THE CRIMES OF SENATOR EHIGIE EDOBOR A.K.A. "GODWIN" UZAMERE
1. Home2. Once Upon A Time3. Victim's Statement4. My Search for Justice5. Descent into Hell6. U.S. Laws Violated by Senator Uzamere7. Nigerian Laws Violated by Senator Uzamere8. Ignored by Federal Agencies9. Ignored by Nigerian Authorities10. Victims' Loss of Child Support11. The Uzamere Family12. Municipal Employees Who Helped Senator Uzamere13. John Gray and Non-Profit Legal Community14. Hall of Shame15. 1st Judicial Blow By African-American Judge Thomas16. Law Firm of Allen E. Kaye17. Too Many Discrepancies...18. Allen E. Kaye And His Diabolical Talmud-Following Minions19. Will Sampson Staff Refuse To Help Identity Fraud Victims?20. Law Office of Gladstein & Messinger21. Patrick Synmoie's Attempts to Hide22. Consulate General of Nigeria23. Strange Chat with Senator Ekweremadu24. Proof of Legal Marriage25. Proof of Illegal Marriage/Identity Fraud26. Senator Uzamere's Attempts to Hide Crimes Will Fail27. The Proof...28. Success -- The Proof Is Finally Here!29. Will Senator Uzamere Evade Child Support Again?30. Nigeria's New Commitment to Protect Child Abandoned by Sen. Uzamere31. Judge Prus -- What Gives?32. Back on Track!33. Eugene Uzamere -- Third Attorney to Break the Law34. Petitioner's Verified Petition35. Supplemental Verified Petition36. Judge Prus Recuses Himself37. Eugene's Failed Attempt to Thwart Justice38. Kate Ezomo -- Diabolical Liar39. Letters of Complaint Against Kate Ezomo40. My Factual Response to Imaginary Cousin Godwin41. Federal Action Against Defendant Dismissed42. Open Letters to the FBI43. Open Letter to All U.S. Judges44. Open Letter to Ehigie and Eugene45. Tara's Affidavit46. $100,000,000.00 Lawsuit Against Corrupt Fiduciaries47. Will Fiduciaries Settle?48. New York City Defrauds Disabled Schvartze49. There Is No Cousin Godwin!50. Warning Letter to Governor and Chief Justice of New York State51. Deprived of Child Support by Allen Kaye52. Can International Agency Help?53. Chief Judge Wood's Court54. Will NYS' Dept. Disc. Committee and Commission on Judicial Conduct Be Corrupted?55. Subpoena Planned for Judge Garaufis56. No Negotiations for Justice...Justice is Owed!57. Will Attorneys Sign Affirmation?58. Am I Finally Being Taken Seriously?59. Evidentiary Hearing is Scheduled!60. Amy Feinstein Refuses to Prosecute!61. Robert Juceam's Useless Excuses62. Appellate Brief pages 24 to end63. No Justice -- No Peace!64. Happy Birthday My Beautiful Angel65. Are You A Victim of A Green Card Marriage Scam?66. End Green Card Marriage Sponsorship67. How to Report an Immigration Scammer and the Attorney68. Is The End Finally in Sight?69. Will Appellate Division Justices Decide Fairly?70. What Will NYSCJC's Response Be?71. How Will NYSDDC Respond?72. Will Obama's Administration Coerce Helpless Schvartze's Silence73. Will U.S. Department of State's Secretary Rise To The Challenge?74. Eugene Uzamere Calls It Quits75. Bigot Judge Sunshine Continues Courtroom Corruption76. Schvartze's Complaints Still Ignored By Appellate Division's White Judiciary77. More Talmudic Bias and Anti-Schvartze Racism At SDNY78. Senator Uzamere...You Are The Husband!79. Will U.S. Solicitor General Office Look On Idly?80. What will SCOTUS Do?81. Why did they disobey?82. Cabranes' Fraud Upon The Court83. Is Hinds-Radix Their 'Secret' Weapon?84. New York State Lawsuit for Fraud85. Judge Sunshine Is A Loser86. Judge Sunshine Out of Options87. Petitioner Prepares Request for Rehearing...88. Petition for Rehearing89. Loser Sunshine's Last Hurrah90. Lawsuit Against Daily News and Scott Shifrel91. Mort Zuckerman's Bigoted Tabloid92. Corruption at Nassau County Supreme Court and Nassau County Clerk93. Judge Scuccimarra Ruling94. Defendants Have Defaulted95. Will Judge Parga Accepts Anne Carroll's Drivel Because Defendants Are Rich Jews?96. New York and Anne B. Carroll97. Lawsuit Against President98. Will Obama Listen?99. Open Letter to Al Jazeera, President Obama and Judge Allegra100. More Court Shenanigans?101. Howard U. Schmokescreen102. Into the fire...103. What Will The New York State Division of Human Rights Do?104. Housing Court Corruption105. Mayor Bloomberg's Finest106. FEGS in Criminal Conspiracy107. FEGS Gave Victim No Choice108. What Will The New York State Supreme Court Do?109. What Will Court of Claims Do?110. Abuse of Religion Not New111. How Wicked Are They?112. What Lies???113. Federal Lawsuit114. Disastrous Results to Appeal115. Judge Garaufis' Discriminatory Decision116. Garaufis' Talmudic Shenanigans117. FOIA Hiding Evidence118. Congressional Testimony119. Unintelligible Complaint of Rachel G. Yohalem120. Uzamere v. USA, et al121. Judicial Whores Willy and Patty122. Uzamere v. USA123. Find an Unbiased Court124. U.S. Government Blacklists Own Citizens125. Appellate Brief First Circuit126. U.S. Government Hides Prosecution127. A Jewish RICO128. Jews' Demonic Doctrine -- Law of the Moser129. Mishkin Yanks His Own Nuts130. Will African American Victim of Grand Laceny Receive Justice?131. Judicial Ethics Hypocrite132. Jew Shenanigans Involved in Random Selection of Morally Compromised Judge133. Please save my family!134. Psychopaths135. Jewish Paradigm Put Jews on Top136. Pretender Bharara137. Int'l Complaint Against Israel, United States and Nigeria138. Memorial of Impeachment139. Supplemental Complaint140. Appellate Brief to UN and US141. U.S. Supreme Court Petition -- UN and U.S.142. A Real Man

José A. Cabranes Commits Fraud Upon the Court
by Copying the Dishonesty of Talmud Loyalist
Nicholas G. Garaufis
 bankimoon.jpg NavanethemPillay.jpg
JoseACabranes.jpg
judgegaraufis.jpg

      SDNY Judge José A. Cabranes is in the unenviable position of being a member of a tiny ethnic/racial minority of judges whose ability to render justice has been overpowered by the 2nd Circuit's larger, stronger, ruthless Talmud-oriented judiciary.  Choosing to strengthen his less powerful social status by cooperating with the more powerful Talmud-oriented judiciary rather than upsetting the status quo and sacrificing his career, Judge Cabranes allowed Talmud loyalist Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis to influence him to render a biased, unconstitutional decision, thereby commiting fraud upon the court.

        In the decision that was handed down by Judge Cabranes, he parrots essentially the same untrue statement that was made by Judge Garaufis:  "the complainant has filed numerous civil actions in the district court...related to her abandonment by her ex-husband."

        Judge Cabranes' parroting of this statement is a blatant act of fraud upon the court, a criminal act that violates  18 U.S.C. §24118 U.S.C. §242, the First Amendment's doctrine of separation of religion and government and the Fifth Amendment's and Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause of the U.S. Constitution.   His behavior appears to be based on the belief that pro se victims of biased decisions lack the ability of to disseminate the decisions to the general public public.

        In order to teach this constitutionally-challenged bully a lesson, I have taken the liberty of uploading Judge Cabranes' decision to my website so that the whole world can see Judge Cabranes for what he truly is -- a traitor of the U.S. Constitution.

        Proof that Judge Cabranes Committed Fraud upon the Court 

        Point I -- Complainant Knows that Abandonment of a Spouse is a State Issue, Not a Federal Issue

       I know that the issue of abandonment of a spouse is purely a state issue.  Having prepared my own divorce action, I researched New York State Domestic Relations LawDomestic Relations Law §170(2) says:  "An action for divorce may be maintained by a husband or wife to  procure  a  judgment  divorcing  the  parties  and   dissolving the marriage on any of the following grounds...the abandonment of the plaintiff by the defendant for a period of one or more years."

        If I know the aforementioned law well enough to understand that I cannot use legal grounds based on New York State law in a federal district court, why would I litigate grounds based on New York State law in a federal court?

        The above succinctly shows that Judge Cabranes' fraudulent implication that I used spousal abandonment as an actionable federal ground in my lawsuit is untrue and an act of fraud upon the court. 

 

        Point II -- Spouse's Abandonment Cannot Be An Issue Because Spouse is not a Party to the Action

        SDNY Judge José A. Cabranes is in the unenviable position of being a member of a tiny ethnic/racial minority of judges whose ability to render justice has been overpowered by the 2nd Circuit's larger, stronger, ruthless Talmud-oriented judiciary.  Choosing to strengthen his less powerful social status by cooperating with the more powerful Talmud-oriented judiciary rather than upsetting the status quo and sacrificing his career, Judge Cabranes allowed Talmud loyalist Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis to influence him to render a biased, unconstitutional decision, thereby commiting fraud upon the court.

        In the decision that was handed down by Judge Cabranes, he parrots essentially the same untrue statement that was made by Judge Garaufis:  "the complainant has filed numerous civil actions in the district court...related to her abandonment by her ex-husband."

        Judge Cabranes' parroting of this statement is a blatant act of fraud upon the court, a criminal act that violates  18 U.S.C. §24118 U.S.C. §242, the First Amendment's doctrine of separation of religion and government and the Fifth Amendment's and Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause of the U.S. Constitution.   His behavior appears to be based on the belief that pro se victims of biased decisions lack the ability of to disseminate the decisions to the general public public.

        In order to teach this constitutionally-challenged bully a lesson, I have taken the liberty of uploading Judge Cabranes' decision to my website so that the whole world can see Judge Cabranes for what he truly is -- a traitor of the U.S. Constitution.

        Proof that Judge Cabranes Committed Fraud upon the Court 

        Point I -- Complainant Knows that Abandonment of a Spouse is a State Issue, Not a Federal Issue

       I know that the issue of abandonment of a spouse is purely a state issue.  Having prepared my own divorce action, I researched New York State Domestic Relations LawDomestic Relations Law §170(2) says:  "An action for divorce may be maintained by a husband or wife to  procure  a  judgment  divorcing  the  parties  and   dissolving the marriage on any of the following grounds...the abandonment of the plaintiff by the defendant for a period of one or more years."

        If I know the aforementioned law well enough to understand that I cannot use legal grounds based on New York State law in a federal district court, why would I litigate grounds based on New York State law in a federal court?

        The above succinctly shows that Judge Cabranes' fraudulent implication that I used spousal abandonment as an actionable federal ground in my lawsuit is untrue and an act of fraud upon the court.

        Point II -- Spouse's Abandonment Cannot Be An Issue Because Spouse is not a Party to the Action

        My petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court lists the following defendants:  Allen E. Kaye, P.C.; Uzamere and Associates, PLLC; Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, LLP; Allen E. Kaye Esq.; Eugene O. Uzamere, Esq.; Robert E. Juceam, Esq.; Jack Gladstein, Esq.; Eugenia Cowles, Esq.; Rachel McCarthy, Esq.; Andrew Cuomo, Esq.; Honorable Michael Bloomberg; Honorable A. Gail Prudenti, Judge of the Appellate Court 2nd Judicial Department; Honorable Abraham Gerges, Judge of the Supreme Court, Kings County; Honorable Jeffrey S. Sunshine, Judge of Supreme Court Kings County; James Edward Pelzer, Clerk of Appellate Court 2nd Judicial Department; Joseph Visceglia, Municipal Clerk; Bernard J. Rostansky, Notary Public; State of New York; City of New York and New York City Clerk's Office.

        If one takes notice of the list of defendants, the "ex-husband" mentioned in Judge Cabranes' decision is not mentioned as a defendant.  Why would Judge Cabranes state that this case is "related to her abandonment by her "ex-husband" when the "ex-husband" is not a party to the action?

               The above succinctly shows that Judge Cabranes' implied reference to my husband as some kind of "secret" party to my federal action when my husband is not mentioned as a party to my federal complaint/writ of certiorari is dishonest.

        Point III -- Falsified Documents Established that Constitutional Torts is the Ground for Complaint

        Listed below are the documents that were falsifed by attorneys Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Bernard J. Rostanski: 

  • Marriage affidavit that contains Senator Uzamere's fictitious name at the top and his real name signed at the bottom;
  • Marriage certificate with the fictitious name "Godwin E. Uzamere" that Senator Uzamere used to marry me;
  • Immigration agency's I-130 immediate relative sponsorship form that was falsified by Senator Uzamere, immigration attorneys Allen E. Kaye and Harvey Shapiro, and notary public/attorney Bernard J. Rostanski;
  • Immigration agency's Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney signed by immigration attorney Harvey Shapiro;
  • Correspondence from the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (now U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service) containing immigration number A35-201-224 based on real name "Ehigie Edobor Uzamere";
  • Correspondence from the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (now U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service) containing immigration number A24-027-764 based on fictitious name "Godwin E. Uzamere";
  • Arrest warrant issued Senator Uzamere for non-payment of child support;
  • Immigration attorney Allen E. Kaye's letter dated July 22, 2003 admitting that Ehigie Edobor Uzamere is my husband;
  • Federal summons for disorderly conduct and making loud noise; U.S. Attorney dropped the charge (to prevent me from appearing in front of a judge and reporting Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Bernard Rostanski);
  • Judge Murtha's dismissal based on U.S. Attorney's withdrawal of Rachel McCarthy charge of simple assault (to prevent me from appearing in front of a judge and reporting Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Bernard Rostanski);
  • Report from Rachel McCarthy of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service regarding the two immigration files of Allen Kaye's and Harvey Shapiro's client;
  • Rachel McCarthy's letter dated January 6, 2009;
  • Subpoena requiring Harvey Shapiro to come to court;
  • Subpoena requiring Allen Kaye to come to court;
  • Allen Kaye's letter dated March 24, 2009 refusing to comply with subpoena;
  • Federal summonses for disorderly conduct and destroying government property; U.S. Attorney later dropped the charges (to prevent me from appearing in front of a judge and reporting Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Bernard Rostanski);
  • Judge Sunshine's Decision and Order determining that Senator Ehigie Edobor Uzamere is my husband;
  • Rabbi Michael Broyde's Informing on Jews Who Commit Crimes;
  • Judge Cabranes' decision and order.

         It should be obvious to a person of reasonable intelligence that Allen E. Kaye's, Harvey Shapiro's and Bernard J. Rostanski's crime of aiding and abetting their client's use of a fraudulent name and birthday to circumvent immigration law and withhold proof of the real name and birthday that is now my property, thereby violating my Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment right not to be deprived property without due process of law is the proximate reason for the filing of my lawsuit.  Spousal abandonment has never been a ground upon which I filed my federal complaint.

        The above succinctly shows that Judge Cabranes' refusal to refer to the falsified documents that I submitted in my complaint of misconduct against Judge Garaufis decision is dishonest.

        Point IV -- Judge Cabranes' Misuse of Anti-Semitism Violates the First Amendment

        Personal views of anti-Semitism, while viewed by many as morally wrong, is not addressed by the U.S. Constitution.  However, it is a halakhic issue in Judaism.  Paragraph 12 of Gentiles in Halacha states that "The prohibition to hate applies only to Jews, one may hate a Gentile."  Paragraph M entitled You Shall Not Hate states that "Anyone who hates a Jew in his heart transgresses a negative commandment."  The charge of anti-Semitism, other than in situations where federal civil rights and state human rights have been violated is defamatory and unconstitutional.

        In the U.S. District Court case Quigley v. Aronson, et al, the Anti-Defamation used anti-Semitism as a ground to spy on and smear the reputations of William and Dorothy Quigley.  The jury in this case awarded the Quigleys damages, mostly punitive, of $10.5 million.

        The Anti-Defamation League was also a defendant in a federal lawsuit after raids were made by the San Francisco Police Department and the FBI on offices of the ADL in both San Francisco and Los Angeles, which found that the ADL was engaged in extensive domestic spying operations on a vast number of individuals and institutions around the country, based on anti-Semitism concerns.  Eventually the ADL was found guilty and forced to pay damages for using spying/smear campaign based on the charge of anti-Semitism against  former Congressman Peter McCloskey.

        The above succinctly shows that Judge Cabranes' inferences to anti-Semitism as a basis for dismissing my complaint against Ashkenazi judges Nicholas Garaufis (Judge A), Leonard Sand (Judge B) and Miriam Goldman-Cedarbaum (Judge C) are both dishonest and biased.

        Point V -- Judge Cabranes Use of Mistruths and Willful Blindness to Feign Ignorance of Plaintiff Wrongful Arrests 

       It is safe to assume that Judge Cabranes is articulate with regard to the use and understanding of the English language.  That being said, why would he give the false impression that I said and meant that I was a criminal defendant in a case against Judge Cedarbaum, Judge Sand or Judge Garaufis when such was never the case?  Why did Judge Cabranes fail to mention the criminal cases for which I was charged while attempting to exercise my constitutional right to present my allegations to a federal court?  Most important, why did Judge Cabranes fail to mention that every single charge for which I had to appear in federal court was dropped by the U.S. Attorney?

      Judge Cabranes' use of mistruths and willful blindness to feign ignorance of plaintiff's wrongful arrests while I attempted to exercise my constitutional right to due process succinctly shows that he is both dishonest and biased.

        Point VI --  Rabbi Broyde's Informing on Fellow Jews Who Commit Crimes Was Ignored by Judge Cabranes

        In the aforementioned document, Rabbi Michael Broyde (not Louis Farrakhan or any other individual deemed to be anti-Semitic) stated:  "...the Talmud recounts - in a number of places - that it is prohibited to inform on Jews to the secular government, even when their conduct is a violation of secular law and even when their conduct is a violation of Jewish law."  Is this statement restricted to Rabbi Broyde?  Let's see:

  •  dwek.jpgMoser Solomon Dwek -- "Inside the shops and the Syrian synagogue, few would talk about Solomon Dwek, the man they feel is a turncoat to his own people. "To do something like that to the community is a disgrace," Syrian community member Joy Abboud said.  Some in the Jewish community in Deal, New Jersey feel burned after five rabbis were...rounded up by the feds, arrests only possible with Dwek's help...Dwek was a government informant."
  • Case of Informant Reverberates Through L.A.’s Orthodox Community -- "Indeed, the question of Kasirer — the FBI witness who turned state’s evidence against the Hasidic rebbe in exchange for a lighter sentence on previous fraud charges stemming from his health care business — seems to be weighing most heavily on people’s minds, according to Los Angeles rabbis interviewed by the Forward. In traditional Jewish law, if a Jew reports another Jew to the government, he is deemed a moser, and in some interpretations, a moser’s actions are punishable by death."
  • cov_zigelman-moshe_011108.jpgThe Spinka money trail—and the informant who brought them down -- "...the case has sparked a fierce debate about the type of behavior that is acceptable for observant people and what type of religious community Los Angeles would like to be. But there's also debate about the laws of a moser, an informant, because one person who was not charged was the primary source of information for the federal case -- though he allegedly started out as one of the perpetrators."
  • Rambam Nizakin 8:10 -- It is permissible to murder one who is deemed an informant anywhere even today that we don’t judge capital cases, and it is even permitted to murder him before he informs by just hearing him say, “I will inform on said individual with regard to his physical body or his money”. This even applies for an insignificant amount of money. He thereby has doomed himself to be killed, and we warn him and we tell him “do not inform”, if he is defiant and he says,”No, I will still inform” it is a Mitzvah to kill him and whoever seizes the opportunity first to kill him will be rewarded.”
  • Rambam Tshuva 3:12, and chovil U’mazik 8:9: --  “there are two kinds of informers, one who delivers his friend to gentiles to kill or injure him, or one who conveys his friend’s money to the gentiles… neither of these (informers), have a portion in the world to come”.
  • Jewish World/Parents ignore child abuse at rabbi's advice, by Efrat Weiss -- "...ultra-Orthodox parents ignored sexual abuse of their two children after their rabbi warned filing charges may invoke halachic rule equal to 'din moser'...the mother reportedly told the investigators that she was "powerless...several neighbors witnessed the suspect molesting the children in public, but failed to report him. The children's father claimed that he consulted his rabbi, who told him that unless he witnesses the acts himself, reporting it would be like rendering a "Din Moser." "Din Moser" is an ancient halachic law pertaining to informants, which according to the austere interpretation of Jewish tradition, equals a death sentence."

       Judge Cabranes' embarrassingly lame attempt to defame my character by implying that I am an anti-Semite is unconstitutional, and is an overt attempt to use Talmudic religious doctrine to deprive me of constitutional right to proceed in a lawsuit against Ashkenazim Allen E. Kaye, Jack Gladstein and Bernard Rostanski, in violation 18 U.S.C. §242, deprivation of rights under color of law.

        Point VII -- Judge Cabranes Misinterpretation of Federal Disqualification Requirements is Fraud upon the Court

        On page 6 of Judge Cabranes' decision, he states that "the complainant's bald allegation that Judges A, B, and C were biased towards members of their own faith are wholly conclusory, and are therefore dismissed as "lacking sufficient evidence to raise an inference that midconduct has occurred..."  However, the federal requirements of 28 U.S.C. §455 say something different regarding judicial recusal:

goldrightarrow.gifIn 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge's impartiality (Liteky v. U.S., 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1162 (1994).

goldrightarrow.gifCourts have repeatedly held that positive proof of the partiality of a judge is not a requirement, only the appearance of partiality. Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 108 S.Ct. 2194 (1988) (what matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance); United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191 (7th Cir. 1985) (Section 455(a) "is directed against the appearance of partiality, whether or not the judge is actually biased.") ("Section 455(a) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C. §455(a), is not intended to protect litigants from actual bias in their judge but rather to promote public confidence in the impartiality of the judicial process.").

goldrightarrow.gifSection 455(a) "requires a judge to recuse himself in any proceeding in which her impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989).

goldrightarrow.gifIn Pfizer Inc. v. Lord, 456 F.2d 532 (8th Cir. 1972), the Court stated that "It is important that the litigant not only actually receive justice, but that he believes that he has received justice."

goldrightarrow.gifThe Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the principle that "justice must satisfy the appearance of justice", Levine v. United States, 362 U.S. 610, 80 S.Ct. 1038 (1960), citing Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14, 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 (1954).

goldrightarrow.gifShould a judge not disqualify himself, then the judge is in violation of the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. United States v. Sciuto, 521 F.2d 842, 845 (7th Cir. 1996) ("The right to a tribunal free from bias or prejudice is based, not on section 144, but on the Due Process Clause.").

        The above succinctly shows that Judge Cabranes' statement regarding judicial misconduct based on bias is a gross misinterpresation of 28 U.S.C. §455, such that Judge Cabraness has committed fraud upon the court.

       Lastly, the questions that still beg to be answered are:  1) Why have Judge Garaufis, who is an Jewish, Judge Cedarbaum, who is Jewish and Judge Sand, who is Jewish, made no attempt to review or even mention my allegations regarding the acts of fraud committed by Allen E. Kaye, who is Jewish, Harvey Shapiro, who is Jewish, Jack Gladstein, who is Jewish and Bernard J. Rostanski, who is Jewish, although I submitted irrefutable proof of my allegations? 2) Why, in spite of all the times that federal agencies charged me with petty offenses, have I never been allowed to appear before a judge to present my allegations against the aforesaid attorneys? 3)Why does each judge who touches my case always change the subject?

       Conclusion

        I presented government documentation that clearly establishes that my complaint concerns the violation of my constitutional rights -- not spousal abandonment.  I produced irrefutable proof that both the defendants in my writ of certiorari and the judges who dismissed my action belong to the same religion.  Furthermore, I produced irrefutable evidence the aforesaid individuals are fellow members of the religion that promulgates the doctrine that reporting the crimes of fellow members is prohibited.  Most importantly, I produced irrefutable government documentation that the fraudulent attempt to illegally circumvent immigration laws by Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Bernard J. Rostanski caused the violation of my constitutional rights and that no federal judge who had the opportunity to view my case obeyed 18 U.S.C. §4, misprision of felony and reported the attorneys to the authorities.

        Judge Cabranes commited fraud upon the Court based primarily on Talmudic bias.  He committed treason upon the Constitution.
 

 thanksgivingcheryl1.jpg
What the...???

 
cabranesdecsionpg1.jpg
 
 

 
cabranesdecsionpg2.jpg
 
 
 

 cabranesdecsionpg3.jpg

 

 

 

 cabranesdecsionpg4.jpg

 

 

 

 cabranesdecsionpg5.jpg

 

 

 cabranesdecsionpg6.jpg

 

 

 

 

 cabranesdecsionpg7.jpg

 

 

 

 

marriageaffidavitfront.jpg
marriage_cert.jpg
I-130.jpg
A24.jpg
A35.jpg
nonpayment_warrant.jpg
allenkayeresponse.gif
allenkayeletterpg2.jpg
fedsummons4-18-08.jpg
twouzameresreport.jpg
rachelmccarthyletter2.jpg
fed_dismissal12-18-08.jpg
harvey_shapiro_subpoena.jpg
allenkayesubpoena.jpg
allenkayeattackletter.jpg
fedsummonsA.jpg
fedsummonsB.jpg
sunshinedecision5-12-09pg1.jpg
sunshinedecision5-12-09pg2.jpg
informingonjews_2.jpg