Make your own free website on Tripod.com

 

Welcome to the Real World

 

“We Blacks were already familiar with terrorism.  For us, slavery and lynchings were a form of terrorism.” – Lawyer Vernon E. Jordan Jr., on The PBS News hour (11/26/01)

 

NOTE: The court case to which the below “pleadings” refer ended December 2005.  Due to the dishonesty and incompetence of the numerous “judges” involved therein, we “lost the battle” (case), but “we won the war,” i.e., the plaintiff never received a penny of the money they sued for and we now have a rather substantial record of “In Justice” perpetrated by the courts, to quote the name of a new legal TV series starring Kyle MacLachlan.  Not only that, we have a vast record of similar injustice experienced by numerous other individuals in “their” so-called “justice” courts.  As time allows, in the future, this website will document the same.  YOU’VE BEEN WARNED: ALL JUSTICE COURTS ARE A HOAX.  ALL.

 

Purpose: We help others see that the system is not what it appears to be.  We wake others up to the fact that their perceptions about reality may be the opposite of what they are calling reality.  We make suggestions for altering personal behavior so that our perceptions about society and the world around us can start to match our day-in and day-out reality.  We focus on matters legal and, in the future, may expand to include other subjects.

 

Present focused subject matter: The unauthorized practice of law and its relationship to discrimination, denial of justice, human rights, equal protection, due process, equal access to justice, free markets, freedom of choice, freedom of association, privacy, the right to contract, the right to assistance, court-supported monopolies, cartels, protection rackets, i.e., organized coercion.

 

Perception: In a great many “representative” democracies around the world, in exchange for an ongoing pledge of allegiance both expected and required from childhood, many governments promise truth, justice, equality, and the freedom to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit happiness, among other things.

 

Reality:  A well-intended promise?  Mere perception, or something in between?  You be the judge …

 

 

A Basic Primer:

 

Linda Kennedy on the reality behind courts of injustice and a letter to the media

 

Texas versus Nolo Press

 

Nolo Press on UPL

 

HALT.org on UPL

 

Mediate.com on UPL

 

Arizona paralegals try to keep the Arizona Bar from putting them out of business

 

Arizona Republic Editorials on the Need for Reform in their own State Courts

 

Arizona Republic “My Turn” Editorial on UPL

 

The case for repealing unauthorized practice of law statutes or having them struck down by the courts as unconstitutional by George Leef

 

The case for a free market in legal services by George Leef (adobe format)

 

The case for a free market in legal services (identical to above document, in web page format)

 

Cato Institute Letters on UPL George Leef responses (adobe format)

 

John Locke Pro-UPL article

 

David Berens on The Case for the Free Market Provision of Legal Services

 

Lawyers Don’t Need Three Years of Law School by Andrew Peyton Thomas, an assistant attorney general for Arizona.

 

Prof. George Shepherd on Making Law School Optional

 

The Case of the Kentucky Bar versus Della Tarpinian

 

UPL Protection for Whom?

 

 

Documents That Will Be Filed with the World’s Courts with Your Help:

 

Mail-in version of our petition: English World Anti-Bar Petition

 

Sign our new online petition at Petitions Online by clicking here.

 

 

Documents Filed with Arizona’s Courts:

 

(Note: The formatting of these documents is slightly altered from the originals due to their conversion to web pages.  They are otherwise identical to the originals, i.e. verbatim. Only contact information has been removed.)

 

Motion for Disqualification and Recusal of Bar Members (9/23/02)

Asked a Superior Court Presiding Judge to disqualify and recuse himself from hearing any anti-UPL cause for lack of impartiality and to also reverse his previous order requiring another Superior Court Judge to violate his own ethics rules “because the Arizona Constitution prohibits a non-bar member from acting as a “superior” court judge.

 

Motion for Disqualification for Lack of Impartiality (8/19/02)

Asked the Arizona Supreme Court to disqualify itself from any issue pertaining to bar membership for lack of neutrality.

 

Motion to Strike or Dismiss the Bar’s Petition to Change the Rules (filed on 7/17/02)

Asked the Arizona Supreme Court to strike or dismiss the State Bar of Arizona’s petition to further consolidate its monopoly.

 

Petition for Special Action Against the State Bar of Arizona (7/9/02)

Asked the Arizona Supreme Court to require the State Bar of Arizona to justify its existent being that their own Constitution (their alleged “supreme law”), purports to make their “state” a so-called “right to work” state.

 

Petition to Repeal Arizona Supreme Court Rules 31-74 (5/23/02)

Asked the Arizona Supreme Court to either get rid of their “State Bar of Arizona” or to hold a public trial to test who does more harm to the consumers of legal services (i.e., the public), “unauthorized” practitioners of law or “authorized” (“bar members”).

 

Motion to Have Plaintiff’s Counsel Removed (3/18/02)

Asked a Superior Court judge to remove a plaintiff’s lawyer from off a case for repeatedly violating his own ethical rules of professional conduct and then repeatedly lying about doing so once confronted with the facts.

 

Response to Motion for Reconsideration (4/19/01) – soon to be posted

Asked the Superior Court judge not to grant the opposition’s request that it retract its written permission to allow a non-lawyer son of a defendant to assist his mother at trial by “asking questions and offering argument.”

 

Motion to Dismiss Petition (10/9/01) – soon to be posted

Asked the higher Court of Appeals judges not to grant the opposition’s request that it order the Superior Court judge to prohibit the non-lawyer son of a defendant from further assisting his mother, whether verbally or in writing.

 

Request for Oral Argument (10/09/01)

Asked the Court of Appeals to allow the non-lawyer son of a defendant to explain why a poor foreign-born immigrant that is not knowledgeable in legal process or the law cannot enjoy justice without any assistance whatsoever, contrary to the supreme laws of the land promising equal protection under the law and due process.

 

Response to Petition (10/19/01)

Further developed and expanded the above described Motion to Dismiss.

 

Reply to Response (10/29/01)

A Reply supporting the above described Motion to Dismiss.

 

Motion for Interlocutory Order (10/31/01)

Asked the Court of Appeals to grant leave to file a final Reply to the opposition’s final Reply supporting their Petition for Special Action which had asked the Court of Appeals to order the Superior Court judge to prohibit the non-lawyer son of a defendant from assisting his mother further, whether in or out of Court, whether verbally and/or in writing.

 

Motion for Clarification and Judicial Notice (11/05/01)

Asked the Court of Appeals to take mandatory judicial notice of the ‘adjudicative’ fact that they are now in violation of their own oath of office to support their own supreme laws, the Arizona Constitution, and the U.S. Constitution.

 

Application for Order to Show Cause (11/6/01)

Asked the Superior Court judge to dismiss the opposition’s case if they could not state how the Court is supposed to proceed without the judge first violating his oath of office to protect individual rights and administer justice in all cases now that they have successfully gotten the Court of Appeals to deny the defendant any ability to respond meaningfully, i.e., get justice, by prohibiting her the assistance of her only method of responding at all, her non-lawyer son.  In the alternative, it asked the Court to join her son as a fellow co-defendant.

 

Motion to Suspend the Rules (11/19/01)

Asked the Court of Appeals to suspend any and all case law and/or rules that they might utilize in order to prohibit the non-lawyer son of a defendant from filing a Petition for Special Action of their own on behalf of himself and his mother showing why the case in the underlying Superior Court civil action is actually totally and completely frivolous.

 

Motion for Reconsideration (11/19/01)

Asked the Court of Appeals to reverse its order accepting jurisdiction on the opposition’s Petition for Special Action and grant the relief requested by them, namely, to order the Superior Court judge to prohibit the non-lawyer son of a defendant from assisting his mother further and bring about a default judgment for lack of funds to pay a lawyer.

 

Reply Supporting Motion for Clarification & for Interlocutory Order (11/23/01)

A Reply supporting the above described motions for clarification and motion for interlocutory order.

 

Reply Supporting Motion for Suspension of the Rules (12/4/01)

A Reply supporting the above described motion to suspend to rules.

 

Arizona Law, International Law, International Treaties & UPL:

 

Arizona Code of Judicial Conduct – An Arizonan Judge’s Ethical Rules

 

Arizona Constitution

 

Arizona Enabling Act

 

World Constitution (1946)

 

International Human Rights Instruments

 

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

 

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (12/16/66)

 

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (12/16/66)

 

 

Miscellaneous Documents:

 

History of the State Bar of Arizona

 

State Bar of Arizona Legislation (1/31/97)

 

State Bar of Arizona UPL Task Force

 

Do Mess with Texas

 

UPL in Maine

 

Teach Your Child About Politics

 

Food for Thought (some thought-provoking quotes)

 

 

How You Can Help:

 

Order a copy of our new book by clicking here.

                                                                 

Any donations would help us defray the costs associated with fighting for truth, justice and authentic freedom.  This includes court filing fees, gasoline, photocopies, stationary, postage, etc.  Second, we are interested in finding statements written by lawyers, or non-lawyers, in days gone by predicting that mandatory bar membership will be used to either form a ‘legal’ monopoly, or to raise attorneys fees to such a high degree as to make them unaffordable to most people, i.e., turn justice into an item to be bought and sold like any other commodity thereby denying justice, equal protection, due process, etc. to all but the very rich.  These types of statements can be found in the records of debates before voting on bills to ‘integrate’ or ‘organize’ ‘bars,’ as they are called, or histories written about bars, or op-ed pages in old newspapers.  Any help you can offer to track down such historical records would be greatly appreciated and might even be brought before the Arizona Supreme Court, the United States Supreme Court, and or be prominently displayed on this website.  Third, any suggestions, tips, etc., may be e-mailed to the webmaster using the below link provided for that purpose.  Fourth, let us know about any other issues where the promises (propaganda) given do not match the reality.  We will help you get the word out through the media, including showing you how to do-it-yourself.  If you’d like to be a guest on our internet or radio show, or know someone that should be, let us know about that as well.

 

Fill out this survey and e-mail your answers to us.

 

 

Resources:

 

http://www.lib.az.us/ (the State Archives link for the library on the 3rd floor of the Arizona Capitol)

 

 

Upcoming Projects:

 

1.                  Petition for Special Action, if the Superior Court judge makes another fundamental error.

2.                 Petition for Review to the Arizona Supreme Court.  (done)

3.                 Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court.  (done)

4.                 Federal Injunction based upon the U.S. Const. 14th amendment and U.S. treaties.

5.                 Petition an International Court if all U.S. Courts fail to follow their own rules.

6.                 Spread the word to all media outlets, e.g., print, radio, TV, cable, internet, etc.

 

 

How to Change The System Quickly and Simply:

 

You can start by clicking here for a few easy to follow suggestions.

 

 

Your visit to this site implies acceptance of our terms of use and disclaimer.

Messages sent here may not receive a reply: “lawemail7 (at) yahoo.com”. 

Copy & paste address into email - replace “(at)” with “@” (You can't just click on an

email link here because active links get spidered and leads to endless junk email.)

Report broken links to the webmaster at the same e-mail address.

This site and its contents are copyrighted.  All rights reserved world wide.