't care about anything! This is fraud! Completely fraud! And the military affidavit is fraudulent as well! You can't steal money! You can't collaborate with people and steal money from good people that pay their bills! This company is fraudulent! They have an enormous reputation for being frauds! Here you say you're going to continue the case and I said they had their day and now you're just gonna rule in their favor just because you feel like giving me a hard time! Because I'm a targeted person! That's all this is about! I'm a targeted person!
170. no more could be saved - reached 60 minutes.
Motions, Letter, and Judicial Complaint will be posted by the end of this weekend. I'm very tired.
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
______________________
NOTE, THE ATTORNEY FIRM STILLMAN LAW OFFICE BLOCKED THEIR FAX NUMBER, SO THEY COULD IMPEDE JUSTICE AND CLAIM THEY WERE NEVER SERVED. I HAD TO LOOK UP WHAT THEY POST ONLINE AGAIN AND COPIED IT FOR COURT PURPOSES, ADDED IT TO MY DOCUMENTS EXPLAINING THEY BLOCKED IT AND I FOUND AN ALTERNATE FAX NUMBER ONLINE.
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
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
AFFIDAVIT
RE-ARGUING MERITLESS CASE
MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
MOTION FOR ARTICULATION
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
JUDICIAL COMPLAINT
MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT
IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT
MOTION TO OPEN
NOT HEARD
1. I am the defendant pro se on aforesaid case.
2. There is no Due Process; the court failed to do its job to begin with in determing merit and compliance with even the basic rules of court. The Plaintiff even illegally filed a Pro Hac Vice Appearance yet the Connecticut Attorney is NOT an out of state attorney and therefore fraudulently filed and the court broke the law, never remedying it.
3. As I have said over and over, the case has no merit; the plaintiff showed no diligence and even frauded information. The plaintiff attorney who said she was representing LVNV, only said her name was "me" and the judge refused to produce or order this attorney for her name, AND unlawfully let this same person be a witness.
4. My recording of the hearing has been frauded on my phone by a FORCED GOOGLE UPDATE before I could even access it!
5. This hearing is a public hearing and I cannot be denied opportunity to record it. Attorneys record hearings all the time, bringing their devices in court.
6. Using Artificial Intelligence to back up FRAUDULENT ACTIONS, is only compounding a lengthy battle with corruption in these courts!
7. The very fact this case has NO MERIT CANNOT EVEN BE DISPUTED! I stopped using the card in 2014! In the hearing, unless they altered THAT as well (since the hearing recording has been altered) they admitted I paid $30/month for three years. They admitted my credit was reduced to $710 - FOR NO GOOD REASON, JUST MORE ABUSE BY AN ACCOUNT MANAGER WHO IS CORRUPTED AND SET TO DESTROY GE MONEY WITH HER NEFARIOUS ACTIVITY.
8. GE Money had purchased 80% of Synchrony's stock to help them stay in business - yet the CEO who replaced Jack Welch may have been in on the Federal Reserve plot to destroy everything that Jack Welch and his administration buit up.
9. This is what happens when there is NO JUSTICE, NO ADMINISTRATION OF THE LAW - they have built themselves a nefarious web of criminal activity ON A CASE THAT HAS NO MERIT.
10. Rather than hold them accountable from failing to be diligent, this judge has instead conspired with their fraudulent activity to cover up everything - THEY CANNOT MAKE ME PAY MONEY I DO NOT OWE!
11. I overpaid Synchrony by the time I stopped paying! THEY WERE NOT THE ISSUER OF MY ACCOUNT. GE MONEY WAS. THEY FAILED TO ABIDE BY THE CONTRACT OF REVOLVING CREDIT ALSO. THEY DID NOT ASK ME TO SIGN A NEW AGREEMENT. HAD THEY, I WOULD HAVE REFUSED AND DEMANDED THEY STOP THE ACCOUNT, ALLOW ME TO MAKE MONTHLY PAYMENTS UNTIL THE BALANCE WAS PAID. A CONTRACT INVOLVES TWO PARTIES AND BOTH PARTIES ARE OBLIGATED TO ABIDE!
12. BURDEN OF PROOF WAS NOT MET. That has been my argument since I submitted my Answer and Special Defenses. This very issue has been deliberately ignored!
13. Just using logic on this case - I overpaid, as I have stated in my Motion To Open and thereafter Motion for Default Judgment! THERE WAS NO RULING ON THE MOTION TO OPEN AT THE TIME I SUBMITTED THE MOTION FOR DEFAULT.
14. It is the court's obligation to hear both sides. The plaintiff NEVER responds to motions and obviously expects Artificial Intelligence to successfully fraud everything for a company that does not have any jurisdiction - for an attorney firm that had no jurisdiction on litigating this matter.
15. THEY DID NOT EVEN SERVE ME PROPERLY. Improper service from a company in Illinois - NOT THE PLAINTIFF! HOW OBVIOUS CAN IT BE THAT THIS CASE HAS BEEN DELIBERATELY IMPROPERLY ADMINISTERED!
16. Attached is my Judicial Complaint! I cannot believe how obvious the courts allow such nefarious behavior. We have a Constitution for a reason! Connecticut is not a government unto itself! This state is rampant with corruption and why its economy is destroying families. Only a sociopath would take gratification in such "achievements".
Prepared and Submitted by,
FOR THE DEFENDANT, PRO SE
__________________________
Note, I filed Motion For Reconsideration, Motion For Articulation as well - it is really discusting I even had to.
8/10/2021 NOTE, WHAT I SAID WAS
I filed
Motion FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
Motion FOR RECONSIDERATION
Motion FOR ARTICULATION
AND I SAID I WAS PASTING THEM HERE
SO WHERE ARE THEY? AND MY MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION FOR JUDICIAL AUTHORITY WAS DELETED OFF MY FLASH DRIVE! I SHOULD BE ABLE TO RECOVER IT. I WILL AGAIN PASTE THEM ALL HERE.
================================================
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
______________________
_________________________________________
Don't expect me to be happy I had to prepare a SECOND ERRATA BECAUSE THE COURT FRAUDS RECORDS
Case No. NNH-CV-20-6105010-S : State of Connecticut
LVNV Funding, LLC : Superior Court
Vs : Court of New Haven
Anne M. Bradley : AUGUST 5, 2021
DEFENDANT'S
ERRATA
MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDiCIAL AUTHORITY
JUDGE MICHAEL P. KAMP
Page 10 was missing from fax
Page 10 attached
Prepared and Submitted by,
FOR THE DEFENDANT, PRO SE
______________________
Anne M. Bradley
Appearance on File
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
FOR THE SECOND TIME!
Both the court and the plaintiff received the prior submission
The clerk's office attempted to get the defendant to take the faxed copy which had a blank page for Page 10, with the statement "Page 10 did not print off my computer" yet they removed this which is another example of RECORDS FRAUD on this matter.
The clerk's office was provided an Errata with Page 10 promptly, August 5.
They failed to upload it yet claimed in person that everything they had was uploaded
Defendant provided copy of the internet search on Stillman Law Office since Stillman Law now blocks the fax number to which they have been receiving copies and at no point did they indicate otherwise.
A statement to that effect was also provided.
Systematically abusing power in dishonest ways only proves the dishonesty of the court IN PLAIN SIGHT.
Systematically using technocratic tricks to additionally cover up the obvious corruption also proves the dishonesty of the court IN PLAIN SIGHT.
CERTIFICATION OF MAILING
Aforesaid motion on this State of Connecticut case has been FAXED this day, August 5, 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 - THIS WAS BLOCKED BY STILLMAN LAW OFFICE, THE CONFIRMATIONS PREVIOUSLY ATTACHED PROVED IT.
FAX NUMBER WAS CHANGED WITHOUT NOTICE TO: 248-851-6029
__________________________
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 : AUGUST 4, 2021
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION AND REMOVAL OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
APPENDIX
1. Plaintiff's billing
Balance $583. 19 on 4/17/2017
CREDIT LIMIT $610
2. Plaintiff's billing
Balance $599.83 4/10/2017
CREDIT LIMIT $710
3. ANONYMOUS LETTER FROM "Me" , which is how the LVNV Attorney described herself as appearance on this case
4. Letter to Judge Patrick Carroll III
5. Declaration of Account Transfer - NOT A MEDICAL EXPENSE
FAILURE TO VALIDATE ANY CONNECTION TO DEFENDANT
6. OPENCORPORATES - business info on Resurgent Capital Services - only located in Delaware, contrary to testimony of witness
7. Transcript of hearing on May 20, 2021 - to be presented to the court forthwith on 8/6/2021 or latest 8/9/2021
note, all documents to be notarized have to go through Milford Court since the state-paid free notary was told to refuse to notarize any further documents by the defendant, reflecting dfeprivation of Due Process of Law
8. Sherman Originator, LLC - only in Delaware. Jurisdiction is only in Delaware
9. Affidavit of Sale, Pg 48 to Motion For Default Judgment along with already on record, Disclaimer says Anne Bradley has to be a resident of California. Yet plaintiff has used this as "proof" on a non-medical bill which has no merit.
10. Denial of Plaintiff's inept Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim.
NEVER ARGUED!
11. SMALL CLAIMS WRIT - inept preparing. No amended CLAIM
on Medical Expenses pursuant to CGS 37-3a
12. SMALL CLAIMS WRIT ON PASCARELLI - which reflects defendant's statement at the hearing, "The pop them out like candy" and could care less about validating anything.
13. CGS 37-3a
Prepared and Submitted,
FOR THE DEFENDANT, PRO SE
__________________
Anne M. Bradley
Appearance on File
===========================================
Case No. NNH-CV-20-6105010-S : State of Connecticut
LVNV Funding, LLC : Superior Court
Vs : Court of New Haven
Anne M. Bradley : AUGUST 5, 2021
DEFENDANT'S
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Pursuant to PB 24-13, 24-29, and any other rule which ensures DUE PROCESS OF LAW, Defendant moves for reconsideration by this court in that the a contested hearing was requested through her MOTION TO OPEN YET wrongfully denied.
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.
August 4, Motion To DISQUALIFY AND Remove Judicial Authority was submitted into court via fax from the Milford Courthouse. Today, August 5, aforesaid motion is being submitted into court at the New Haven Courthouse in person.
MEMORANDUM OF LAW TO BE SUBMITTED FORTHWITH
Prepared and Submitted,
FOR THE DEFENDANT, PRO SE
__________________________________
Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se
Appearance on File
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 5, 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
______________________
===================================
I can't just type even a repeated equals symbol because
they are causing it to not type, then when I take my finger off
the key, it types several times - fyi
Case No. NNH-CV-20-6105010-S : State of Connecticut
LVNV Funding, LLC : Superior Court
Vs : Court of New Haven
Anne M. Bradley : AUGUST 5, 2021
DEFENDANT'S
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Pursuant to PB 24-13, 24-29, and any other rule which ensures DUE PROCESS OF LAW, Defendant moves for reconsideration by this court in that the a contested hearing was requested through her MOTION TO OPEN YET wrongfully denied.
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.
August 4, Motion To DISQUALIFY AND Remove Judicial Authority was submitted into court via fax from the Milford Courthouse. Today, August 5, aforesaid motion is being submitted into court at the New Haven Courthouse in person.
MEMORANDUM OF LAW TO BE SUBMITTED FORTHWITH
Prepared and Submitted,
FOR THE DEFENDANT, PRO SE
__________________________________
Anne M. Bradley, Pro Se
Appearance on File
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 5, 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
______________________
-----------------------------------------------------
same thing happens with this dash key as well - everything is manipulated
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 ARTICULATION
Pursuant to Due Process and the Small Claims Statutes 51-15 and 51-345(g) assuring FAIR HEARING, Defendant motions this court for Articulation on Court Order denying MOTION TO OPEN should the court fail to DISQUALIFY and REPLACE the judge on this case, as also motioned and presented this day.
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 for Articulation, along with Motion For Reconsideration and Motion To DISQUALIFY AND Remove Judicial Authority are being presented.
FACTS
1. Aforesaid order was not entered in the court system until on or after July 28, 2021 yet it was backdated to July 21, 2021. It was not on record on this case on July 27, 2021. Defendant called the Court Clerk's office at 203-503-6800 on July 23 and they confirmed no judicial order had been recently entered on the case - fully knowing the issues at hand were the MOTION TO OPEN AND MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMMENT. Additionally, defendant relayed that she saw no action on the case, no rulings by the court, and no pleadings entered by the plaintiff on either motion. They confirmed that was exactly right.
2. Defendant is presenting both aforesaid motion. PLEASE NOTE, Judicial Complaint on Judge Kamp has taken a great deal of time to prepare; particularly due to the court's claiming that "I don't have to read everything" and facing the probability it will again not be properly reviewed to address issues which defendant has had to repeat at every juncture due to the lack of actually hearing the case or motions submitted.
3. The following motions were submitted and NOT HEARD: 2 Motions to Strike, Motion For Default Judgment on the case due to the plaintiff failing to timely answer counterclaim as a matter of DUE PROCESS OF LAW, The Plaintiff's Motion To Dismiss Counterclaim was denied yet at the hearing the judge only said, "I'm going to hear everything at once" which is a denial of DUE PROCESS OF LAW. PLAINTIFF FAILED TO SHOW DILIGENCE ON THIS MATTER THROUGHOUT THE CASE.
4. JUDICIAL COMPLAINT ON JUDGE KAMP IS BEING SERVED ON THE JUDICIAL REVIEW COUNSEL TODAY, AUGUST 4, 2021. PROOF IS ATTACHED THAT THIS COMPLAINT WAS FAXED, WITH ASSURANCE THAT IS BEING MAILED BY PRIORITY MAIL.
5. Defendant continues to have great difficulty on internet using her laptop,including even seeing what she is typing on the screenl. Defendant had to purchase her current laptop in recent months due to the fact her prior laptop was destroyed by a cyber attack, which gave advantage to the nefarious plaintiff, who defendant also claims to be a deliberate FRAUD.
6. Defendant's Motion for Default Judgment, granting MOTION TO OPEN, due to the plaintiff showing lack of diligence throughout this case, not even objecting to the MOTION TO OPEN OR ANY OTHER MOTION, has not even been heard.
7. MOTION TO OPEN FORM HAS BEEN PREPARED TODAY, 8/4/2021 TO REQUEST THIS BE HEARD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY A DIFFERENT JUDGE SINCE JUDGE KAMP HAS FAILED TO DO SO.
Summary
Due Process is an automatic Constitutional right of an accused to be heard. Defendant has NOT been heard according to the law. No judge should have a right to say, "I'm combining all of the motions together" on any matter. Not even an arbitrator would do this. Each party is supposed to be fairly heard. Yet in this case, the plaintiff submitted fraudulent information right in the Small Claim Form which only qualified the case to be refused to be docketed, and therefore dismissed as lacking merit. The plaintiff has an illegal appearance, has not argued the Counterclaim, has not even justified its claim on MEDICAL EXPENSES, and has deliberately evaded the fact the the credit line was decreased to $710 by Synchrony Bank, at which time the defendant refused to use the card anymore and paid the balance off, exceeding it by $300 since she paid $30 a month for three years.
WHEREFORE Defendant motions this court for Articulation on its decision if the judge is not removed after hearing Motion To DISQUALIFY and Remove Judge Kamp.
PREPARED AND SUBMITTED,
FOR THE DEFENDANT, PRO SE
__________________________
Anne M. Bradley
Appearance on File
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
______________________
-----end----- 8/10/2021
.png)
Comments