Well kids, as expected, Judge Jeanie Vaudt completely denied me all claims that I made against the state, in their entirety. Also, as expected, all court costs have been assigned to the plaintiff...me. They should probably expect, in return, that they will never see a dime of their $120 in court costs, or any of the money that the Polk County Sheriff claims that I owe them for my involuntary room and board, in the amount of $8,000+ for the year I spent in jail.
Here again is the order...and, we will really tear this apart, for those of you either still lost as to why I think I should get relief, or for those who believe I should, but wanna know why, and what my thought process is.
This order is nearly identical to the one submitted by the state, the "proposed" order, published not all that long ago, right here on this blog. The judge, evidently, didn't want to do her job; so ordered both parties to submit our versions of how we thought our orders should go; and if she wanted to change anything, she would do so. She changed very nearly nothing. Here is the link to the proposed order by the State, so that you can see that the judge pretty much submitted the State's version, word for word:
http://themightyswordamericasdeadlysins.blogspot.com/2017/09/the-state-post-conviction-relief-case_21.html
Note also that the entire case's ruling is ruled using legal precedent. At this point, I'd once again like to submit my opinion on the use of legal precedent.
First, let me say that the main and primary reason that there is, and that legal precedent is used, is because judges and lawyers are essentially lazy. God forbid that they should think for themselves, or use LOGIC or common sense to rule in their cases.
Oh, but precedent is a good thing....Rowe v. Wade, Miranda, etc., etc., right? This has helped the people in an awful lot of cases, hasn't it? Yes, yes it has, and my opinion on that is, that without cases where it did help, precedent and the way it's used AGAINST you would never have taken a hold in our judiciary, nor would it have lasted out as long as it has. It's sugar-coated to look like it helps us, mainly to cover up the way it doesn't, as well as allows them to continue to use it. Yes, officials in the Judicial branch in our country do not like to lose...especially when it involves their own; and, just like they do in the legislative branch, when they pass funky laws relating to you the way the law helps you out, they usually neglect to tell you how it doesn't help you out, usually when that law involves YOU.
I hate to tell you folks, but precedent usually only helps the people...sometimes. What it really does is help them, more so. It absolutely gives them a means to win out, 99% of the time, in cases that may be SIMILAR....but are never exactly like yours...and that's the key, isn't it? No case anywhere on the planet involves the exact same circumstances; nor does it, more importantly, involve exactly the same PEOPLE. Precedent, for the most part, therefore, should NEVER be used...because no case is exactly like another, in any way, shape or form.
That stated, let's get to this order. Unfortunately for my readers, this is going to have to involve me nutshelling ALL that happened...again. Most importantly, this article will very much serve the purpose of showing how precedent is used to deny you your due diligence, as well as your due justice.
Let's begin by showing you, again, the original complaint, made by me. That complaint can be found here:
http://themightyswordamericasdeadlysins.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-post-conviction-relief-case-part-iv.html
Now, just a little history. The harassment, stalking and threats referred to in the underlying criminal case happened in, according to their complaint against me, on September 8th, 2016, and on or around December of 2016. Police reports were filed both on January 14th, and on the DAY of the arrest, while I was en route to the county jail for charge 1, harassment in the first degree. There was an approval of the charge of Harassment 1 on January 25th, nearly a month after the last event happened, and the approval of the other two charges, Stalking and Threats on the SAME Day those police reports were filed. Bond for the harassment charge was $2000...what it should have been. By the time I arrived at the jail, bond had gone from $2000, not to what it should have been, around $9000 ($2,000 for harassment and $2,000 for stalking, and $5000 for the felony charge of threats), but $70,000; stated to be this high because of my "Extensive Criminal history" they said; which, at this time, was the conviction of just 2 simple misdemeanors of plead to charges of harassment 3rd degree.
Let me just rehash something for you...in a different light. The victim, in desperate fear of her life, filed a police report on January 14th, 2016. The alleged crime happened nearly a month before, in December. The charge harassment 1st, was approved 13 days later. Police reports for the other two crimes were filed on the day of my arrest, and approved on the day of the arrest, within hours.
Doesn't make a lot of sense does it? The victim is in fear of her life. Why did we wait so long to file the initial charge, to begin with, and why the big hurry to file the other two charges, while I'm on my way to jail? Worth mentioning too, is the fact that they already had me in jail just three days prior to my being arrested for this charge...so why didn't they file these charges against me when they had me in jail for the previous charges? The original charges, by the way, started a parallel case that ran at the same time for 2 other simple misdemeanor harassment charges, filed by one Darren Tromblay of CityView, because I "harassed" him by emailing him twice to ask why he hadn't made a move to report a story that he promised me he would, in a signed email to me.
Makes a person wonder, doesn't it? Let's finish off by mentioning that, while I was out for the first charges, I had just begun attacking social services in Carroll, Iowa, and had also sent over 8000 social workers in LA county in California an email, showing them that I had put their business out on my nationally read blog; and Theo Booker, the man the article had been about, had been arrested by the feds some 8 hours before I was arrested. They ended up holding him at the Twin Towers in LA for nearly 30 days without filing charges against him. That case, by the way, was dismissed. They appeared at my door to arrest me for the charges in THIS case the very next day.
There were, by the way, 8 witnesses that were going to be subpoenaed to testify on my behalf at this trial. Subpoenas to be issued at State expense were DENIED, even though, due to my indigent status, they had waived a filing fee, just prior to this. Needless to say, all of the necessary witnesses could not be served, save one...the County Attorney himself, John P. Sarcone, whose subpoena was quashed, due to "undue burden" on him...poor guy. I am most certain that ALL of the subpoenas would have been also quashed, had I been able to get to any of them to serve them...which I could not. These officials are well-guarded, in their places of work...judges, clerks of court...access to these individuals is nearly impossible, unless you could somehow find out where they reside...which in Polk County, at least, is most certainly...impossible. Linda Lane, the prosecutor in the underlying matter, had, by this time, disappeared off of the face of the Earth, and had been promoted to criminal Assistant U.S. Attorney, somewhere unbeknownst to anyone in this country. 'Magine that.
Lucas Taylor, the "Stand-by Attorney" mentioned here, was the State's only witness. Of course, he would be. Even funnier still, he was the State's witness, so cross-examination by me could only concern matters brought by the defense...the State. Anything else was immediately objected to...and, of course, subsequently sustained by the crooked judge.
Let's quickly go over the claims.
1. Ineffective assistance of council for failure to appeal the conviction. I'd say that's a pretty big thing. I hate giving away the answer so early, but they got out of that by a. Saying I had no proof of that. And I was going to have proof how? I was in jail, so I couldn't record the conversation. I would have never gotten the guy to sign anything saying he received the document, and intended to file it for me...besides, he was my co-council...I would have just trusted that he would do as I asked, wouldn't I? b. I was my own attorney at the time. So? What difference does that make? According to them, it was my responsibility to file it...and again, I would do that HOW?
2. Ineffective assistance of council for failure to call witnesses that I desired to testify on my behalf at trial. Well, first, Mr. Taylor, co-council, didn't appear at the hearing that dismissed 29 witnesses from testifying, all elected officials. The remaining 11, all friends and family, showed up the first day of trial....half showed the second...none the 3rd. The 3rd day, of course, is when the defense's turn finally came up. It wasn't until THIS trial, upon hearing his testimony, that I finally heard Mr. Taylor's story as to why my witnesses didn't testify. He said it didn't fit into his strategy, since I had, because I couldn't get a single piece of evidence admitted properly, allowed him to take over for me. He never informed me of this strategy, naturally...and I had thought that no one had returned because they were tired of showing up for nothing. At this trial, during his testimony, I found out that he had told them to go home, and stay home. Nice huh? So, because I had no witnesses and no evidence (they had also dismissed 200 pieces of my evidence as "irrelevant" the same day that they dismissed all my elected officials from testifying), I rested as soon as my turn came up. What else could I have done?
3. Ineffective assistance of council for failure to request a bond hearing. Now this is a goodie. First, I was, during the time I awaited trial, my own attorney, and co-council was standby. I had limited him, ONLY in that he was not to speak for me, nor was he allowed to file anything for me...without my permission. The conclusion the judge here then made was that it had been MY responsibility to ask for a bond reduction hearing...WHAT? For starters, what the hell was he there for, if not to advise me in what I should be doing? I hadn't ever been in jail for anything like this before, how would I know about bond reduction hearings? What's more, I never told the guy to not speak until spoken to...he could have suggested such a hearing, couldn't he have? This guy was no novice...and I would discover that asking for this is PRELIMINARY, and crucial to any big case! I think we can find the guy pretty damn ineffective here. And it wasn't just the bond hearing. There were other things too....depositions. This is probably the MOST important thing to do in ANY felony case. I didn't know that...this had been my first case involving anything more serious than simple misdemeanors. Felony cases had been the only kind of cases that he had ever dealt with, per his own testimony. So what kind of strategy would involve not doing the most important thing for your client's felony case?
4. Newly discovered evidence. I love this one. This wasn't newly discovered evidence at all. It was evidence that was already there, already filed. They just don't call it that. It was always there, they just dismissed it all. They call it newly discovered evidence. I don't get that at all.
5. Error for co-council not asking for a mistrial, concerning a media publication. Yeah, you remember the one...the libelous article they printed in the Des Moines Register, Iowa's biggest and most read newspaper; likening me to a "murderous, lawless domestic terrorist", found here:
http://themightyswordamericasdeadlysins.blogspot.com/2016/04/christopher-bruce-domestic-terrorist.html
published 1 day before jury deliberation. It had been his job (and he had said he would do so, by the way) to poll the jury following the conviction to find out whether they had seen that article or not, then ask for a mistrial if they had. At sentencing, he informed me that he didn't even do the poll. It didn't fit into his strategy, he testified at this trial. Imagine that. He had, at that time, been the head attorney in charge. How convenient.
6. Unconstitutionality of my trial, conviction and sentence. I don't rightly remember claiming this exactly...but OK, sure. The only things I claimed as unconstitutional were the high and unreasonable bond, and a judge denying me my right to represent myself properly without an attorney while I was incarcerated, which of course forced me into the position where I had to accept a stand-by attorney...who then proceeded to screw me out my justice...as I'm sure was intended, by the powers that be.
7. Denial of my right to proceed pro se...although, this wasn't exactly what the allegation was...it was denial of my right to proceed pro se while incarcerated, to get everything I needed to defend myself properly, without having an attorney to do so. To me, that's pretty much the same thing, but they won't say that.
8. Denial of my request for a no contact order, naming me as the protected party. This wasn't my complaint. The prosecution had asked for this no contact order, naming Mark Worthington as the protected party, which, in effect would also make ME a protected party against him. The judge, after receiving enough evidence from me showing that he had continued to harass me all the way up to my sentencing date, then did NOT issue that order, because then they would have had to arrest him immediately. That harassment, by him, did not cease until maybe 2 months ago. Can't have that!
9. A bench warrant I claimed was issued in error concerning my violation of probation...probation that I did not sign up for, and had asked the judge several times to revoke, immediately...and he answered back by setting up a hearing to do so...and then issued a warrant for my arrest for probation violation. Wow.
Now, I love this stuff. Here, under background facts and proceedings, you notice that they mention the hearing where I was denied my right to defend myself....and all they say about that is that there was an order denying me that right. That's it. See, it was found by a judge that I didn't deserve any rights...and that's that. No argument about it, just the order, and that's good enough, right?
They also mention....AGAIN, that bond was set at $60,000. It was NEVER, EVER set at this amount. It was set, always, at $70,000. I correct then several times throughout this trial...and still, they state it was $60,000. $60K, $70K, does it make a difference really? It was supposed to be $9,000. That's the problem, folks.
It also proceeds to say that I applied for council. I had no choice America. They denied me my rights. There was nothing else to do. They then follow that up with the fact that I did so...I CHOSE to do so. And that's all they need to claim that allegation as bullshit. Sure, I could have chose to represent myself without an attorney...but I would have never received any evidence I needed, would have never received any paperwork concerning the case, and, obviously, would have lost because of that. Sooo....I chose to have an attorney? I don't think I did.
Notice later that, when talking about my witnesses, that they state that all had been served...or that they had requested NOT to be served. When did this start, exactly? Since when can someone, ANYONE, request NOT TO BE SERVED by a subpoena?? Do we common folk have this option? I believe NOT!
Now, after reading the first paragraph here, remember America...trial information and minutes of testimony are NEVER sufficient. Indictment by a Grand Jury...that's what's needed. There was no such thing. These things are produced by a witness or witnesses, affidavits and the like...and these things are questionable until trial. Now, witness testimony to a Grand Jury, who then decides to indict, that's something else all together. Their other job is to review any hard evidence. This was never done, and is the way it's supposed to be done. The Grand Jury never did so. There was no indictment...only by the crook running the county attorney's offices. This fact, of course, is something I disputed often...and it's never mentioned, anywhere in this order, or any paperwork submitted by either side. They can't. We know this is how it's done. Were we to find out that it isn't done in MOST cases, we might get a little suspicious.
Here, again, they mention, as fact, that I filed an appeal for unlawful arrest in this case. I did NOT. I filed for an appeal in the parallel simple misdemeanor case, yes. The Supreme Court, they say, denied this appeal. They did NOT. Judge William A. Price, the criminal judge responsible for the loss of my daughter, who is not a member of the Supreme Court to my knowledge, denied that appeal. It wasn't even an appeal for unlawful arrest. It was simply an appeal. Funny that it got denied too. No reason for this was given in their supposed "Procedendo"
Notice also that they go out of their way to state that the jury was admonished to not follow any media coverage..., like ordering them not to read or watch the news is a guarantee that they won't...or like they'd even admit that they did, if they had...but just the fact that they were instructed to not follow media coverage, that's good enough, lawfully...riiiiiiiight.
Now here, around paragraph 2, they mention that I was set for a hearing to revoke probation and serve the rest of my sentence...but that it was cancelled as moot. What they DON'T tell you, is that it was cancelled as moot, because they had arrested me for probation violation, because they issued a warrant for my arrest, and I was already automatically, because of this, revoked, and back in jail. I love how they always leave out those things that would make them look like the bad guys.
It also states that, on July 25th (this by the way, was the date that they issued the warrant for probation violation), Lucas Taylor, my stand-by attorney, withdrew from my case. This is an outright lie. Mr. Taylor asked to withdraw from the case on this day...and the very next day, the judge DENIED that withdrawal...but they won't say that either.
Then, then, they have the gall to lie OUTRIGHT, and said that I "stipulated to violating the terms of my probation"...I NEVER, EVER stipulated to any such thing. I agreed that I did not want to be on probation and wanted instead to serve the rest of my sentence...I NEVER admitted to violating probation...because I NEVER SIGNED UP FOR IT!!!
Then, even further, they state that I signed and filed a waiver of attorney for the probation hearing. This wasn't for any probation hearing, this was for a trial by jury, that I had asked for, concerning 3 simple misdemeanors they had arrested me for just 2 days earlier. There never was a probation hearing, nor was there mention of such a hearing; or, for that matter, anything mentioned concerning my probation AT ALL, during this trial. The reason for that is quite simple. I was NEVER ON probation. A warrant had been issued to arrest me for probation violation, for no reason whatsoever, and the State was attempting to cover it up. Explain to me...how do I violate probation I was never officially on, or that I NEVER SIGNED UP FOR, had asked to be revoked from doing, and had a hearing to attend that would decide what to do with me next?
Lastly, under facts, they state, just once more, for affect...that no appeal was taken from the underlying matter...which of course it wasn't....THE ATTORNEY NEVER FILED IT!!!
Now we come to the real bullshit department of this order's decision...applicable law...case law, we peons call it. They start right off by stating that I must demonstrate by a preponderance of evidence that my attorney failed to perform an essential duty, and that judicial prejudice occurred because he didn't do it. That, by the way, is according to Iowa case law...magine that. More Iowa case law is used, following this. If Iowa's courts are corrupt, and Iowa Supreme Courts are also corrupt, then why not use their precedent? Makes perfect sense to me.
Oh, but the best part is yet to be heard...then, they state that, "there may also be a lack of prejudice where there is SO MUCH EVIDENCE OF GUILT, no reasonable probability exists that the result would have been different", even if the lawyer had screwed up by not doing what he should have done. What they again fail to mention, is that their "so much evidence of guilt," presented by the prosecution, couldn't possibly be disputed...the defense had no presentable evidence, it had all been dismissed...nor any presentable witnesses to dispute THEIR "so much evidence of guilt", they had either all been quashed from testifying, or sent home and asked never to return. What they're essentially doing here? IS COVERING FOR THEIR OWN...a state issued attorney, that I'm sure they plan to use...again, and again...one of the brotherhood, right?
You know, I just gotta stop with this....this shit makes me so furious when I read it, I just wanna puke. Just do me a favor America, read the proposed order, then read this one. That should be more than enough for you, I would think. The judge never reviewed the REAL evidence in the underlying matter. I guarantee she never spoke to anyone, nor looked at anything, including this order, written up by and proposed by the defense, the State. She just accepted the order drawn up by the opposing attorney, and called it quits. Oh, it will, of course be appealed. I'm doing that, of course, myself, this time. More so, we all know the outcome. It will also be upheld, by their criminal Supreme Court, just like they did with my obviously ridiculous juvenile appeal, where, even in the face of a decision by the DIRECTOR of the very agency that took my daughter, DHS/CPS. stating essentially that they shouldn't have removed her, and that we were innocent, upheld the legal kidnapping of my daughter by the district court. Worse yet, it will take them an eternity to do so. You think I'm gonna wait around see what happens with this one? Hell no. :D
