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

IntlDecadeforAfricansBanner.jpg
International Criminal Court

 
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights


Cheryl D. Uzamere, et al


Plaintiff,

v.

The State of Israel, the United States of America
and the Federal Republic of Nigeria, et al

Defendants.

███████████████████████████████████████

Verified Complaint/Petition, Application Form
and Request for Participation in Proceedings and
Reparations of the ICC for Individual Victims

███████████████████████████████████████

Cheryl D. Uzamere
Appearing Pro Se
1209 Loring Avenue
Apt. 6B

Brooklyn, NY  11208

Tel.: 718-235-6836

Fax: 718-235-2804

E-mail: cuzamere@netzero.net




paragraphendingdesign.jpg
  


Crimes and Torts With Which Defendants Are Charged
 


 

Statutory Authority

Violations Alleged Against Defendants

1977 PROTOCOL I ADDITIONAL TO THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS OF 12 AUG. 1949

Article 37:

Perfidy

VIOLATION OF THE ROME STATUTES OF
THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT:

Article Six:

Genocide

Article Seven:

Crimes against humanity

Article Eight:

War Crimes

U.N. HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS:

Article Five:

Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment at he hands of Defendants;

Article Six:

Recognition as persons before he law;

Article Seven:

Equal protection before the law;

Article Eight:

Right to obtain an effective remedy by Government Defendant's competent national tribunals;

Article Nine:

Arbitrary arrest and detention;

Article Ten:

Full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and
impartial tribunal;

Article Eleven:

Right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty;

Article Twelve:

No arbitrary inter-ference with privacy; protection by the law

Article Thirteen:

Right to freedom of movement.

FEDERAL VIOLATIONS:

CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS:

FIRST AMENDMENT

Freedom of speech; Separation of church and state; Petition government for a redress of grievances

FIFTH AMENDMENT

Due process of the law

SIXTH AMENDMENT

Access to attorney; Presumption of inno- cence

EIGHTH AMENDMENT

Prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment

FOURTEENTH
AMENDMENT

Equal protection of the law; due process of the law

CRIMINAL OFFENSES:

42 USC §1986

Action for neglect to prevent

42 USC §1983

Deliberate indifference

42 USC §1985

Deprivation of rights under color of law

18 USC §2381

Treason

18 USC §2385

Misprision of treason

18 USC §2382

Seditious conspiracy

18 USC §1961 - §1968

(RICO -- Racketeering, Influenced Corrupt Organization)

18 USC §1951

Hobbs Act

18 USC §4

Misprision of felony

18 USC §1001

Fraud

18 USC §1028

Identity theft

18 USC §1028A

Aggravated identity fraud

18 USC §242

Deprivation of rights under color of law

18 USC §872

Extortion

18 USC §873

Blackmail

 


ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW

Verified Complaint/Petition, Application Form and Request or Participation
in Proceedings and Reparations at the ICC or Individual Victims

*****1)*****Whether international law acknowledges Israeli-controlled media's right to engage in acts of war by deception designed to violate the right of free speech of those described by Talmudic Laws of Israel as those who are hated by Jews (sub-Saharan Africans and their descendants, Northern Africans, Ethiopians Jews, Gentiles) and who have been victimized and are victims of torts or crimes committed by Israel and/or Israeli citizens.

*****2)*****Whether a country whose government  uses its own adult citizens and the adults of foreign adult to bomb and destry, bomb and kill and commit acts of sexual degradation against a foreign nation's children for the purpose of blackmailing the citizens of said foreign country to wrest away control of said foreign government to itself,  if said country can be considered either a friendly state or an enemy state.


*****3)*****Whether international law acknowledges Israel’s and the Jews’ right to practice the Talmudic doctrine Curse of Ham/Curse of Dark Skin, a slanderous doctrine never taught in the Torah or any of the 39 books of the Bible in a manner that subjects black Africans to the deprivation of their rights, including lost of their lives (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, Folio 57a; also, see Dr. Martin Speaks of the Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade; Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, Folio 57a).


*****
4)*****Whether international law acknowledges Israel’s and the Jews’ right to practice Judaism in a manner that legally acknowledges Israel’s and the Jews’ right to put to death individuals who are Christians, as stated at the Jewish website Come and Hear, America’s New Government Church . . . the Noahide Laws promise deadly consequences for Christians (http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/america_1.html);  and whether international law acknowledges Israel's and the Jews' right to present child/murder to Molech per the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, Folio 64A to be used in child snuff movies.


*****5)*****Whether Gentiles who believe that the Nation of Israel’s claim to a covenant/ contractual relationship with Jehovah is false, have any legal obligation based on international law to obey Talmudic/Judaic law.


*****
6)*****Whether international law’s and national law’s acknowledgment of Israel’s and the Jews’ right to practice Judaism in a manner that gives Israel and the Jews the right to attack, threaten with murder, murder, shun, or in any other way punish any person for reporting crimes committed by Jews to the secular, non-religious, Gentile-controlled authorities.


*****7)*****Whether international law's acknowledgment of Israel's and the Jews' right to practice Judaism extends to their right to allow the encroachment of the Talmudic/Judaic Laws of Israel.
 
 
 
paragraphendingdesign.jpg

InternationalCriminalCourtLogo.jpg


Application Form for
Individuals
 

 ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀

Request for Participation in Proceedings and
Reparations at the ICC For Individual Victims

████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

PART A...................................................................................................................

PERSONAL INFORMATION

 

1. Has the victim already submitted an application for participation or for reparations to the ICC?

 

____Yes       X   No

 

2. If yes and the victim has a registration number, please indicate it here:

 

__/______/____

 

3. Name(s) of the victim:


Cheryl D. Uzamere


Please give all names as completely as possible

 

4. Sex:     X  Female  ____Male

 

5. Date of birth

 

31        05      1959             and/or Age 56

(day) (month) (year)

 

6. Place of birth

 

New York, New York United States of America

(village/town) (country)

 

7. Number of Dependants:

 

None (2 adult children)

 

8. Tribe/ethnic group (optional):

 

Gentile/African American

 

9. Please indicate what work the victim does, if any, or whether the victim is a student or unemployed.

 

unemployed

 

 

Joint Participation and Reparation Form for Individuals



Part A.  If any of the information provided here is different from the information on your identity documents, please explain why next to your answer.


























5. Where the victim Is date of birth and age are unknown, please give approximate date or age
or provide any information that will enable the age to be identified.









7. Indicate the number of people such as children, orphans or other family members who are dependant on the victim for financial or other support.






9. Please indicate what work the victim does, if any, or whether the victim is a student or unemployed.

Print

Page 2 of 7

10. What language(s) does the victim speak?

English

 

11. What proof of identity is the victim providing? Please specify:

Unexpired/current New York State Learner's Permit with photo; unexpired/current

New York City Human Resources Food stamp card with photo


12. Where does the victim currently live?

 

Village/City/Town: Brooklyn

 

County/District/Province: Kings County

 

Country: United States of America

 

13. Is the victim applying on his/her own behalf?

 

YES __ NO X

 

If yes, go to question 22.

 

 

14. If no, what is the name of the person acting on behalf of the victim?

Please give all names, as completely as possible

 

15. Why is this person acting on behalf of the victim?

Please tick only one box

 

a. The victim is a child under 18 years of age__

b. The victim is unable to act for him or herself because of disability__

c. The victim is an adult and gives his or her consent__

d. Any other reason? Please specify as completely as possible.

16. What is the relationship between the victim and the person acting

on behalf of the victim?__

Proof of this relationship must be attached

 

Joint Participation and Reparation Form for Individuals

11. It is a requirement that the victim provide proof of identity. This can include, for example, national identity card, birth toertificate, voting card, passport, driver s licence, student or employee card, letter from a local authority, camp registration card, card from a humanitarian agency, tax document or other document identifying the victim.

 

13. Usually a victim will apply for him/ herself. In some cases this is not possible, for example because the victim is a child or is disabled, deceased or disappeared. In such cases, another person may be permitted to act on behalf of the victim.

 

The victim should consent to have another person act on his/her behalf if the victim is able to. If somebody is acting on behalf of the victim, then answer no to question 13 and complete questions 14 to 21.

 

16. Where answer a, b or d has been ticked in question 15, proof must be provided of the relationship between the victim and the person acting on behalf of the victim. See note 11 for examples of documents that might prove the relationship. If c is ticked, the victim must give his/her consent by signing at the end of this form.

Print

Page 3 of 7
 

17. Sex of the person acting on behalf of the victim:

 

____Female ____Male

18. Date of birth of the person acting on behalf of the victim:

 

and/or Age

(day) (month) (year)

 

19. What language(s) does the person acting on behalf of the victim speak?

 

________________________________

 

20. What proof of identity is the person acting on behalf of the victim providing?
Please specify.

 

21. What proof of identity is the person acting on behalf of the victim providing?
Please specify.

 

_______________________________

 

 

 


 


 

22. How can the victim or the person acting on behalf of the victim be contacted?

Please fill in as much information as possible

 

Contact person/organisation: Cheryl D. Uzamere

Street: 1209 Loring Avenue Number/Plot: Apt. 6B

P.O. Box: Sector/Cell/Zone: _______________

Village/City/ Town/Camp: Brooklyn, New York

Sub-county/Parish: ______________________

County/District/Province: Kings County

Postal Code: 11208____ Country: United States of America

E-mail: cuzamere@netzero.net

 

Telephone Number(s): +1 (718) 235-6836+1 (718) 235-6836

 

23. Is somebody assisting the victim to fill in this form?

 

Yes No

 

24. If yes, what is that persons name and organisation (if any)?

 

______________________________________

(name) (organisation)

 

25. Is an interpreter assisting with the filing of this form?

 

___Yes  No    X   

 

 

Joint Participation Reparation Form for Individuals


20. See note to question 11.

22. This could be the victim s own address or the address of an organisation, a family member or other individual, if the victim prefers to be contacted through someone else.

Print

   

PART B
INFORMATION ABOUT THE ALLEGED CRIMES



26. What happened to the victim? Describe the event(s) in as much detail as possible.

If more space is needed, please attach answers to this question on a separate sheet of paper



CHERYL D. UZAMERE
APPEARING PRO SE
1209 Loring Avenue
Apt. 6B
Brooklyn, NY 11208
Tel.: (718) 235-6836
Fax: (718) 235-2408
E-mail: cuzamere@netzero.net

 

International Criminal Court

-and-

United Nations Office of the High Commission for Human Rights


Cheryl D. Uzamere


***********************Plaintiffs,

*****- against -

The State of Israel,

******************* - and -




As Representatives and Citizens of the State of Israel: Benyamin Netanyahu, as Prime Minister of the State of Israel; those individuals listed below who hold dual citizenship with the United States of America and the State of Israel; Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Rabbi Noson Gurary, Esq., Nathan Lewin, Esq. and Alyza Lewin.

The United States of America,

*******************- and -

As Representatives and Citizens of the United States: The Honorable Barack H. Obama, Individually and in His Official Capacity as President of the United States of America; James R. Clapper, in his Official Capacity as Director of the National Intelligence Agency; Michael S. Roger, in his Official Capacity as Director of the National Security Agency and Chief of the Central Security Service, Ashton B. Carter, in his official capacity as Secretary of Defense; Loretta E. Lynch, in her official capacity as Attorney General of the United States, and James B. Comey, in his Official Capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Jeh Johnson, in his Official Capacity as Secretary of the the United States Department of Homeland Security; Leon Rodriquez, in His Official Capacity as Director, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services; Rachel McCarthy, in her Official Capacity as Bar Counsel, in her Official Director as Bar Counsel, United States Citizenship and Immigration Service; James X. Dempsey, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; Elisebeth Collins Cook, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Member, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; David Medine, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chairman, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; Rachel L. Brand, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, Patricia M. Wald, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, The Honorable William E. Smith, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the District of Rhode; The Honorable Patricia A. Sullivan, in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the District of Rhode Island; Nicholas G. Garaufis, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Dennis Jacobs, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Jon O. Newman, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Amalya L. Kearse, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Ralph K. Winter, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; John M. Walker, Jr., Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Joseph M. McLaughlin, Individually in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Pierre N. Leval, Individually in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Guido Calabresi, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; José A. Cabranes, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Chester J. Straub, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Rosemary S. Pooler, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Robert D. Sack, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Robert A. Katzmann, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Barrington D. Parker, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Reena Raggi, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Richard C. Wesley, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Peter W. Hall, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Debra Ann Livingston, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Gerard E. Lynch, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Denny Chin, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Raymond J. Lohier, Jr., Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Susan L. Carney, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Christopher F. Droney, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Carol Bagley Amon, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Chief Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Frederic Block, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Joseph F. Bianco, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Margo K. Brodie, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Brian M. Cogan, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Raymond J. Dearie, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Sandra J. Feuerstein, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Nina Gershon, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. Court for the Eastern District of New York; I. Leo Glasser, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; John Gleeson, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Denis R. Hurley, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Dora L. Irizarry, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Sterling Johnson, Jr., Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Edward R. Korman, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Kiyo A. Matsumoto, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; William F. Kuntz, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Roslynn R. Mauskopf, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Allyne R. Ross, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Thomas C. Platt, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Joanna Seybert, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Arthur D. Spatt, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Sandra L. Townes, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Eric N. Vitaliano, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Jack B. Weinstein, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Leonard D. Wexler, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Ronnie Abrams, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Harold Baer, Individually and Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Deborah A. Batts, Individually and in Her Southern District of New York; Richard M. Berman, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Vincent L. Briccetti, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Naomi Reice Buchwald, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Andrew L. Carter, Jr., Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; P. Kevin Castel, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Denise L. Cote, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Paul A. Crotty, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; George B. Daniels, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Kevin T. Duffy, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Paul A. Engelmayer, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Katherine B. Forrest, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Jesse M. Furman, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Paul G. Gardephe, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Thomas P. Griesa, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Charles S. Haight, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Alvin K. Hellerstein, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Lewis A. Kaplan, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Kenneth M. Karas, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; John F Keenan, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; John G. Koeltl, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Victor Marrero, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Colleen McMahon, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Alison J. Nathan, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; J. Paul Oetken, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Richard Owen, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Robert P. Patterson, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; William H. Pauley, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Loretta A. Preska, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Chief Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Jed S. Rakoff, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Edgardo Ramos, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Leonard B Sand, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Shira A. Scheindlin, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Cathy Seibel, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Louis L. Stanton, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Sidney H. Stein, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Richard J Sullivan, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Laura Taylor Swain, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Robert W. Sweet, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Kimba M. Wood, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Steven M. Gold, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chief Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Joan M. Azrack, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Lois Bloom, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; E. Thomas Boyle, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Gary R. Brown, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Marilyn D. Go, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Robert M. Levy, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Arlene R. Lindsay, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Roanne L. Mann; Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; James Orenstein, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Viktor V. Pohorelsky; Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Cheryl L. Pollak, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; Vera M. Scanlon, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; A. Kathleen Tomlinson, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; William D. Wall, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; James L. Cott, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Paul E. Davison, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Michael H. Dolinger, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Ronald L. Ellis, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Kevin N. Fox, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chief Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; James C. Francis, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Debra Freeman, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Gabriel W. Gorenstein, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Frank Maas, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Sarah Netburn, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Andrew J. Peck, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Henry Pitman, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Lisa Margaret Smith, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Individually and George A. Yanthis, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Martin R. Goldberg, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Lawrence E. Kahn, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York; José Linares, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge for the District of New Jersey; Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Clerk of Court for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Nancy B. Firestone, in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the United States Court of Claims; Christine O.C. Miller, in Her Official Capacity as Judge for the United States Court of Claims; John P. Wiese, in His Official Capacity as Judge for the United States Court of Claims; the Honorable Patrick J. Leahy, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chairman, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Charles Schumer, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Dick Durbin, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Sheldon Whitehouse, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Amy Klobuchar, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Al Franken, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Christopher A. Coons, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Richard Blumenthal, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Mazie Hirono, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Chuck Grassley, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Orrin G. Hatch, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Jeff Sessions, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Lindsey Graham, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable John Cornyn, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Michael S. Lee, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Ted Cruz, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Jeff Flake, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Bob Goodlatte, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Jim Sensenbrenner, Jr., Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Howard Coble, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Lamar Smith, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Steve Chabot, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Spencer Bachus, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Darrell Issa, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable J. Randy Forbes, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Steve King, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Trent Franks, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Louie Gohmert, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Jim Jordan, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Ted Poe, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Hon. Jason Chaffetz, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Tom Marino, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Hon. Trey Gowdy, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Mark Amodei, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Raul Labrador, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Blake Farenthold, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable George Holding, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Doug Collins, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Ron DeSantis, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable John Conyers, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Bobby Scott, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Mel Watt, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Zoe Lofgren, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Jackson Lee, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Steve Cohen, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Hank Johnson, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Pedro Pierluisi, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Judy Chu, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Ted Deutch, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Luis V. Gutierrez, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Karen Bass, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Cedric Richmond, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Suzan DelBene, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Joe Garcia, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Hakeem Jeffries, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee; the Honorable Dianne Feinstein, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Chairperson, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable John D. Rockefeller IV, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Ron Wyden, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Barbara A. Mikulski, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Mark Udall, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Mark Warner, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Martin Heinrich, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Angus King, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Saxby Chambliss, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Vice Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Richard Burr, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable James E. Risch, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Daniel Coats, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Marco Rubio, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Susan Collins, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Tom Coburn, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Mike Rogers, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Mac Thornberry, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Jeff Miller, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Mike Conaway, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Peter King, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Frank LoBiondo, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Devin Nunes, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Lynn Westmoreland, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Michele Bachmann, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Thomas J Rooney, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Joe Heck, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Mike Pompeo, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Mike Thompson, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Jan Schakowsky, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; the Honorable Jim Langevin, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; Hon. Adam Schiff, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; Hon. Luis Gutierrez, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; Hon. Ed Pastor, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; Hon. Jim Himes, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; Hon. Terri Sewell, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; Mr. Ruslan Agarunov, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Bertram Berns, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Mr. Norman Bobrow, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Mr. Paul Burg, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Ms. Vickie Fishman, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Mr. Sander Gerber, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Mr. Michael Granoff, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Mr. Marvin Israelow, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Mr. Alan Levow, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Mr. William Russell-Shapiro, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Ms. Donna Sternberg, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Mr. Marc Spiegel, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Mr. Daniel Tenenblatt, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Leslie Topper, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Mr. Craig Weiss, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Campaign Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; World Alliance for Israel PAC, Individually and in Its Official Capacity as Campaign-Contributor to Congressman Hakeem Jeffries; Lee Ziff, Individually and in His Official Capacity as President of the World Alliance for Israel; the Honorable Eric H. Holder, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Attorney General for the United States; Thomas Perez, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Assistant Attorney General, Disability Right Section for the U.S. Department of Justice; Michael E. Horowitz, Individual and His in Official Capacity as Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Justice; the U.S. Department of Justice; the Honorable Robert Swan Mueller, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; George Venizelos, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Assistant Director in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Branch; the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Mr. Stein, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; “John Doe” #1, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the Honorable Janet Napolitano, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Secretary for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; John Morton, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Director for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Daniel Ragsdale, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Deputy Director for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Radha Sekar, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Acting Executive Associate Director for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; James Dinkins, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Executive Associate Director for the U.S. Homeland Security Investigations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Gary Mead, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Executive Associate Director for the Enforcement and Removal Operations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Peter S. Vincent, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Principal Legal Adviser for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement;Timothy Moynihan, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Assistant Director, Office of Professional Responsibility U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Tamara Kessler, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Acting Officer for the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties; Rachel McCarthy, Individually and Her Official Capacity as Bar Counsel for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Rand Beers, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Under Secretary for the Homeland Security for National Protection and Programs; Denis P. McGowan, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Regional Director, Federal Protection Service, National Protection and Programs Directorate for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Gayle Worthy, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as FOIA Officer/Public Liaison for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Ivan K. Fong, Individually and in His Official Capacity as General Counsel of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Charles K. Edwards, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Inspector General of U.S. Department of Homeland Security; the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Stacia Hylton, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Director of the U.S. Marshal Service; Gerald Auerbach, Individually and in His Official Capacity as General Counsel for the U.S. Marshals Service; Charles Dunne, Director, U.S. Marshals Service for the Eastern District of New York; “John Doe #2”, U.S. Marshals Service for the Eastern District of New York; “John Doe #3, U.S. Marshals Service for the Eastern District of New York; “Jane Doe”, U.S. Marshals Service for the Eastern District of New York; the U.S. Marshals Service; Kathleen Sebelius, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; William B. Schultz, Individually in His Official Capacity as General Counsel for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Marilyn Tavenner, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Acting Administrator Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Office; Eric Schneiderman, Individually and in His Official Capacity as New York State Attorney General, New York State Attorney General's Office; Eric Adams, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; John J. Bonacic, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Neil D. Breslin, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; John A. DeFrancisco, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Martin Malavé Dilan, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Adriano Espaillat, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; John J. Flanagan, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Charles J. Fuschillo Jr., Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Kemp Hannon, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Ruth Hassell-Thompson, Individually, and in Her Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Brad Hoylman, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Andrew J Lanza, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Kenneth P. LaValle, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Betty Little, Individually, and in Her Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Michael F. Nozzolio, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Thomas F. O'Mara, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Bill Perkins, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Michael H. Ranzenhofer, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; John L. Sampson, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Diane J. Savino, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Malcolm A. Smith, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Toby Ann Stavisky, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Lee M. Zeldin, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Member, New York Senate Judiciary Committee; Andrew M. Cuomo, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Governor of the State of New York; the State of New York; Jonathan Lippman, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chief Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; John W. McConnell, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Counsel to the Chief Administrative Judge, for the New York State Unified Court System; Daniel D. Angiolillo, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Cheryl E. Chambers, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Jeffrey A. Cohen, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Mark C. Dillon, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Anita R. Florio, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Steven W. Fisher, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; L. Priscilla Hall, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; John M. Leventhal, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Plummer E. Lott, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; William F. Mastro, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Robert J. Miller, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; A. Gail Prudenti, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Reinaldo E. Rivera, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Sheri S. Roman, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Sandra L. Sgroi, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Peter B. Skelos, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Appellate Judge for the New York State Unified Court System; Second Judicial Department; Thomas Scuccimarra, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Justice for the New York State Unified Court System; Jeffrey S. Sunshine, Individually and in His Capacity as Justice, New York State Unified Court System; Nancy Tegtmeier Sunshine, Individually and in her Official Capacity as Chief Clerk of Court for the New York State Unified Court System; Lara J. Genovesi, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Court Attorney for the New York State Unified Court System; Antonio Diaz, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Borough Chief Clerk for the New York State Unified Court System; Arthur M. Schack, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Justice of the New York State Unified Court System; Ronald D. Bratt, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Law Clerk for the New York State Unified Court System; Barbara Guida, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Secretary for the New York State Court System; Yolanda Jennings, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Part Clerk for the New York State Unified Court System; Kalisha Evans, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Officer for the New York State Unified Court System; Eileen A. Rakower, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Justice for the New York State Unified Court System; Donna Mills, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Justice for the New York State Unified Court System; Matthew D'Emic, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Justice for the New York State Unified Court System; Michael Gerstein, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Justice for the New York State Unified Court System; New York State Unified Court System; Anthony Cutrona, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Justice for the New York State Unified Court System; New York State Unified Court System; Thomas A. Klonick, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chair of the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct; the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct; Jorge Del Tipico, Individually and in His Capacity as Chair for the New York State Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Department; New York State Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Department; Richard M. Gutierrez, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chair for the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts; Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts; The Honorable Nirav R. Shah, M.D., M.P.H., Individually and in His Official Capacity as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Health; New York State Department of Health; Kristin M. Woodlock, RN, MPA, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Acting Commissioner for the New York State Office of Mental Health; John Tauriello, Esq. Individually and in His Official Capacity as Deputy Commissioner and Chief Counsel of the New York State Office of Mental Health; Samuel Gant, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Director of the Intensive Case Management Program, Kingsboro Psychiatric Facility, New York State Office of Mental Health, Bridget Davis, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Intensive Case Worker for the Intensive Case Management Program, New York State Office of Mental Health; New York State Office of Mental Health; Kristin M. Proud, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Commissioner of the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance; Maria T. Vidal, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as General Counsel for the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance; Robert Doar, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Administrator and Commissioner of the New York City Human Resources Administration; Roy A. Esnard, Individually and in His/Her Official Capacity as General Counsel of the New York City Human Resources Administration; the New York City Human Resources Administration; the New York City Human Resources Administration; Michael Bloomberg, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Mayor of the City of New York; the City of New York; Michael Cardozo, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Corporation Counsel for the City of New York; Charles A. Hynes, Individually and in his Official Capacity as District Attorney for Kings County; Amy Feinstein, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Chief Assistant District Attorney, Kings County District Attorney's Office; Kings County District Attorney's Office; Salvatore J. Russo, Individually and in His Official Capacity as General Counsel for the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation; Agnes Flores, Individually and in Her Former Official Capacity as Psychiatric Nurse for the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation; Martin Bolton, Individually and in Former His Official Capacity as Psychotherapist for the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation; Margaret Thomas, Individually and in Her Office Capacity as Licensed Practical Nurse for the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation; Pauline Amo-Adu, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as (unlicensed) Master Social Worker for the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation; Mario Blake, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Psychiatric Technician; James Oniwe, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Registered Nurse for the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation; Jean Barry, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Licensed Clinical Social Worker for the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation; Hugette Guilliame Sam, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Registered Nurse for the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation; Samuel Sarpong, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Program Manager for the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation; Dr. Scott Andrew Berger, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Psychiatrist for the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation; Dr. “John Doe” #4, Psychiatrist, Brookdale Hospital Medical Center; Brooklyn Hospital Medical Center; Giselle Stolper, President and CEO, Mental Health Association of New York City; Robert P. Borsody, Esq., Secretary of the Mental Health Association of New York City; Mental Health Association of New York City; Richard M. LaFontaine, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Elizabeth Latimer, Esq., Yung-Mi Lee, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Thomas Leith, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Hela Levi, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Paul Lieberman, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Jacob Lipsky, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Cary London, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Ruben Loyo, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Alyssa Mack, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Harvey Mandelcorn, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Marie Mark, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Ed Mayr, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Cameron Mease, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Becca Miller, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Susan Mitchell, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Jillian Modzeleski, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Benjamin Moore, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Lauren Nakamura, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Anders Nelson, Esq., Sarah Nolan, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Hemangi S. Pai, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Sydney Peck, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Talia Peleg, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Christopher Perks, Esq., Alex Perlin, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Guy Raimondi, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Danielle Regis, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Robert Riether, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Alan Rosenberg, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Scott Ruplinger, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Laura Saft, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Lisa Salvatore, Esq., Iliana Santiago, Esq., Josh Saunders, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Lisa Schreibersdorf, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Amanda Scioscia, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; David Secular, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Renee Seman, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Marissa Sherman, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Joseph P. Sieger, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Debora Silberman, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Arielle Simon, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Angad Singh, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Shari Stein, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Sonia Tate-Cousins, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Sarah Vendzules, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; C. Randall Walker, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Emilie Williams, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Ken Womble, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Aminie Woolworth, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Brooklyn Defender Service; Marianne C. Yang, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Brooklyn Defender Service; Iris Ying, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Benjamin Zeman, Esq., Brooklyn Defender Service; Lauren Zimmerman, Brooklyn Defender Service, Brooklyn Defenders Service, Inc.; Gerald Levin, in His Official Capacity as Chief Executive Officer and Director of AOL Time Warner; Michael Eisner, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Walt Disney Company; Edgar Bronfman, head of Universal Studios; Sumner Redstone/Rothstein, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of CBS, Inc.; Dennis Dammerman, in His Official Capacity as Vice Chairman of General Electric; Peter Chernin, in His Official Capacity as President and Co-Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation Limited; Jeffrey L. Bewkes, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Office, Time Warner; Philippe Dauman, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Robert A. Iger, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Leslie Moonves, President and Chief Executive Officer, CBS, Inc.; NBC Universal, Brian L. Roberts, Chairman, NBC Universal; Stephen B. Burke, Chief Executive Officer, NBC Universal; Mortimer Zuckerman, President and Chief Executive Office, Daily News, LP; Michael Bloomberg, Bloomberg News; Scott Shifrel, former Staff Writer of the Daily News, LP; the Daily News, LP; Rupert Murdoch, New York Post, New York Post; Mark Fass, Staff Writer, ALM.com; ALM.com; Jazmin M. Quary, Michael J. Fitzpatrick, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Executive Director for NAMI, Inc.; NAMI, Inc.; Andrew Lavoott Bluestone, Esq., Roberta Siegal, Individually in Her Official Capacity as Assistant Vice President of Federation Employment and Guidance Services, Inc.; Dr. Forster, in His Official Capacity as Psychiatrist of Federation Employment and Guidance Services, Inc.; Clifford Nafus, in His Official Capacity as Rehabilitation Technician of Federation Employment and Guidance Services, Inc.; Federation Employment and Guidance Services, Inc.; Rabbi Michael J. Broyde, Esq., Rabbi Michoel Zylberman, Esq., Rabbi Yona Reiss, Esq., Rabbi Shlomo Weissmann, Esq.; Abraham H. Foxman, Individually and in His Capacity as Executive Director of the Anti-Defamation League, Inc.; Steven M. Freeman, Esq., Anti Defamation League, Inc.; Steven C. Sheinberg, Esq., Anti-Defamation League, Inc.; Deborah Bensinger, Esq., Anti-Defamation League, Inc.; David L. Barkey, Esq., Anti-Defamation League, Inc.; Allen E. Kaye, P.C.; Jan Eastman, Esq., Chair, Vermont Professional Responsibility Program, Office of Bar Counsel; Michael Kennedy, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Bar Counsel for the Vermont Professional Responsibility Program, Office of Bar Counsel; Vermont Professional Responsibility Program, Office of Bar Counsel; George Wachtel, Esq.; Jonathan D. Schwartz, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Executive Vice President and General Counsel for Cablevision, Inc.; Cablevision, Inc.; Allen E. Kaye, Esq. Harvey Shapiro, Esq., Law Office of Harvey Shapiro; Jack Gladstein, Esq., Law Office of Jack Gladstein and Messinger

The Federal Republic of Nigeria,

********************- and -

As Representatives and Citizens of the Federal Republic of Nigeria: Mallam Ibrahim Awalu, in His Former Official Capacity as Consul General, Consulate of Nigeria; Mr. Salisu Suleiman, Federal Ministry of Information; Mrs. M. C. Ekeocha, in Her Former Official Capacity with the Embassy of Nigeria; Bola O. Oloko, Esq., in His Official Capacity as President of the Nigerian Lawyers Association; the Honorable Okon I. Udoh, in His Former Official Capacity as Deputy Chief of Mission, Embassy of Nigeria; Oserheimen Osunbor, in His Former Official Capacity as Executive Governor, Edo State, Nigeria; Mr. Felix Y. Pwol, in His Former Official Capacity as Minister of Chancery, Embassy of Nigeria; George A. Obiozor, in His Former Official Capacity as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Embassy of Nigeria; C. N. Okafor, in in His Former Official Capacity as Consul General, Consulate General of Nigeria; Mr. A. O. Babalola, in His Former Official Capacity with the Embassy of Nigeria; Mrs. M. N. Obidi, in Her Former Official Capacity as Embassy of Nigeria; the Honorable David Mark, in His Official Capacity as Senator for the Federal Republic of Nigeria; Mr. James T. Medugu, in His Former Official Capacity as Senior Counsellor for the Embassy of Nigeria; the Honorable Ike Ekweremadu, in His Official Capacity as Senator for the Federal Republic of Nigeria; Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, in His Former Official Capacity as Senator, Edobor State South, Nigeria Senate; Osato Eugene Uzamere in His Official Capacity as attorney with the State of New York and the Federal Republic of Nigeria; Godwin Ehigie Uzamere, Godwin E. Uzamere, male, farmer, Christian, Nigerian citizen of 18, Eweka, Street, Benin City, Nigeria 
 VERIFIED COMPLAINT AND PETITION

VENUE AND JURISDICTION ARE BASED ON DEFENDANTS' VIOLATION OF THE FOLLOWING INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL LAWS:

VIOLATION OF THE
1977 Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Article 37 – Prohibition of Perfidy

VIOLATION OF THE ROME STATUTES OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT: Article Six -- Genocide; Article Seven -- Crimes against humanity, and Article Eight -- War Crimes.

HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS: Article Five – cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment at the hands of the Respondents; Article Six – recognition as persons before the law; Article Seven – equal protection before the law; Article Eight – Petitioner was deprived of the right to obtain an effective remedy by Government Respondent's competent national tribunals; Article Nine – arbitrary arrest and detention; Article Ten – full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal; Article Eleven – right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty; Article Twelve – Petitioner was subjected to arbitrary interference with her privacy and her family; was not protected by the law; Article Thirteen – right to freedom of movement violated.

FEDERAL OFFENSES THAT VIOLATED PLAINTIFF'S HUMAN RIGHTS LAW: 18 USC §2381; treason; 18 USC §2382, misprision of treason; Seditious conspiracy, 18 USC §2385; 18 USC §1962, 18 USC §1964, civil remedies (for RICO); 18 USC §1961-§1968; Hobbs Act, 18 USC §1951; misprision of felony, 18 USC §4; fraud, 18 USC §1001; identity theft, 18 USC §1028; aggravated identity fraud, 18 USC §1028A; deprivation of rights under color of law, 18 USC §242/42 USC §1985; extortion, 18 USC §872§, blackmail, 18 USC §873.

CIVIL TORTS THAT VIOLATE PLAINTIFF'S HUMAN RIGHTS: 42 U.S.C. §1983; §1985; §42 U.S. Code § 1986 - Action for neglect to prevent; 28 U.S.C. §1331; §1343; §1361; First, Fifth, Fourteenth Amendments, deprivation of rights under color of law based on indifference. 

 
*****At all times hereinafter mentioned, Plaintiff Cheryl D. Uzamere, a natural person, and mother of David P. Walker and Tara A. Uzamere, all of whom are victims of fraud, identity theft, aggravated identity theft, other federal offenses and civil rights violations committed by the Defendants, states the following under the penalties of perjury:

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT


Treason doth never prosper, what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it Treason.
-  John Harington  -



*****The Court understands impunity to be the total lack of investigation, prosecution, capture, trial and conviction of those responsible for violations of the rights protected by the American Convention, in view of the fact that the State has the obligation to use all the legal means at its disposal to combat that situation, since impunity fosters chronic recidivism of human right violations, and total defenselessness of victims and their relatives.

*****This Court has clearly indicated that the obligation to investigate must be fulfilled in a serious manner and not as a mere formality preordained to be ineffective. An investigation must have an objective and be assumed by the State as its own legal duty, not as a step taken by private interests that depends upon the initiative of the victim or his family or upon their offer of proof, without an effective search for the truth by the Government.

Bámaca-Velásquez v. Guatemala
Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Impunity, Recidivism and Continuing Violations Doctrine
 
 
*****The theme of this Verified Complaint will be repeated throughout the length of this Verified Complaint. The Plaintiff must do this in order for this Court to see that the problem Plaintiff presents to this honorable Court is not solely a problem specific to the Plaintiff. It is a worldwide problem that will get worse, waste many lives, and quite possibly employ the use of weaponry -- as Defendant State of Israel has done so in the past, if this Court follows the course of Defendant United States of America and does nothing:

1977 Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949,

Article 37 – Prohibition of Perfidy


*****It is prohibited to kill, injure or capture an adversary by resort to perfidy. Acts inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead him to believe that he is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, with intent to betray that confidence, shall constitute perfidy. The following acts are examples of perfidy:

*****(a)*****The feigning of an intent to negotiate under a flag of truce or of a surrender;

*****(b)*****The feigning of an incapacitation by wounds or sickness;

*****(c)***** The feigning of civilian, non-combatant status; and

*****(d)*****The feigning of protected status by the use of signs, emblems or uniforms of the United Nations or of neutral or other States not parties to the conflict

Rome Statutes of the International Criminal Court

*****Article Six: Genocide

*****For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

*****(a)     Killing members of the group;

*****(b)     Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

*****(c)     Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

*****(d)     Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

*****(e)     Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

*****Article Seven: Crimes against Humanity

*****(a)***For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

*****(b)***Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;

*****
(c)***Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

*****(d)***Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

*****(e)***For the purpose of paragraph 1:

***********(1)***"Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions;

***********(2)***"Persecution" means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity;

*****Article Eight: War Crimes

*****The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes.

*****For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means:

*****(a)***Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:

*****(b)***Willful killing;

*****(c)***Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;

*****(d)***Willfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health;

*****(e)***Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;

*****(f)***Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile power;

*****(g)***Willfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial;

*****(h)***Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:

*****Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated;

*****Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party;

*****Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;

Human Rights Violations

*****Article Five – Plaintiff and her children were subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment at the hands of the Respondents and ignored by this Court;

*****Article Six – Plaintiff and her children's right to recognition as persons before the law was violated by the Respondents and ignored by this Court;

*****Article Seven – Plaintiff and her children's right to equal protection before the law was violated by the Respondents and ignored by this Court; Plaintiff right not to be publicly insulted and discriminated against as a “wacko” because she has bipolar disorder, and Plaintiff's right to equal protection of the law was violated by the Respondents and this Court;

*****Article Eight – Plaintiff was deprived of the right to obtain an effective remedy by Government Respondent's competent national tribunals for acts Plaintiff was falsely accused of violating by the Respondents and ignored by this Court;

*****Article Nine – Plaintiff was subjected to arbitrary arrest and detention by the Respondents and ignored by this Court;

*****Article Ten – Plaintiff's right to full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him was violated by the Respondents and ignored by this Court;

*****Article Eleven – Plaintiff's right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty after being charged with various penal offenses was violated by the Plaintiff. Plaintiff's right not to be held guilty of any penal offense on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offense under national or international law was violated by the Respondents and ignored by this Court;

*****Article Twelve – Plaintiff was subjected to arbitrary interference with her privacy, her family and her home by the Defendants. Plaintiff was subjected to attacks upon her honor and reputation; Plaintiff's right to the protection of the law against such interference or attack was violated by the Respondents and ignored by this Court;

*****Article Thirteen – Plaintiff's right to freedom of movement within Defendants State of New York and City of New York was violated by the Respondents and ignore by this Court; Plaintiff's family's right, as a natural and fundamental group unit of American society, being entitled to protection by society and the State, was violated by the Respondents, and ignored by this Court; Plaintiff's right to equal access to public service in his country was violated by the Respondents and ignored by this Court.

U.S. Constitutional Mandate

First Amendment

*****“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. . .or abridging the freedom of speech, . . .and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances ” See Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971)

*****U.S. Supreme Court Case Law Regarding the Establishment Clause: “In 1947, the U.S. Supreme Court decision Everson v. Board of Education incorporated the Establishment Clause (i.e., made it apply against the states). In the majority decision, Justice Hugo Black wrote: 'The “establishment of religion” clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another . . . in the words of Jefferson, the [First Amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State' ... That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach. In the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that “government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion.”

Talmud Violates Plaintiff's 1st Amendment Rights

*****“The establishment of religion”' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church.” Everson v. Board of Education. The Israeli Respondents enforced the Judaic doctrine Law of the Moser, a doctrine whose very intent is to prevent the reporting of lawbreaking Israeli citizens to the secular authorities.

Fifth Amendment

*****“No person shall be . . .deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. . .” Correctional Services Corporation, v. John E. Malesko 534 U. S. __ (2001), page 5.

Talmud Violated Plaintiff's 5th Amendment Rights

******The Defendants blocked Plaintiff's passage to go to court to prevent Plaintiff from filing criminal and civil complaints against their lawbreaking Israeli friends.

Sixth Amendment

*****“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.” See Pointer v. Texas, 380 U.S. 400 (1965)

*****U.S. Supreme Court Case Law regarding the Notice Clause: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.” In the case United States v. Carll, 105 U.S. 611 (1881)”

Talmud Violates Plaintiff's 6th Amendment Rights

*****In Gideon v. Wainwright, supra, in which this Court held that the Sixth Amendment's right to the assistance of counsel is obligatory upon the States, we  did  so  on  the  ground  that  'a  provision  of  the Bill of Rights which is 'fundamental and essential to a fair trial' is made obligatory upon the States by the Fourteenth Amendment.'

Fourteenth Amendment

*****“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property , without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” See Tennessee V. Lane (02-1667) 541 U.S. 509 (2004) 315 F.3d 680, affirmed.

Talmud Violates African-American Plaintiff's 14th  Amendment Rights

*****“. . .nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” See Tennessee V. Lane (02-1667) 541 U.S. 509 (2004) 315 F.3d 680, affirmed. The Defendants used Plaintiff's mental illness to disparage her criminal and civil complaints as untrue to prevent Plaintiff's complaints against lawbreaking Israeli citizens from being believed.

FEDERAL STATUTES

Title II of the Americans With Disabilities
Federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973

*****Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§12131, 12132, prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities, including those with mental illness. Similarly, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §794, provides that no person with a disability, including those with mental illness, shall: “solely by reason of his or her disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

*****In the decision regarding Disability Advocates, Inc. vs. Paterson, et al, Defendant Garaufis stated that “The Supreme Court held in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999), that “[u]njustified isolation . . . is properly regarded as discrimination based on disability,” observing that “institutional placement of persons who can handle and benefit from community settings perpetuate unwarranted assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable of or unworthy of participating in community life.” 527 U.S. at 597, 600. The “integration mandate” of Title II of the American with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §12101 et seq., and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §791 et seq., as expressed in federal regulations and Olmstead, requires that when a state provides services to individuals with disabilities, it must do so “in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.” The “most integrated setting,” according to the federal regulations, is “a setting that enables individuals with disabilities to interact with non-disabled persons to the fullest extent possible.” 28 C.F.R. §35.130(d); 28 C.F.R. pt. 35 app. A.

Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI, §601
Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs

*****“No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Fogg v. Gonzales, Nos. 05-5439, 05-5440 says the following: “In the case Correctional Services Corporation, v. John E. Malesko, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that “In 30 years of Bivens jurisprudence we have extended its holding only twice, to provide an otherwise nonexistent cause of action against individual officers alleged to have acted unconstitutionally, or to provide a cause of action for a plaintiff who lacked any alternative remedy for harms caused by an individual officers unconstitutional conduct.” However, in the same case, the Court said: “Most recently, in FDIC v. Meyer, we unanimously declined an invitation to extend Bivens to permit suit against a federal agency, even though . . .Congress had waived sovereign immunity [and] was otherwise amenable to suit. 510 U. S., at 484, 486. Our opinion emphasized that the purpose of Bivens is to deter the officer, not the agency. Id., at 485 (emphasis in original) (citing Carlson v. Green, supra, at 21). We reasoned that if given the choice, plaintiffs would sue a federal agency instead of an individual who could assert qualified immunity as an affirmative defense. To the extent aggrieved parties had less incentive to bring a damages claim against individuals, the deterrent effects of the Bivens remedy would be lost. 510 U.S. at 485. Accordingly, to allow a Bivens claim against federal agencies would mean the evisceration of the Bivens remedy, rather than its extension. 510 U. S., at 485.”

42 USC §1983 – Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
42 USC §1985 - Conspiracy to Interfere with Civil Rights

*****Federal courts recognize blacklisting as a cause of action. In the lawsuit Castillo v. Spiliada Maritime Corporation MV, 937 F. 2d 240, the United State Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit stated that “. . .Plaintiffs have offered substantial evidence that they were coerced into agreeing to the settlements with threats that charges would be filed against them with the POEA and that they would be blacklisted. As the threats of blacklisting endangered the possibility of future employment in their established trade, Plaintiffs reasonably could have been intimidated into settling.” In the lawsuit Duckworth v. Pratt & Whitney, Inc., 152 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1998), the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit stated that “As both Duckworth and the Secretary of Labor persuasively argue, the achievement of these objectives would be frustrated by adopting Pratt & Whitney's interpretation. That interpretation would permit an employer to evade the Act by blacklisting employees who have used leave in the past or by refusing to hire prospective employees if the employer suspects they might take advantage of the Act.” The United States Court of Appeal's use of the term “leave” refers to medical leave. The United States Court of Appeals use of the term “Act” refers to the Family and Medical Act of 1993. In the case Davis v. Paul, et al, 505 F.2d 1180, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth circuit stated that “Few things are as fundamental to our legal system as the presumption of innocence until overcome by proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt at a fair trial. The dissemination of the flier in the case at bar is in the face of the presumption of innocence, disregards the Due Process Clause and is based on evidence that is not probative of guilt. Condemning a man to a suspect class without a trial and on a wholly impermissible standard, as in the case at bar, offends the very essence of the Due Process Clause, i.e., protection of the individual against arbitrary action. Slochower v. Board of Education, 350 U.S. 551, 559, 76 S.Ct. 637, 100 L.Ed. 692 (1956); Peters v. Hobby, 349 U.S. 331, 351-352, 75 S.Ct. 790 (1955) (Douglas, J., concurring.) As said by Mr. Justice Black in his concurring opinion in Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrath, 341 U.S. 123, 144-145, 71 S.Ct. 624, 634 (1951): 'Our basic law, however, wisely withheld authority for resort to executive. . .condemnations and blacklists as a substitute for imposition of legal types of penalties by courts following trial and conviction in accordance with procedural safeguards of the Bill of Rights.'”

Commission of RICO Crimes

*****“Racketeering activity” means (A) any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year; (B) any act which is indictable under any of the following provisions of title 18, United States Code: (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents), Section 1513 (relating to retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant) . . .”

The Hobbs Act and Conspiracy
to Deprive Plaintiff and Gentile Constituents of Honest Services

****“The requirement of a quid pro quo means that without pretense of any entitlement to the payment, a public official violates §1951 if he intends the payor to believe that absent payment the official is likely to abuse his office and his trust to the detriment and injury of the prospective payor or to give the prospective payor less favorable treatment if the quid pro quo is not satisfied. The official and the payor need not state the quid pro quo in express terms, for otherwise the law's effect could be frustrated by knowing winks and nods. The inducement from the official is criminal if it is express or if it is implied from his words and actions, so long as he intends it to be so and the payor so interprets it.” Evan v. United States, 112 S.Ct. 1881, 504 U.S. 255, 119 L.Ed.2d 57.

18 USC §1951 -- Hobbs Act
Interference with Commerce by Threats or Violence

*****“Whoever in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce, by robbery or extortion or attempts or conspires so to do, or commits or threatens physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.”

*****“The term “extortion” means the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.”

Fraud Upon the Court

*****“Whenever any officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the court, he/she is engaged in fraud upon the court. In Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated “Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. . . It is where the court or a member is . . . influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function --- thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly affected.”

*****Fraud upon the court has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication.” Kenner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d ed., p.512, ¶ 60.23. The 7th Circuit further stated “a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final."

*****Fraud upon the court makes void the orders and judgments of that court.

Right to Privacy

****The Connecticut statute forbidding use of contraceptives violates the right of marital privacy which is within the penumbra of specific guarantees of the Bill of Rights. Pp. 381 U. S. 481-486. The foregoing cases suggest that specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance. See Poe v. Ullman, 367 U. S. 497, 367 U. S. 516-522 (dissenting opinion). Various guarantees create zones of privacy. The right of association contained in the penumbra of the First Amendment is one, as we have seen. The Third Amendment, in its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers "in any house" in time of peace without the consent of the owner, is another facet of that privacy. The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." The Fifth Amendment, in its Self-Incrimination Clause, enables the citizen to create a zone of privacy which government may not force him to surrender to his detriment. The Ninth Amendment provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." The Fourth and Fifth Amendments were described in Boyd v. United States, 116 U. S. 616, 116 U. S. 630, as protection against all governmental invasions "of the sanctity of a man's home and the privacies of life." We recently referred in Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U. S. 643, 367 U. S. 656, to the Fourth Amendment as creating a "right to privacy, no less important than any other right carefully an particularly reserved to the people." See Beaney, The Constitutional Right to Privacy, 1962 Sup. Ct. Rev. 212; Griswold, The Right to be Let Alone, 55 Nw. U.L. Rev. 216 (1960). . .NAACP v. Alabama, 377 U. S. 288, 377 U.S. 307. Would we allow the police to search the sacred precincts of marital bedrooms for telltale signs of the use of contraceptives? The very idea is repulsive to the notions of privacy surrounding the marriage relationship.” Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)

*****According to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996's Wrongful Disclosure of Individually Identifiable Health Information, it says that: “(a) Offense – A person who knowingly and in violation of this part -- (1) uses or causes to be used a unique health identifier; (2) obtains individually identifiable health information relating to an individual; or (3) discloses individually identifiable health information to another person, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b). (b) Penalties – A person described in subsection (a) shall -- (1) be fined not more than $50,000, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both; (2) if the offense is committed under false pretenses, be fined not more than $100,000, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both; and (3) if the offense is committed with intent to sell, transfer, or use individually identifiable health information for commercial advantage, personal gain, or malicious harm, be fined not more than $250,000, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.” See United States of America v. Huping Zhou, 2:08-cr-01356-AJW-1.

National Security Letters

*****“The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, or his designee in a position not lower than Deputy Assistant Director at Bureau headquarters or a Special Agent in Charge in a Bureau field office designated by the Director, may: (1) request the name, address, length of service, and local and long distance toll billing records of a person or entity if the Director (or his designee) certifies in writing to the wire or electronic communication service provider to which the request is made that the name, address, length of service, and toll billing records sought are relevant to an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such an investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely on the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and (2) request the name, address, and length of service of a person or entity if the Director (or his designee) certifies in writing to the wire or electronic communication service provider to which the request is made that the information sought is relevant to an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such an investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.” in the stipulation and order regarding the case Doe et al. v. Holder, et al it says: “3) Plaintiff John Doe is hereby permitted to identify himself and his company as the recipient of the NSL that has been the subject of this litigation. Plaintiffs ACLU and ACLU Foundation may publicly disclose this information as well. In addition, the Government acknowledges that plaintiffs may discuss matters and information that have been filed without redaction on the public docket in this case; 4) Plaintiffs are also permitted to publicly discuss plaintiff Doe's personal background, background about his company, the services Doe generally provided to his clients, and his type of clientele generally, including (a) the information that is redacted in the public filing of the Third Declaration of John Doe, dated August 21, 2009, Paragraph 1; (b) the information that is redacted in the public filing of the Second Declaration of John Doe, dated September 8, 2006, Paragraph 4; and (c) the information that is redacted in the public filing of the Second Declaration of John Doe, dated September 8, 2006, Paragraph 37. . . 6) Nothing in this Stipulation shall affect plaintiff Doe's right and plaintiffs ACLU and ACLU Foundation's right, if any, to petition in the future under 18 U.S.C. § 3511(b) ('or an order modifying or setting aside the nondisclosure requirement imposed in connection with the NSL served on plaintiff Doe.” Doe, et al v. Holder, et al, 04 Civ. 2614 (VM).

*****On May 5, 2015, in the United States Circuit Court for the Second Circuit, in the case American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York Civil Liberties Union, New York Civil Liberties Union Foundation, v. James R. Clapper; case number #14-42, the following decision was rendered with regard to the issues regarding the gathering of non-content information obtained from internet accounts and telephone accounts, which includes federal district Nicholas Garaufis' authorizing Denis McGowan to obtain Plaintiff's non-content information regarding her internet and telephone calls to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services and associated falsified content information to non-content information that was, according to 18 USC §2709 and 18 USC §3511 protected by Plaintiff's First Amendment's free speech and her First Amendment right to petition the government for a redress of grievances:
*****For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the district court erred in ruling that §215 authorizes the telephone metadata collection program, and instead hold that the telephone metadata program exceeds the scope of what Congress has authorized and therefore violates §  215.  Accordingly, we VACATE the district court’s judgment dismissing the complaint and REMAND the case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York Civil Liberties Union, New York Civil Liberties Union Foundation, v. James R. Clapper;  https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/clapper-ca2-opinion.pdf. 

Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Impunity, Recidivism and Continuing Violations Doctrine
Bámaca-Velásquez v. Guatemala

*****The Court understands impunity to be the total lack of investigation, prosecution, capture, trial and conviction of those responsible for violations of the rights protected by the American Convention, in view of the fact that the State has the obligation to use all the legal means at its disposal to combat that situation, since impunity fosters chronic recidivism of human right violations, and total defenselessness of victims and their relatives.

*****This Court has clearly indicated that the obligation to investigate must be fulfilled in a serious manner and not as a mere formality preordained to be ineffective. An investigation must have an objective and be assumed by the State as its own legal duty, not as a step taken by private interests that depends upon the initiative of the victim or his family or upon their offer of proof, without an effective search for the truth by the Government.


*****The violations of the right to personal safety and liberty, to life, to physical, mental and moral integrity, to judicial guarantees and protection, which have been established in this judgment, are attributable to Guatemala, which had the obligation to respect these rights and guarantee them. Consequently, Guatemala is responsible for the non-observance of Article 1(1) of the Convention, in relation to violations established in Articles 4, 5, 7, 8 and 25 of the Convention.

*****In view of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the State violated Article 1(1) of the Convention, in relation to its Articles 4, 5, 7, 8 and 25.

H.R. 40

Commission to Study Reparation Proposals for African-Americans Act
(as it concerns the African Holocaust/The Maafa)

*****Commonly known as the “African Reparations Bill”, it was promulgated by African-American Congressman John Conyers “To acknowledge the fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery in the United States and the 13 American colonies between 1619 and 1865 and to establish a commission to examine the institution of slavery, subsequently de jure and de facto racial and economic discrimination against African-Americans, and the impact of these forces on living African-Americans, to make recommendations to the Congress on appropriate remedies, and for other purposes.”

Laws of Israel

Declares Abolished, Suspended or Inadmissible in a Court of Law the Rights and Actions of the Nationals of the Hostile Party; Commits Outrages upon Personal Dignity, in Particular Humiliating and Degrading Treatment

*****Come and Hear, a website that expounds on the Talmudic Laws of Israel, states and identifies the U.S. Supreme Court-backed National Institute for Judaic Law and Israel’s right and responsibility to enforce the Talmudic Law all over the world against all Gentiles:

*****Title: Death Penalty and Talmud Law, Part 4: US v. Talmud Law
*****URL: http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/capunish_4.html
*****http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/capunish_4.html

*****In Sentence and Execution (Part 1 of "Death Penalty and Talmud Law") we watched the US Supreme Court create a precedent by accepting for consideration a brief based wholly on Talmud law (http://www.jlaw.com/Briefs/capital1.html; http://www.jlaw.com/Briefs/capital2.html). We watched as Israeli and American legal experts recommended that, on the issue of humanitarianism and the death penalty, that the US should use Talmud law as the exemplar.

*****What was missing from this presentation? The Orthodox Jewish advocates failed to mention that US and Talmud law are fundamentally incompatible.

*****Over the cornice of the Supreme Court building are etched these words: Equal Justice Under Law.

*****In contrast, Talmud law insists on unequal justice under law. Talmudic law holds there is one law for Jews, and one for Gentiles. This is not inconsistent with the Old Testament, in which LORD God decrees that Jews should not enslave other Jews: Gentiles are the proper slaves of Jews.

*****Title: Death Penalty and Talmud Law, Part 4: US v. Talmud Law
*****URL: http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/capunish_4.html
*****Version: August 12, 2010

*****While the United States of America renounced and outlawed slavery with the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, there is no mechanism in Judaism that could vacate or cancel the Old Testament or Talmud slavery laws.  And they have not been canceled. Those laws are the Word of God.

*****The Unrescinded 613 Commandments
*****http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/gentile.html

*****For any who have lingering doubts about the place of the Gentile in Judaism and the New America, notice that Jewish leadership is actively promoting the highly discriminatory Noahide Laws. (See America's New Government Church, which embody these core Judaic doctrines.

*****Co-existence?

*****What does the future hold? Can the Jews ever co-exist with the rest of humanity? The answer is "yes," provided the rest of humanity accepts the role designed for them by Jewish leadership. If Gentiles do not accept enslavement, there will be conflict.

Come and Hear: Death Penalty and Talmud Law
US v. Talmud Law
http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/capunish_4.html

In Sentence and Execution (Part 1 of "Death Penalty and Talmud Law") we watched the US Supreme Court create a precedent by accepting for consideration a brief based wholly on Talmud law. We watched as Israeli and American legal experts recommended that, on the issue of humanitarianism and the death penalty, that the US should use Talmud law as the exemplar.

What was missing from this presentation? The Orthodox Israeli advocates failed to mention that US and Talmud law are fundamentally incompatible.

Over the cornice of the Supreme Court building are etched these words: Equal Justice Under Law.

In contrast, Talmud law insists on unequal justice under law. Talmudic law holds there is one law for Israeli citizens, and one for Gentiles. This is not inconsistent with the Old Testament, in which LORD God decrees that Israeli citizens should not enslave other Israeli citizens: Gentiles are the proper slaves of Jews.

US Supreme Court Warms to the Talmud

Approximately three years after Nathan and Alyza Lewin filed the Bryan v. Moore amicus curiae brief — a notable event in itself — another notable event took place. A kosher dinner was held to honor the establishment of the National Institute for Judaic Law (NIJL). The dinner was attended by 200 people, including Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Antonin Scalia. Nathan and Alyza Lewin also attended.

Coming from Where We've Never Been

The Israeli Week explains more of the NIJL project. In the following paragraph, macher is a Yiddish word meaning "big shot," a person with access to authorities.

According to Gurary, the group, which has hired two researchers to compile reports, will focus initially on the issue of business ethics. Eventually, the goal is to compile a library and database in Washington that will offer Israeli law insights into a host of contemporary issues and to help create courses on the subject at law schools nationwide.

Report: Netanyahu Promises Talmud Will Be Israeli Law
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/180440#.Vl1a6r_HmAo

Netanyahu also promised that "we will define in the law the Gemara as a basis for the Israeli legal system," referencing the Israeli legal text analyzing the Mishnah, a legal work of the Israeli sages, which together form the Talmud.

Law of the Moser; Israeli citizens Must Not Report Crimes of Fellow Israeli citizens to Secular Law Enforcement Authorities

“. . .the Talmud recounts - in a number of places - that it is prohibited to inform on Israeli citizens to the secular government, even when their conduct is a violation of secular law. . .” http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/moser-broyde/index.html.

Inferiority of Sub-Saharan Africans and Their Descendants:

Artsot Ha-Hayyim, pages 52a, 52b: In 1992 a book was published by a leading member of the Satmar community entitled Artsot Ha-Hayyim. On p. 52 he explains, and quotes other rabbis, that the reason Abraham Lincoln was killed was because he freed the blacks. this is also the reason why Kennedy was killed, i.e. because he was good to the blacks. He continues by saying that this will be the fate of any who adopt a progressive attitude towards blacks, because they are meant to be enslaved.

The Legends of Ham/Canaan - Ginsburg, Vol. 1, p. 169: "The descendants of Ham through Canaan therefore have red eyes, because Ham looked upon the nakedness of his father; they have misshapen lips, because Ham spoke with his lips to his brothers about the unseemly condition of his father; they have twisted curly hair, because Ham turned and twisted his head round to see the nakedness of his father; and they go about naked, because Ham did not cover the nakedness of his father. Thus he was requited, for it is the way of G-d to mete out punishment measure for measure."

Midrash Rabbah (Soncino) Vol. 1, p. 293: "AND HE SAID: CURSED BE CANAAN (Breishit 9:25): (Commentary omitted)...R. Huna also said in R. Joseph's name: You [i.e. Noah is speaking to Ham) have prevented me from doing something in the dark [i.e. cohabiting with his wife], therefore your seed will be ugly and dark-skinned. R. Chiyya said: Ham and the dog copulated in the Ark, therefore Ham came forth black-skinned while the dog publicly exposed its copulation.

Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin (Soncino), p. 745, 108b: "Our Rabbis taught: Three copulated in the ark, and they were all punished - the dog, the raven and Ham. The dog was doomed to be tied, the raven expectorates [his seed into his mate's mouth], and Ham was smitten in his skin." (This is footnoted and the footnote reads: "i.e., from him was descended Cush (the negro), who is black-skinned."

Plan to Force Judaism on United States Government and the World

“But now, with the rise of Judaism in the halls of power, we are looking at a return to Old Testament state-religion. Particularly, given the strain of Orthodox Judaism in ascendance, we are looking   toward   a   re-unification   of church   and   state,    with    priestly enforcement of Old Testament and Talmudic commandments . . .” (http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/america_1.html).

Gentiles are Inferior to Jews

*****Come and Hear: Death Penalty and Talmud Law, US v. Talmud Law: “Talmud law insists on unequal justice under law. Talmudic law holds there is one law for Israeli citizens, and one for Gentiles. This is not inconsistent with the Old Testament, in which LORD God decrees that Israeli citizens should not enslave other Israeli citizens: Gentiles are the proper slaves of Israeli citizens. . .Gentiles are easy to convict. . .(http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/capunish_4.html)

Israeli citizens' Talmudic Right to Deceive Gentiles

"Where a suit arises between an Israelite and a heathen, if you can justify the former according to the laws of Israel, justify him and say: 'This is our law'; so also if you can justify him by the laws of the heathens justify him and say [to the other party:] 'This is your law'; but if this can not be done, we use subterfuges to circumvent him."

The Israeli Encyclopedia states (See Exhibit 269): "The Mishnah … declares that if a Gentile sued an Israelite, the verdict is for the defendant [the Jew]; If the Israelite is the plaintiff, he obtains full damages."

Right to Wage War, Kill Gentiles with Impunity

On murder of Gentiles (Exhibit 57); also http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_57.html:   "For murder, whether of a Cuthean by a Cuthean or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred: but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty."

Rabbi Simon ben Yohai's edict is: "The best among the Gentiles deserves to be killed."

In Judaism Non-Israeli citizens — No Property Rights

"Is it permitted to take from a Gentile?" the owner asked. Ashi's evasive answer is given with the explanation that: "In truth Ashi coincided with the opinion of the authority stated above: namely, that …  Gentile … property is considered public property, like unclaimed land in the desert." (See Exhibit 270)

The Talmudic authority which holds that Gentile property is like unclaimed land in the desert is the Talmud Book of Baba Bathra, Folio 54b, there cited. The passage actually appears on page 222 of the Soncino edition: "Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: The property of a heathen is on the same footing as desert land; whoever first occupies it acquires ownership."

Death Sentence Endorsed Against Christians Today

“The Noahide Laws promise deadly consequences for Christians. . . (http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/america_1.html).

One of the requirements needed to make the claim of "war crimes" is "Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party." The other is "committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment."  How does this Court view Defendants' use of the internet to publicly scorn the Plaintiff as having committed the "crime" of being mentally unfit, and rendering any complaint renders against any Israel citizen not believable.

The Talmudic Laws of Israel have always had a deleterious effect on anyone who is not Israeli-Israeli, especially individuals who are perceived to be sub-Saharan Africans. Whether it be sub-Saharan Africans, individuals referred to as "illegal aliens", the Thai workers in Israel or Russian, Slavic and other ladies of Europe, Israeli citizens have NEVER treated Gentiles in accord with secular laws. While they have convinced people that Israel belongs to them because of some covenant/contractual relationship with Jehovah God, they have instead disobey they God they claim to serve and treated Gentiles in a manner that one treats toilet paper. Everywhere Israeli citizens go, Gentiles die or suffer some form of being used and discarded. The Talmud's view of Gentiles is wasteful of human life, something that the God of the Torah Pentateuch, Jehovah, does not support.

Please review the following Talmudic Laws of Israel. You will see how Judaic laws have contributed to the increase of murders, rapes, war deaths -- both U.S. soldiers and the death of those against whom U.S. military is at war, judicial corruption, human trafficking and loss of justice in settings where Gentiles have locked horns with Israeli litigants, biased Israeli judges and obsequious Gentile judges who supplant the U.S. Constitution with the Laws of Israel.

*****Israeli citizens in U.S. Government Positions Violate U.S. Laws Regarding Treason, Seditious Conspiracy, Misprision of Treason, Misprision of Felony and Aggravated Identity Theft/Fraud and Defy 42 USC §1986 by Treating Plaintiff's Complaint Indifferently Based on Libelous Claims that Plaintiff is Mentally Unfit and that Israel-Controlled Court Discounts the Veracity of Truth When the Plaintiff is  Mental Illness, Constituting Defendants' Act of War by Deception, a Crime against Humanity and a Violation of Plaintiff's Human Rights

*****The Daily New published a story concerning Israeli attorney and former New York State Chief judge Sol Wachtler. Sol Wachtler was convicted of  blackmailing wealthy Israeli socialite Joy Silverman. Sometime after his release from prison, the Jew-controlled State of New York reinstated Sol Wachtler's law license. On no occasion did Mortimer Zuckerman of the Daily News or anyone from the State of New York question his mental health status, in spite of his erratic behavior in the Joy Silverman fiasco. His mental competence was automatically accepted as fact by the racist Jew-controlled State of New York.

*****While the Daily News, under the care and control of racist Jew Mortimer Zuckerman, however, did not malign Sol Wachtler with regard to his having bipolar disorder, not only did it lambasted the Plaintiff as “wacko” and “mentally unfit, but implied that both the Plaintiff and child of the marriage Tara A. Uzamere were liars or “wackos” for holding that Senator Ehigie Edobor Uzamere was Plaintiff's husband and is Tara's father, a fact that was decided by NYS Justices Jeffrey S. Sunshine, Matthew D'Emic and NYS Appellate Judges Fisher, J.P., Angiolillo, Lott and Sgroi.

*****The same racist Jew-controlled New York State government still refuses  to  reinstate  African-American  attorneys  Cecil Vernon Mason and Alton Maddox. This racist Israeli attitude is consistent with Israeli literature that teaches that blacks are meant to be slaves to Israel and her citizenry.

*****In the U.S. Supreme Court case United States vs. Georgia, et al, quoting verbatim: “Goodman, Plaintiff in No. 04–1236, is a paraplegic who sued respondent state Respondents and others, challenging the conditions of his confinement in a Georgia prison under, inter alia, 42 USC §1983 and Title II of the Americans with Disability Act of 1990. As relevant here, the Federal District Court dismissed the §1983 claims because Goodman’s allegations were vague, and granted respondents' summary judgment on the Title II money damages claims because they were barred by state sovereign immunity. The United States, Plaintiff in No. 04–1203, intervened on appeal. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the District Court’s judgment as to the Title II claims, but reversed the §1983 ruling, finding that Goodman had alleged facts sufficient to support a limited number of Eighth Amendment  claims  against  state  agents and should be permitted to amend his complaint. This Court granted certiorari to decide the validity of Title II’s abrogation of state sovereign immunity.”

Purpose of Plaintiff's Action


*****By this action, Plaintiff seeks to put an end to Defendants' commission of the following: 18 USC §2381, treason; 18 USC §2382, misprision of treason; seditious conspiracy, 18 USC §2385; misprision of felony, 18 USC §4; fraud, 18 USC §1001; identity theft, 18 USC §1028; aggravated identity fraud, 18 USC §1028A; deprivation of rights under color of law (including being kidnapped, unlawfully imprisoned and blacklisted), 18 USC §242/42 USC §1985; extortion, 18 USC §872§, blackmail, 18 USC §873; violation of Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act; violation of the Federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973; violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI, §601; violation of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment; violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment; violation of the Petition Clause of the First Amendment; violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments; violation of the Notice Clause of the Sixth Amendment; violation of the Assistance of Counsel Clause of the Sixth Amendment; violation of Plaintiff's right of privacy with regard to the illegal dissemination of her psychiatric records, Plaintiff marriage history, Plaintiff married name, and the non-content information associated with Plaintiff's internet and telephone accounts; violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, intentional misuse of national security letters (NSLs) and violation of the Hobbs Act.

*****Furthermore, Plaintiff's also seeks to put to an end the Israel-controlled media's acts of war by deception of Israel as a friend of the United States and of Gentiles when the Talmud-based Law of Israel preaches pure hate toward and enslavement of Gentiles; hate toward and enslavement of sub-Saharan Africans; the Israeli-controlled media's acts of treason by employing the Law of Israel's Law of the Moser to refuse to allow Plaintiff to expose the crimes committed against her and her children by Israeli Mortimer Zuckerman; and by refusing to allow Plaintiff to expose Defendant U.S. Department of Homeland Security knowledge of the correct identity, and has been in possession of the identification documents for Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere for well over thirty (30) years. Defendant the United States of America, along with the rest of the Defendants, owed Plaintiff and her children the duty to use the aforementioned documentation regarding Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere's identity to protect Plaintiff and her children from being victims of fraud, immigration fraud, aggravated identity theft and victims of Plaintiff's inability to obtain spousal and children support based on Plaintiff and her daughter having the legal right to bear Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere's correct name. However, rather than comply with the law, the Defendants, in particular, the Israeli Defendants, engaged in a course of conduct that violated Plaintiff rights and the rights of her daughter, Tara, for the sole purpose of preventing Plaintiff from filing complaints against hateful, racist, dishonest, Israeli immigration attorneys Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Jack Gladstein. Defendants' criminal conduct deprived them then, and continues to deprive Plaintiff and her family of the right to bear Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere correct African name, and continues to condemn Plaintiff and her family to the same deprivation of the knowledge of African bloodline indicators that racist Israeli citizens forced upon Plaintiff's African ancestors.

Factual Events On Which Lawsuit Is Based

*****Please refer to http://thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.net/verified_complaint_to_intl_criminal_court_and_united_nations.html for all exhibits.

*****In December, 1977, approximately two (2) years before the Plaintiff met Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, Nosayaba (John) Uzamere and his wife Ethel Uzamere (Defendant Uzamere's brother and sister-in-law, not his father and stepmother) filed for IR2 residence for Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere. The IR2 visa for Defendant Uzamere was approved on January 28, 1980.

*****On November 20, 1979, the Plaintiff and Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere visited Defendant City of New York's City Clerk's marriage department and filled out the marriage affidavit form with the fictitious name “Godwin Ehigie Uzamere” and the fictitious birthday “XXXXXX XX, 19XX” without providing his current passport to verify his age and identity. Defendant City Clerk Joseph Visceglia verified the identification Plaintiff presented to him; however, at the clandestine behest of Defendants Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, Defendant Visceglia, made no attempt to obtain Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere's passport. While Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere wrote the fictitious name “Godwin Ehigie Uzamere” on the marriage affidavit form, he inadvertently signed the form with his real name Ehigie Edobor Uzamere.

*****On November 21, 1979, the Plaintiff unwittingly entered into a “green card” marriage with Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere under the fictitious named “Godwin Ehigie Uzamere, and under the fictitious birthday “XXXXXX XX, 19XX.” On or after November 30, 1979, Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere and Defendants Allen E. Kaye and Harvey Shapiro, Esq. engaged in an act of aggravated identity theft and immigration fraud by giving the Plaintiff form I-130 to sign so as to sponsor the Defendant for IR1 residence under the fictitious name “Godwin Ehigie Uzamere” and fictitious birthday “XXXXXX XX, 19XX” without requiring their client to produce his current passport.

*****In December, 1979, Defendant Uzamere left for Nigeria, abandoning the Plaintiff and leaving her poor and pregnant with his daughter Tara A. Uzamere. On January 28, 1980, Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere entered the port of New York as a lawful permanent resident. The aforementioned attorneys exacerbated their act of aggravated identity theft by refusing to require Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere to produce his passport to establish proof of his identity, and by engaging in willful blindness by pretending not to have knowledge of the existence of Senator Uzamere's passport or of knowledge that Senator Uzamere previously applied under his correct name as an unmarried beneficiary under 21 years of age. At the time of Plaintiff's signing the fraudulent I-130 relative sponsorship form, Plaintiff did not know that Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere had applied and been found eligible for permanent residence under his real name via sponsorship by Nosayaba Uzamere and Ethel Uzamere. See report prepared by Defendant Rachel McCarthy, Bar Counsel, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service attached as Exhibit A.

*****On November 5, 2002, at the behest of  Israeli-Americans U.S. Supreme Court’s justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, Rabbi Noson Gurry A kosher dinner was held to honor the establishment of the National Institute for Judaic Law (NIJL). The dinner was attended by 200 people, including Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Antonin Scalia. Nathan and Alyza Lewin also attended.

“Under circumstances that are not explained, Justice Scalia developed a correspondence with Rabbi Noson Gurary (a disciple of the late Rabbi Schneerson). During this exchange, Scalia mentioned his "fascination with Israeli law." That prompted Rabbi Garary to found the National Institute for Judaic Law (NIJL). (45) The Institute promotes courses on Talmud-based law in American law schools and otherwise injects Talmud-based law into American society.
 
The founding of NIJL was celebrated by a gala kosher dinner on November 5, 2002. Justice Scalia and two other Supreme Court judges were among 200 dinner guests. Where was the dinner held? In the Supreme Court building.

*****Site of Kosher Banquet
 
*****This remarkable event was not reported contemporaneously by either The Washington Post or The Washington Times. Missing from The Jerusalem Post coverage was the role Scalia may have played in securing the use of the Supreme Court building as a banquet hall for Rabbi Gurary.

Why a devout Catholic like Justice Scalia would promote Talmud-based law is not clear. The Talmud classifies Christians as idolaters, and the Noahide regulations require that idolaters — devout Catholics, for example, people exactly like Justice Scalia — be put to death. Could it be that Rabbi Gurary did not tell Justice Scalia about the Noahide provisions to execute people like Scalia?”

*****For the sakes of helping this honorable Court understand the level of traitorous involvement exists with Israeli-American attorneys and Israel, the Plaintiff begs this Court to review the following information:

Mr. Lewin was president of the American Section of the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists from 1992 to 1997. Between 1982 and 1984 he served as President of the Jewish Community Council of Greater Washington, which speaks for approximately 220 Jewish organizations and synagogues in the Greater Washington area.

*****Her clients include individuals and corporations under investigation by the Department of Justice, individuals who have been denied a security clearance, and government employees who are the subject of inquiries relating to their official duties. In addition, together with her father, Ms. Lewin represents (and has represented) a host of individuals and organizations including:

Menachem Zivotofsky and his parents who seek the enforcement of a Congressional statute which provides that Menachem (who was born in Jerusalem) may list his place of birth on his U.S. passport as “Israel.” The United States Supreme Court heard oral argument on the Zivotofsky case on November 7, 2011

Sholom Rubashkin – the manager of Agriprocessors, once the largest kosher meat-packaging plant in the United States. Lewin & Lewin handled Rubashkin’s appeal to the 8th Circuit and will be filing a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court.

Agudas Chasidei Chabad (the umbrella organization for the international Chabad-Lubavitch movement) in its efforts to obtain release from Russia and control over the library held by the Fifth Rebbe and an archive of manuscripts unlawfully seized by the Soviet army after World War II.

The Boim family in its landmark civil tort litigation which established the right of American victims of terror to obtain damages under American law against organizations that knowingly provide financial support to international terrorist groups.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (“AIPAC”) in a federal criminal investigation and prosecution of two AIPAC employees charged with unlawfully disclosing classified information.

The Bigio family in its lawsuit against Coca-Cola for its exploitation and trespass on property in Egypt that was illegally confiscated from the family by the Nasser government because the family is Jewish ( ).

Prior to establishing Lewin & Lewin in May 2002, Ms. Lewin worked at Wilmer Cutler and Pickering (now Wilmer Hale) and at Miller Cassidy Larroca and Lewin. Ms. Lewin began her law career in Israel where she clerked on the Supreme Court for Deputy President Justice Menachem Elon.

In December 2011, Ms. Lewin was elected President of the American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists (“AAJLJ”). In January 2012, Ms. Lewin was named by the Washington Jewish Week as one of D.C.’s “Ten Most Interesting Jews.”

Ms. Lewin served on the Board of Directors of the Jewish Community Council of Greater Washington from 2001-2007. She served on the Board of Directors of the Women’s Bar Association of the District of Columbia from 2001-2004.

Ms. Lewin is admitted to practice in the District of Columbia, in New York, and in the Supreme Court of the United States. She received her B.A. from Princeton University in 1988 and a J.D. from New York University School of Law in 1992. She is married to Eliezer M. Halbfinger and has four children.

Death Penalty and Talmud Law
Sentence and Execution
http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/capunish_1.html

*****On or around October 1, 2003, Jack Gladstein engaged in an act of racketeering, and aggravated identity theft by mailing to the Plaintiff correspondence falsely holding Plaintiff's ex-husband out to be “Godwin Uzamere” even though the only correct identification that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service holds is for Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, not “Godwin Uzamere.”

*****On or September 25, 2008, after Plaintiff had engaged in a series of leaving angry telephone calls on Defendant McCarthy's voice mail based on Plaintiff's perception that Defendant McCarthy had engaged in racketeering designed to nullify Plaintiff's complaint against Defendant Kaye and Defendant Shapiro, Defendant McCarthy engaged in an act of racketeering and fraud by engaging the U.S. Attorney's Office for Vermont to say that “In or about September 2008, in the District of Vermont, the defendant, Cheryl Uzamere, impeded, intimidated, and interfered with a federal employee, namely an employee of the United States Customs and Immigration Service, while that person was engaged in and on account of that person's performance of official duties.” Plaintiff emphatically states that she has never been to Vermont, Defendant McCarthy's state of resident, so that it was impossible for Plaintiff to have engaged in any form of simple assault against Defendant McCarthy. See documentation regarding USA v. Uzamere, 1:08-cr-114-1 attached as Exhibit B.

*****On or around October 8, 2008, Defendant Eugene Uzamere, engaged in an act of racketeering, aggravated identity theft, violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and violation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by hand-delivering a fraudulent affirmation and a fraudulent, unauthenticated, unnotarized counter-affidavit from Nigeria which stated that “The plaintiff who has openly professed her mental illness is also delusional and outlandish in her claims”; and “I have before now, ignored the Plaintiff's outburst but her claim to be married to my cousin who was not in the United States at the time of our marriage is a new twist to this sad tale. . .Her obsession with his destruction has taken her mental ailment to a new level which should not be encouraged” in defiance of the administrative decision rendered by the INS regarding Plaintiff's ex-husband's identity. Defendant Osato Uzamere also gave Defendant Sunshine a copy of a Nigerian passport bearing the number A05588053, but no name; and a copy of a social security card receipt with the number XXX-XX-1205, with the name and address “Godwin E. Uzamere, 239 Clifton Avenue, Apt. 3, Brooklyn, New York, 11216.” The unnamed passport copies and the social security receipt were notarized by “Kate Ezomo, Principal Registrar, Commissioner for Oaths”, in Nigeria. Justice Sunshine refused to commission a diplomatic or consular officer for the purpose of determining the genuineness of the fraudulent foreign document that was presented to him by attorney Osato Uzamere on behalf of his uncle, Plaintiff's ex-husband Nigerian senator Ehigie Edobor Uzamere. From then until the present, Justice Sunshine has never made any attempt to arrest Osato Uzamere for committing perjury. See fraudulent affirmation and fraudulent foreign counter-affidavit Exhibit C. During the same month, Defendant McCarthy and Defendant Cowles gave Plaintiff's criminal attorney Beth Mann a copy of the I-130 immigration sponsorship form that Plaintiff signed on November 30, 1979 and a report explaining the two (2) immigration files having birthdays “XXXXXX XX, 19XX” and XXXXXX XX, 19XX. and explaining “IR2 fraudulently obtained because he was married at the time” and “Compare fingerprints between the two files.”

*****On or around January 6, 2009, Plaintiff received a notice from Defendant McCarthy in which she said that “This office has completed its review of the complaint of professional misconduct that you filed against Allen E. Kaye, Esquire. The matter is confidential at this stage in accordance with the Rules and Procedures of Professional Conduct for Practitioners (“Rules”), except for necessary disclosures in the course of conducting a preliminary inquiry. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) has authority to conduct a preliminary inquiry of complaints of criminal, unethical, or unprofessional conduct in matters before USCIS. In your June 9, 2008 complaint, you allege that Alan E. Kaye “colluded with my husband, the now Senator Ehigie Edobor Uzamere to submit a marriage certificate with the fictitious name "Godwin Uzamere: in order to avoid paying child support. and three years later, in order to hide the 2nd marriage that my husband contracted in the United States.” The acts that you allege constitute a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct for

nerally Kenworthy v. Conoco, Inc., 979 F.2d 1462, 1468 (10th Cir.1992) (“A party who fails to bring to the trial court's attention ambiguities created by jury instructions or special verdict forms may not seek to take advantage of such ambiguities on appeal.”).   If the jury had been asked to make specific findings with respect to both theories, it would have been easy for this court to determine whether the alleged improper instructions on conspiracy warranted a reversal of the jury's verdict on the federal wiretap claims.

*****The ADL contends that plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence to demonstrate that Lozow and Kritzer were the agents of the ADL because “[t]here was no evidence that the ADL had the ability to control the conduct of Lozow and Kritzer in those private attorneys' legal representation of the Aronsons.”   Defs' Op. Br. at 41.   We believe the ADL's arguments miss the point.   Although the existence of a principal/agent relationship certainly hinged on one or both of the attorneys agreeing to act on the ADL's behalf, i.e., subject generally to the ADL's control, it was unnecessary for the ADL to have the ability to control the particular manner of the attorneys' work, or for the ADL to have the ability to control the attorneys' representation of the Aronsons.   Indeed, as noted in the district court's jury instructions, it was possible that the attorneys served as agents for both the ADL and the Aronsons (even though their interests may have been conflicting).

*****. . .In any event, we conclude there was sufficient evidence of a principal/agent relationship to allow the issue to go to the jury.   See generally Lantec, Inc. v. Novell, Inc., 306 F.3d 1003, 1023 (10th Cir.2002) (discussing standard of appellate review applicable to district court's ruling on motion for judgment as a matter of law).   This evidence was succinctly described by the district court in denying defendants' post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law:

*****First Amendment Protection

*****The ADL contends that even if it violated the federal wiretap act by “using” the intercepted telephone conversations in preparing and filing the civil complaint against the Quigleys, that “use” was protected by the First Amendment.   In other words, the ADL contends that the First Amendment would apply to protect it from liability in this case under the federal wiretap act.   The district court rejected the ADL's argument during trial.   Because the issue raised by the ADL is one of law, our scope of review is de novo.   See generally Salve Regina College, 499 U.S. at 231, 111 S.Ct. 1217.

*****. . .In support of its argument, the ADL relies heavily on Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514, 121 S.Ct. 1753, 149 L.Ed.2d 787 (2001), which was decided after the trial in this case.   In Bartnicki, an unidentified person intercepted and recorded a cellular telephone conversation between the president of a local teachers' union and the union's chief negotiator.   The conversation concerned the status of negotiations between the union and the local school board, and included references to a potential strike by the union, a discussion of a potential response to the “board's intransigence,” and references to “go[ing] to the[ ] ․ homes” of the board members, “blow[ing] off their front porches,” and “do[ing] some work” on the board members.  Id. at 518-19, 121 S.Ct. 1753.   The recording of the conversation subsequently wound up in the hands of a radio commentator, who played the tape “on his public affairs talk show.”   Id. at 519, 121 S.Ct. 1753.  “Another station also broadcast the tape, and local newspapers published its contents.”  Id. The two people whose conversation was recorded filed suit against various media representatives asserting, in part, that the broadcast of the tape violated the federal wiretap act.   The media defendants moved for summary judgment arguing, in part, that their disclosures of the tape were protected by the First Amendment.   The district court rejected the defendants' argument, but the Third Circuit reversed, concluding that the federal wiretap act was “invalid because [it] deterred significantly more speech than necessary to protect the privacy interests at stake.”  Id. at 522, 121 S.Ct. 1753.   The Supreme Court subsequently granted certiorari to review the matter.

*****. . .Contrary to the ADL's assertions, we conclude the instant case is distinguishable from Bartnicki in a number of respects.   First, and most importantly, the contents of the Quigleys' intercepted telephone conversations were not matters of public concern.   Although the ADL asserts otherwise, it is apparent after listening to those recorded conversations that the Quigleys were engaging in what they thought was private discussion with each other or with friends and family regarding their ongoing dispute with the Aronsons.   Although the Quigleys (primarily Mrs. Quigley) sometimes engaged in derogatory banter about the Aronsons, it is apparent that those comments represented nothing more than private thoughts about an inherently private matter.   Further, as previously discussed, there is no credible basis for concluding, as suggested by the defendants, that the Quigleys were engaged in an anti-Semitic campaign to harass the Aronsons and force them out of the neighborhood (indeed, the jury's findings clearly refute the defendants' arguments on this point).   Thus, any First Amendment interest in publishing those private remarks was considerably less significant than the First Amendment interest at issue in Bartnicki.  Second, unlike the defendants in Bartnicki, the defendants in this case did not accurately portray the contents of the Quigleys' recorded telephone conversations.   In Bartnicki, the defendants broadcast the recorded conversation and printed a transcript of the conversation.   Here, in contrast, the defendants merely used snippets of the Quigleys' conversations in preparing the Aronsons' civil complaint, and inaccurately portrayed those comments as demonstrating the existence of an anti-Semitic campaign on the part of the Quigleys against the Aronsons.   Third, although the jury in this case found that the ADL did nothing to “procure” the recorded conversations, it was uncontroverted that the ADL, from the time of its first contacts with the Aronsons in late October 1994, knew that the Aronsons were the persons responsible for recording the Quigleys' telephone conversations. Further, it was uncontroverted that the ADL knew, during November and early December 1994, that the Aronsons were continuing to record the Aronsons' telephone conversations.   This is in contrast to the media defendants in Bartnicki, who “found out about the interception [at issue] only after it occurred, and in fact never learned the identity of the person or persons who made the interception.”  532 U.S. at 525, 121 S.Ct. 1753.

*****It is true that the Court in Bartnicki left open the question of whether the interest in protecting the privacy of communications “is strong enough to justify the application of” the federal wiretap act “to disclosures of purely private concern.”  Id. at 533, 121 S.Ct. 1753.   Nonetheless, we are persuaded that, if faced with the issue, the Court would conclude that the interest in privacy is sufficient to allow the federal wiretap act to be applied to situations, such as the case here, involving the “use” of intercepted telephone conversations concerning purely private matters.   Thus, we hold that application of the federal wiretap act to the ADL's actions in this case does not violate the First Amendment.

*****Court’s Decision

*****We REVERSE the judgment of the district court with regard to plaintiffs' invasion of privacy by intrusion and false light invasion of privacy claims.   Our reversal of these judgments does not have any effect upon the damage awards.   We AFFIRM the judgment of the district court in all other respects.

*****I join in much of the majority opinion:  (1) reversal of the judgment on plaintiffs' claims for invasion of privacy by intrusion and false light invasion of privacy;  (2) rejection of defendants' invocation of the fair-report privilege;  (3) affirmance of the judgment for compensatory damages under the federal wiretap act based on plaintiffs' unchallenged conspiracy theory (making it unnecessary, in my view, to determine whether defendants adequately preserved a claim that the agency instructions failed to inform the jury properly regarding the element of control);  and (4) rejection of defendants' First Amendment argument predicated on Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514, 121 S.Ct. 1753, 149 L.Ed.2d 787 (2001).

The Israel Lobby Archive The Institute for Research -- Middle Eastern Policy
Criminal Investigation and Successful Civil Lawsuits against the ADL over Privacy Right Violations - 1992-1993
http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/

*****Documents

*****The investigation of San Francisco Police Officer Tom Gerard's possession of computerized files on Arab-American activists led criminal investigators straight to the Anti-Defamation League in 1993. Roy "Cal" Bullock was secretly on the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) payroll for forty years as an undercover "investigator" reporting to New York ADL chief research officer Irwin Suall.  Bullock compiled files, including information he could not legally possess—such as driver's license and social security numbers—on 10,000 people according to 700 pages of files released by San Francisco D.A. Arlo Smith.

*****Bullock and the ADL's investigation efforts were focused on organizations and individuals considered to be potential threats to Israel: Arab and Palestinian groups. This soon led to other work as Bullock and his contact on the SFPD (and former CIA operative) Tom Gerard began clandestine work for the intelligence services of the Apartheid government of South Africa.

*****ADL offices in California were raided and documents were seized.  After conducting initial interviews (included below) the FBI passed jurisdiction to investigate to local police.

*****Although District Attorney Arlo Smith likely could have criminally prosecuted the ADL for invasion of privacy, tax evasion; and Gerard and Bullock as unregistered agents of a foreign government, they instead reached a settlement that allowed the ADL to deny wrongdoing—while promising not to obtain private citizen information ever again.

*****This didn't stop anti-Apartheid activists from suing the ADL and winning tens of thousands of dollars in damages—while avoiding signing a standard confidentiality agreement.Archivist note: The following documents focus on the 1993 ADL California controversy.

*****The Israel Lobby Archive thanks journalist and plaintiff Jeffrey Blankfort for providing reproductions of historic ADL investigation files. For a more extended archive of ADL activities and the FBI, see http://www.IRmep.org/ila/ADL.

   


RENSE.COM
ADL Found Guilty Of Spying
By California Court
By Barbara Ferguson
Arab News Correspondent
http://www.rense.com/general24/adl.htm
http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=14650

*****WASHINGTON - The San Francisco Superior Court has awarded former Congressman Pete McCloskey, R-California, a $150,000 court judgment against the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

*****McCloskey, the attorney in the case, represented one of three civil lawsuits filed in San Francisco against the ADL in 1993. The lawsuit came 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.

*****During the course of the inquiry in San Francisco, the SFPD and FBI determined the ADL had computerized files on nearly 10,000 people across the country, and that more than 75 percent of the information had been illegally obtained from police, FBI files and state drivers, license data banks.

*****Much of the stolen information had been provided by Tom Gerard of the San Francisco Police Department, who sold, or gave, the information to Ray Bullock, ADL's top undercover operative.

*****The investigation also determined that the ADL conduit, Gerard, was also working with the CIA.

*****Two other similar suits against ADL were settled some years ago, and the ADL was found guilty in both cases, but the McCloskey suit continued to drag through the courts until last month.

*****. . .On March 31, 2001, US District Judge Edward Nottingham of Denver, Colorado, upheld most of a $10.5 million defamation judgment that a federal jury in Denver had levied against the ADL in April of 2000.

*****The jury hit the ADL with the massive judgment after finding it had falsely labeled Evergreen, Colorado residents - William and Dorothy Quigley - as "anti-Semites." The ADL is appealing the judgment.

 

File

Excerpt/Description

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/05191975_ADL_Chomsky.pdf

ADL internal memo to Irwin Suall about Noam Chomsky. "Chomsky is an Arab apologist, pure and simple, regardless of all his other verbiage.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/05031976_ADL_Chomsky_Jabara.pdf  

ADL monitors speeches by Abdeen Jabara, comparing Israel to Apartheid South Africa, mistreatment of Arabs, prediction Israel is preparing for war, poor financial position. Noam Chomsky, criticized Henry Kissinger, oil and the Middle East. Hussein Rahmonn, nocturnal round-ups, illegal land grabs.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/02251993_ADL_regional_dir_memo_SF.pdf

Memorandum to ADL Regional Directors about the investigation of ADL in San Francisco. "Little press coverage.". "ADL has asserted that our own privacy and First Amendment rights would be violated by disclosure of ADL files."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/06181986_Tom_Gerard_ADL.pdf

San Francisco Policy Sergeant Tom Gerard briefs ADL about "Arab Activity in the SF Bay Area."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADLCA/04291993_asian_law_caucus.pdf

ADL Central Pacific Regional Advisory Board President Elliot L. Ben protests Asian Law Caucus Inc.'s withdrawal from an ADL conference on the constitutionality of "hate crime" legislation citing the "Gerard" affair.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/05051993_naacp_outreach.pdf

ADL memo suggesting that regional offices "touch base" with NAACP to remind them "we're in the business of monitoring extremists, not our friends in the civil rights movement."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/011993_ADL_orgchart.pdf

Complete ADL organization chart, printed January, 1993.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/11071983_adl_student_activists.pdf

ADL brings IDF officer to speak during campus Hasbara Network events.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/111983_ADL_pro-Arab_Sympathizers.pdf

Cover letter from ADL Executive Director Leonard Zakim to campus Jewish leaders distributing Jordan Millstein's background information on "pro-Arab sympathizers who are active on college campuses." Letter asks "if you have knowledge of any individuals or groups not listed in the booklet, please pass the information on to us so that we can have a more complete and useful listing." PS, "this booklet should be considered confidential...

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/111983_ADL_proArab_Sympathizers.pdf

New York Times file copy, January 30, 1985. "Middle East Scholars Upset by a List." ADL claims "the document was prepared by an 'overly zealous student volunteer' who no longer works for the league."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/11151993_Settlement_Agreement.pdf

Complaint for injunction 956416, City and County of San Francisco. People of the State of California v. Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith and Roy E. Bullock. "defendants, four years prior to the filing of this complaint...received...certain non-public documents and/or other information that are precluded by law from disclosure to the defendants.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADLCA/11151993_Settlement_Agreement.pdf

San Francisco Police Inspector Ron Roth declaration about search warrants on ADL offices in Los Angles and search of ADL San Francisco offices.  Search warrant served on Roy Bullock's residence, and residence and shed of Thomas and Julie Gerard, FBI interviews attached as exhibits, Bullock payments laundering from ADL through lawyer Bruce Hochman amounting to $169,375.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/exhibit_a.pdf

Search Warrant and Affidavit by SFPD inspector Ronald Roth

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/exhibit_c_d.pdf

Interview of Tim Carroll from the San Diego Sheriff's office about Roy Bullock's operations for the ADL.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/exhibit_2-4.pdf

Search warrant - Tom Gerard property, Roy Bullock search inventory list, ADL Los Angeles inventory list, ADL San Francisco inventory list, news clipping

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/exhibit_5_10.pdf  

Seized financial records - Roy Bullock

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_B_FBI_Interview_Roy_Bullock.pdf

FBI interviews Bullock about his work for ADL, first contact with ADL, infiltration of groups, work for Apartheid South Africa intelligence service, joint work with SFPD officer Tom Gerard. (Missing some pages which will be added by 6/1/2013)

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Ex_c_sfpd_interviews_bullock.pdf

On January 25 and 26 of 1993, ADL operative Roy Bullock is interviewed by San Francisco Police Department officer Ron Roth, Sergeant Bob Hulsey, and Assistant D.A. John Dwyer. Bullock discusses Tom Gerard's hope the ADL could spring three mercenaries imprisoned in Brazil, duties at the ADL, database on groups under ADL monitoring, interactions with South African intelligence.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/11151993_Settlement_Agreement.pdf

Executed search warrant inventory of Tom Gerard's briefcase. Contents include Consulate General of San Francisco entry stamps, multiple US and Philippine passports, multiple drivers licenses, fake birth and marriage certificates, news clippings about Central American death squads, photos in folders titled "Interrogation Training Farm Prison 1984," cloth hood, and blank Department of Army letter head paper.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_E_Interview_with_ADL_Lawyer_%20Bruce_Hochman.pdf

Bruce Hochman explains how the ADL paid his law firm, which then disbursed funds to Roy Bullock.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_F_ADL_Checks_Roy_Bullock.pdf

Register of $169,375 in ADL funds laundered through Hochman to Bullock between 1985-1993

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_G_SFPD_Interview_David_Gurvitz.pdf

On January 28, 1993, the SFPD interviewed former ADL "Fact Finding Librarian" David Gurvitz, maintenance of ADL files, use of "drop boxes," orders from NY Fact Finding Director Irwin Suall and others to "make sure such and such a meeting is covered." Bullock transfer of driver's license numbers and criminal history numbers to ADL Los Angeles, use of ADL money orders to pay informants,

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_H_FBI_Interivew_of_David_Gurvitz.pdf  

On March 8, 1993, the FBI interviewed former ADL "Fact Finding Librarian" David Gurvitz about Roy Bullock's interactions with South African intelligence agents, reports to ADL headquarters in New York, ADL's possession of an FBI report on the Nation of Islam. FBI questions Gurvitz about other FBI reports in ADL's possession. When asked, "GURVITZ denied knowledge of any formal connection between the ADL and Israeli Intelligence. He added, though, that that did not mean there were no contacts between Israeli and ADL officials."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_H_Attachments_Gurvitzb.pdf

Reports, documents and clippings shown by the FBI to Gurvitz during his interview.

July, 1987 Report on Ron Paul and the Liberty Lobby, Bullock's "ARAB" database, FBI "Nation of Islam" report, "The African National Congress (ANC)/South African Communist Party (SACP) Alliance: Salient National and International Issues" report, cover of June 1986 DOJ report "Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)- New York Area,

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit%20I_orgs_in_Gerard_Bullock_computersb.pdf

Database listings of organizations tracked by Bullock and Gerard

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_J_ADL_State_Tax_Records.pdf

State ADL tax filings with no payroll, medical or retirement withholdings for Bullock

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_K_Hochman_Letter_ADL_Check.pdf  

Sample ADL letter transferring funds to pay Roy Bullock

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/04131993McCloskey.pdf

April 14, 1993 Class Action Lawsuit filed against the ADL by Pete McCloskey for involvement in "a massive spying operation which constituted an invasion of the Plaintiffs' privacy..."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/08191993McCloskey.pdf   

Class Action for 19 plaintiffs, Conference Status Statement. ADL attorney argues ADL files seized by SFPD were protected by the First Amendment's free press and free association clause.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/ExhibitA.pdf

July 7, 1961 letter to Saul Joftes, Executive Secretary of B'nai B'rith from ADL National Director Benjamin R. Epstein.

"As you know, the Anti-Defamation League for many years has maintained a very important, confidential investigative coverage of Arab activities and propaganda.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/ExhibitB.pd

On July 16, 1993 the ADL in court categorically denies plaintiffs any access to its files.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/10061993McCloskey.pdf

Plaintiff court filing. "But the ADL has a private side as well. As described in the declarations submitted by Plaintiffs, the ADL for years has secretly cultivated police officers to provide illegally-disclosed information on private individuals and organizations solely because of the expression or participation in political activities opposed to the policies of Israel and South Africa..

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/ADL_Research_Black_Anti-semitism.pdf

ADL Research Report: The Anti-Semitism of Black Demagogues and Extremists, published in 1992 and prepared by David Evanier.


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is presented without profit for research and educational purposes, most importantly understanding how government functions during law enforcement actions involving Israel and its lobbyists.The Israel Lobby Archive has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of the content nor is it endorsed or sponsored by the originator.

 

 




Case

 

File
   

Excerpt/Description

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/05191975_ADL_Chomsky.pdf
   

ADL internal memo to Irwin Suall about Noam Chomsky. "Chomsky is an Arab apologist, pure and simple, regardless of all his other verbiage.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/05031976_ADL_Chomsky_Jabara.pdf 
   

ADL monitors speeches by Abdeen Jabara, comparing Israel to Apartheid South Africa, mistreatment of Arabs, prediction Israel is preparing for war, poor financial position. Noam Chomsky, criticized Henry Kissinger, oil and the Middle East. Hussein Rahmonn, nocturnal round-ups, illegal land grabs.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/02251993_ADL_regional_dir_memo_SF.pdf
   

Memorandum to ADL Regional Directors about the investigation of ADL in San Francisco. "Little press coverage.". "ADL has asserted that our own privacy and First Amendment rights would be violated by disclosure of ADL files."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/06181986_Tom_Gerard_ADL.pdf
   

San Francisco Policy Sergeant Tom Gerard briefs ADL about "Arab Activity in the SF Bay Area."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADLCA/04291993_asian_law_caucus.pdf
   

ADL Central Pacific Regional Advisory Board President Elliot L. Ben protests Asian Law Caucus Inc.'s withdrawal from an ADL conference on the constitutionality of "hate crime" legislation citing the "Gerard" affair.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/05051993_naacp_outreach.pdf
   

ADL memo suggesting that regional offices "touch base" with NAACP to remind them "we're in the business of monitoring extremists, not our friends in the civil rights movement."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/011993_ADL_orgchart.pdf
   

Complete ADL organization chart, printed January, 1993.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/11071983_adl_student_activists.pdf
   

ADL brings IDF officer to speak during campus Hasbara Network events.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/111983_ADL_pro-Arab_Sympathizers.pdf
   

Cover letter from ADL Executive Director Leonard Zakim to campus Jewish leaders distributing Jordan Millstein's background information on "pro-Arab sympathizers who are active on college campuses." Letter asks "if you have knowledge of any individuals or groups not listed in the booklet, please pass the information on to us so that we can have a more complete and useful listing." PS, "this booklet should be considered confidential...

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/111983_ADL_proArab_Sympathizers.pdf
   

New York Times file copy, January 30, 1985. "Middle East Scholars Upset by a List." ADL claims "the document was prepared by an 'overly zealous student volunteer' who no longer works for the league."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/11151993_Settlement_Agreement.pdf
   

Complaint for injunction 956416, City and County of San Francisco. People of the State of California v. Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith and Roy E. Bullock. "defendants, four years prior to the filing of this complaint...received...certain non-public documents and/or other information that are precluded by law from disclosure to the defendants.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADLCA/11151993_Settlement_Agreement.pdf
   

San Francisco Police Inspector Ron Roth declaration about search warrants on ADL offices in Los Angles and search of ADL San Francisco offices.  Search warrant served on Roy Bullock's residence, and residence and shed of Thomas and Julie Gerard, FBI interviews attached as exhibits, Bullock payments laundering from ADL through lawyer Bruce Hochman amounting to $169,375.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/exhibit_a.pdf
   

Search Warrant and Affidavit by SFPD inspector Ronald Roth

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/exhibit_c_d.pdf
   

Interview of Tim Carroll from the San Diego Sheriff's office about Roy Bullock's operations for the ADL.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/exhibit_2-4.pdf
   

Search warrant - Tom Gerard property, Roy Bullock search inventory list, ADL Los Angeles inventory list, ADL San Francisco inventory list, news clipping

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/exhibit_5_10.pdf 
   

Seized financial records - Roy Bullock

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_B_FBI_Interview_Roy_Bullock.pdf
   

FBI interviews Bullock about his work for ADL, first contact with ADL, infiltration of groups, work for Apartheid South Africa intelligence service, joint work with SFPD officer Tom Gerard. (Missing some pages which will be added by 6/1/2013)

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Ex_c_sfpd_interviews_bullock.pdf
   

On January 25 and 26 of 1993, ADL operative Roy Bullock is interviewed by San Francisco Police Department officer Ron Roth, Sergeant Bob Hulsey, and Assistant D.A. John Dwyer. Bullock discusses Tom Gerard's hope the ADL could spring three mercenaries imprisoned in Brazil, duties at the ADL, database on groups under ADL monitoring, interactions with South African intelligence.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/11151993_Settlement_Agreement.pdf
   

Executed search warrant inventory of Tom Gerard's briefcase. Contents include Consulate General of San Francisco entry stamps, multiple US and Philippine passports, multiple drivers licenses, fake birth and marriage certificates, news clippings about Central American death squads, photos in folders titled "Interrogation Training Farm Prison 1984," cloth hood, and blank Department of Army letter head paper.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_E_Interview_with_ADL_Lawyer_%20Bruce_Hochman.pdf
   

Bruce Hochman explains how the ADL paid his law firm, which then disbursed funds to Roy Bullock.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_F_ADL_Checks_Roy_Bullock.pdf
   

Register of $169,375 in ADL funds laundered through Hochman to Bullock between 1985-1993

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_G_SFPD_Interview_David_Gurvitz.pdf
   

On January 28, 1993, the SFPD interviewed former ADL "Fact Finding Librarian" David Gurvitz, maintenance of ADL files, use of "drop boxes," orders from NY Fact Finding Director Irwin Suall and others to "make sure such and such a meeting is covered." Bullock transfer of driver's license numbers and criminal history numbers to ADL Los Angeles, use of ADL money orders to pay informants,

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_H_FBI_Interivew_of_David_Gurvitz.pdf 
   

On March 8, 1993, the FBI interviewed former ADL "Fact Finding Librarian" David Gurvitz about Roy Bullock's interactions with South African intelligence agents, reports to ADL headquarters in New York, ADL's possession of an FBI report on the Nation of Islam. FBI questions Gurvitz about other FBI reports in ADL's possession. When asked, "GURVITZ denied knowledge of any formal connection between the ADL and Israeli Intelligence. He added, though, that that did not mean there were no contacts between Israeli and ADL officials."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_H_Attachments_Gurvitzb.pdf
   

Reports, documents and clippings shown by the FBI to Gurvitz during his interview.

July, 1987 Report on Ron Paul and the Liberty Lobby, Bullock's "ARAB" database, FBI "Nation of Islam" report, "The African National Congress (ANC)/South African Communist Party (SACP) Alliance: Salient National and International Issues" report, cover of June 1986 DOJ report "Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)- New York Area,

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit%20I_orgs_in_Gerard_Bullock_computersb.pdf
   

Database listings of organizations tracked by Bullock and Gerard

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_J_ADL_State_Tax_Records.pdf
   

State ADL tax filings with no payroll, medical or retirement withholdings for Bullock

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/Exhibit_K_Hochman_Letter_ADL_Check.pdf 
   

Sample ADL letter transferring funds to pay Roy Bullock

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/04131993McCloskey.pdf
   

April 14, 1993 Class Action Lawsuit filed against the ADL by Pete McCloskey for involvement in "a massive spying operation which constituted an invasion of the Plaintiffs' privacy..."

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/08191993McCloskey.pdf  
   

Class Action for 19 plaintiffs, Conference Status Statement. ADL attorney argues ADL files seized by SFPD were protected by the First Amendment's free press and free association clause.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/ExhibitA.pdf
   

July 7, 1961 letter to Saul Joftes, Executive Secretary of B'nai B'rith from ADL National Director Benjamin R. Epstein.

"As you know, the Anti-Defamation League for many years has maintained a very important, confidential investigative coverage of Arab activities and propaganda.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/ExhibitB.pdf
   

On July 16, 1993 the ADL in court categorically denies plaintiffs any access to its files.

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/10061993McCloskey.pdf
   

Plaintiff court filing. "But the ADL has a private side as well. As described in the declarations submitted by Plaintiffs, the ADL for years has secretly cultivated police officers to provide illegally-disclosed information on private individuals and organizations solely because of the expression or participation in political activities opposed to the policies of Israel and South Africa..

http://www.israellobby.org/ADL-CA/ADL_Research_Black_Anti-semitism.pdf
   

ADL Research Report: The Anti-Semitism of Black Demagogues and Extremists, published in 1992 and prepared by David Evanier.


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is presented without profit for research and educational purposes, most importantly understanding how government functions during law enforcement actions involving Israel and its lobbyists.The Israel Lobby Archive has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of the content nor is it endorsed or sponsored by the originator.

 


Case No. 97242-4

Coretta Scott King, Martin Luther King, III,
Bernice King, Dexter Scott King and Yolanda King

Plaintiffs,

v.

T.D. Loyd Jowers and Other Unknown Co-Conspirators, Defendants.

Defendants.


AT THE CIRCUIT COURT OF SHELBY COUNTY, TENNESSEE THIRTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT MEMPHIS

*****Coretta Scott King: "We have done what we can to reveal the truth, and we now urge you as members of the media, and we call upon elected officials, and other persons of influence to do what they can to share the revelation of this case to the widest possible audience." - King Family Press Conference http://www.thekingcenter.org/sites/default/files/Assassination%20Trial%20Family%20PressConference.pdf.

*****Martin Luther King's Historic Plea to Break the Silence on Militarism (http://w.globalresearch.ca/martin-luther-kings-historic-plea-to-break-the-silence-on-militarism/5364958). By denouncing so forcefully the war crimes that the U.S. military was committing daily in the killing fields of Vietnam, some of King's followers understood that he had just signed his own death warrant. (http://jdavismemphis.com/2014/01/20/1999-court-decision-the-us-government-killed-dr-martin-luther-jr-video/)

*****September 11, 2001– Five Dancing Israelis – The terrorists who perpetrated the worst attack on America in its history stated on record that their motivation was America’s unabashed support for the apartheid regime of Israel. Five dancing Israelis were actually caught filming the world trade center attacks and dancing in celebration afterwards. When the Israelis were caught in a van that had contained explosives, they said we are all on the same side now against the Palestinians. The dancing Israelis later admitted on an Israeli talk show that they were there to document the event. Before the US government classified all information on Israel’s involvement in 9-11, the FBI officially concluded that Israel had to have known of the attack before 9-11-2001 and didn’t warn the US. After the attacks, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “We are benefitting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.” He also said, “these events have swung American public opinion in our favor.”At best, Israel knew of the attacks before hand and did not warn America because of the strategic support against the Palestinians that it would bring. At worst, Israel had a hand in planning the attacks.

*****2001 - Israeli Spies Deported– More than 60 Israeli spies were arrested and detained. Most of them failed lie-detector tests about their spying activities on the US and their connection to the September 11, 2001 attacks.

*****2002 - Harvard Economist Estimates Total US-Israel Aid At $3 trillion. Dr. Thomas R. Stauffer, a world renowned economist who taught economics and Middle East studies at Harvard, as well as serving twice in the Executive Office of the President on a task force for oil imports and controls, estimated that as of 2002 (in 2002 dollars) Israel has cost the US $3 trillion. His estimate took into account direct military aid, political support, oil price increases as a result of conflicts, and peripheral/hidden foreign aid.

*****In Stauffer’s estimation, US aid to Israel costs 275,000 American jobs per year due to unfair trade imbalances and sanctions on Israel’s enemies. In one example of under the table aid, Stauffer pointed out that the US actually gave Russia and Romania billions of dollars in undeclared aid to facilitate Jews moving to Israel. The US has also spent hundreds of billions in the region to secure friendly relationships with Israel. John McCain admitted in an interview that US aid to Egypt is really just a bribe so the Egyptians will maintain friendly relations with Israel. The US has also given Turkey and Greece billions for the same purpose.

*****2003 – Iraq War –  In January 2003, AIPAC executive director Howard Kohr stated, “quietly lobbying Congress to approve the use of force in Iraq” was one of AIPAC’s successes over the past year.” Jeffrey Goldberg reported during a profile piece of AIPAC’s policy director Steven J. Rosen that, “AIPAC lobbied Congress in favor of the Iraq war.”

*****In addition, the US media, which by this point was almost completely controlled by Jewish American supporters of Israel (see this link for proof), refused to investigate the validity of the government’s accusation of Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction. The mainstream media then went a step further by criticizing anti-war activists and even called them traitors who were against the troops. Many Americans leaders and reporters came out after the war and criticized the media for its pro-war propaganda, but very few spoke of the Israeli connection for fear of being labeled anti-Semitic.

*****Even though Israel aggressively lobbied America to attack Iraq, they committed no troops or resources to the struggle.

*****2005 – AIPAC Spying Scandal – A pentagon analyst pleads guilty to passing military secrets to two AIPAC employees en route to Israel. After some political wrangling, all charges were dropped against the two Jewish AIPAC employees in 2009, even though the analyst agreed to testify against the AIPAC employees, and the government had overwhelming evidence to prosecute. It was later reported by Time magazine that Jane Harman, a Jewish congresswoman, was bribed by AIPAC to lobby the Department of Justice to drop the spying charges against the AIPAC employees. In 2009, CQ politics reported that Harman was caught on a NSA wiretap telling an Israeli agent that she would lobby the Department of Justice to drop the case.

*****2008 - 2009 - Israel Fires White Phosphorous Shells Into Civilian Locations, Including a Crowded Refugee Camp. At first, the Israeli army categorically denied the use of white phosphorous gas on civilians (a war crime), but then later admitted it when video footage made it impossible to deny. These weapons were made in the USA.  The entire planet criticized the barbaric and internationally illegal war crimes, but President Bush and the United States supported the Israeli atrocities, which hurt America’s standing in the world.

*****2010 - Israel is Caught Stealing America’s Nuclear Triggers– The United States Bureau of Industry and Security released a report concluding that nuclear triggers were illegally exported to Israel. (Source)

*****2010 – Israel Bribes US News Outlets for Biased Stories– Newly declassified files prove that Israel has actually been covertly paying American media outlets tens of millions of dollars to publish pro-Israel stories. Among other things, the documents revealed that Israel paid the Atlantic magazine $50,000 to disrupt a US peace proposal that would have allowed Palestinian refugees to return to their homes in Israel. These documents came from a Senate hearing, which ended up being censored by American politicians who received significant campaign financing from non-gentile sources. The bribed senators even went as far as sealing the most damning documents from the investigation.

*****January 13, 2012 - Atlanta Jewish Times Owner Claims the Mossad is Considering Assassinating President Obama- Andrew Adler, the owner of the Atlanta Jewish Times, writes an article stating that Israel has three options in order to defend itself. 1. Attack Hezbollah and Hamas 2. Defy the US and attack Iran 3. “give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice president to take his place, and forcefully dictate that the United States policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies.” He went on to say, “Yes you read three correctly. Order a hit on a US President in order to preserve Israel’s existence.” He claimed to know for sure that this option was already “being discussed in Israel’s most inner circles”, and given his high powered Israeli friends, you can bet that he is correct.

*****April 18, 2012 - The Bilzerian Report Estimates the Total Cost of America’s Relationship with Israel, Adjusted for Inflation and Including the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to be in Excess of $5 trillion, or $16,000 per American.

*****July 28, 2012 – CIA Reports that Israel is the Largest Spy Threat in the Middle East. The report details numerous incidents of Israeli spies breaking into American diplomats’ homes and offices to steal sensitive material.

Jewish Groups Pay to Send U.S. Police to Train in IsraelALL.GOV – Israeli Groups Pay to Send U.S. Police to Train in Israel –
Israeli SWAT team conducts training exercise for US police officials
http://www.allgov.com/news/us-and-the-world/Israeli-groups-pay-to-send-us-police-to-train-in-israel?news=854302

*****The militarization of American police forces hasn’t been paid for by just the federal government. Pro-Israel groups in the U.S. have also played a role by financing trips for hundreds of law enforcement officers to travel to the Middle East for counterterrorism training, according to Ali Winston, a contributor to the Center for Investigative Reporting (CIR).

*****Monies provided by such groups as the Anti-Defamation League, the American Israeli Committee’s  Project  Interchange  and  the  Israeli  Institute  for  National  Security  Affairs have made it
Israeli SWAT team conducts training exercise for
US police officials (photo: Bernat Armangue, AP)

possible for “at least 300 high-ranking sheriffs and police from agencies large and small – from New York and Maine to Orange County and Oakland, California” to attend privately funded seminars in Israel since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Winston discovered.

*****There, they have learned how Israeli security forces deal with demonstrators and armed threats by terrorists. The seminars include field trips to such sites as military installations, surveillance outposts, and checkpoints at the West Bank and the Israeli-Egyptian border. The training includes spending time observing operations conducted by Israel’s Border Patrol, Defense Forces, national police and intelligence services.  U.S. police officials who have undergone such training have come from the Los Angeles and New York police departments, the New York and New Jersey Port Authority Police Department, the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority Police, and the Major County Sheriffs’ Association. The fact that the former chief of Missouri’s St. Louis County Police Department trained in Israel in 2011 recently came to light following the well-armed police response to protestors in St. Louis-based Ferguson.

*****Israeli training of U.S. police has also influenced the type of equipment being used. Security forces from both countries are now using some identical gear, including stun and tear gas grenades manufactured by the same U.S. companies—Combined Systems Inc. and Defense Technology Corp. A long-range “sound rifle” that emits ear-shattering noise to disperse crowds, which was used against 2005 West Bank protestors, was also used in the recent police action against protestors in Ferguson.

*****Shakeel Syed, executive director of the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, told CIR that American police are often copying what Israel does in terms of crowd control and other techniques.

*****“Whether it is in Ferguson or L.A., we see a similar response all the time in the form of a disproportionate number of combat-ready police with military gear who are ready to use tear gas at short notice,” Syed said. “Whenever you find 50 people at a demonstration, there is always a SWAT team in sight or right around the corner.”

*****Israel’s security forces have also trained police in Mexico since 1994, originally in response to the Zapatista uprising in Chiapas.

 **** Abagond
*****https://abagond.wordpress.com/2015/08/11/unarmed-black-americans-killed-by-police-in-2015/
*****Unarmed Black Americans killed by police in 2015
*****Tue 11 Aug 2015 by abagond

*****Killed so far this year: 68
*****Last update: November 26th 2015.

*****Here is a somewhat complete list of unarmed Black people killed by police in the U.S. in 2015. So far.

*****Unarmed Black Americans are five times more likely to be killed by police than unarmed White Americans. Unarmed Native Americans too are killed by police at about the same rate as Blacks. Everyone else is killed at a way lower rate, even Latinos.

 

Latinos.

 

Unarmed African-American Men Who Were Killed by Police in 2015

Date Killed

Name of Victim

Age

Town and City

Cause of Death

1. Jan. 1, 2015

Matthew Ajibade

22

Savannah GA

Death in Custody

  • Jan. 5, 2015

Frank Smart

39

Pittsburgh PA

Death in custody

  • Jan. 6, 2015

Brian Pickett

26

Los Angeles CA

Taser

  • Jan. 7, 2015

Andre Murphy Sr

42

Norfolk NE

Death in custody

  • Jan. 8, 2015

Artago Howard

36

Strong AR

Gunshot

  • Jan. 26, 2015

Alvin Haynes

57

San Francisco CA

Death in custody

  • Feb. 3rd 2015

Natasha McKenna

37

Fairfax VA

Taser

  • Feb. 5, 2015

Jeremy Lett

28

Tallahassee FL

Gunshot

  • Feb. 21, 2015

Terry Price

41

Tulsa OK

Taser

  • Feb. 22, 2015

Calvon Reid

39

Coconut Creek FL

Taser

  • Mar. 1, 2015

Thomas Allen Jr

34

St Louis MO

Gunshot

  • Mar. 1, 2015

Charly ‘Africa’ Keunang

43

Los Angeles CA

Gunshot

  • Mar. 1, 2015

Darrell ‘Hubbard’ Gatewood

47

Oklahoma City OK

Taser

  • Mar. 6, 2015

Tony Robinson

19

Madison WI

Gunshot

  • Mar. 6, 2015

Naeschylus Vinzant

37

Aurora CO

Gunshot

  • Mar. 6, 2015

Bernard Moore

62

Atlanta GA

Struck by vehicle

  • Mar. 9, 2015

Anthony Hill

27

Chamblee GA

Gunshot

  • Mar. 10, 2015

Terrance Moxley

29

Mansfield OH

Taser

  • Mar. 12, 2015

Jonathan Paul

42

Arlington TX

Death in custody

  • Mar. 17, 2015

Askari Roberts

35

Rome GA

Taser

  • Mar. 19, 2015

Brandon Jones

18

Cleveland OH

Gunshot

  • Mar. 22, 2015

Denzel Brown

21

Bay Shore NY

Gunshot

  • Mar. 30th 2015

Dominick Wise

30

Culpeper VA

Taser

  • Mar. 31, 2015

Phillip White

32

Vineland NJ

Death in custody

  • Apr. 2, 2015

Donald Dontay’ Ivy

39

Albany NY

Taser

  • Apr. 2, 2015

Eric Harris

44

Tulsa OK

Gunshot

  • Apr. 4, 2015

Walter Scott

50

North Charleston SC

Gunshot

  • Apr. 12, 2015

Freddie Gray

25

Baltimore MD

Death in custody

  • Apr. 15, 2015

Frank Trey’ Shephard III

41

Houston TX

Gunshot

  • Apr. 16, 2015

Darrell Brown

31

Hagerstown MD

Taser

  • Apr. 19, 2015

Norman Cooper

33

San Antonio TX

Taser

  • Apr. 21, 2015

Samuel Harrell

30

Beacon NY

Death in custody

  • Apr. 22, 2015

William Chapman II

18

Portsmouth VA

Gunshot

  • Apr. 25, 2015

David Felix

24

New York NY

Gunshot

  • Apr. 28, 2015

Bryan Overstreet

30

Sylvester GA

Struck by vehicle

  • May 6, 2015

Brendon Glenn

29

Los Angeles CA

Gunshot

  • May 6, 2015

Nuwnah Laroche

34

Ridgefield Park NJ

Struck by vehicle

  • May 6, 2015

Jason Champion

41

Ridgefield Park NJ

Struck by vehicle

  • May 8, 2015

Sam Holmes

31

Fridley MN

Gunshot

  • May 13th 2015

Lorenzo Hayes

37

Spokane WA

Death in custody

  • May 31, 2015

Richard Davis

50

Rochester NY

Taser

  • Jun. 8, 2015

Ross Anthony

25

Dallas TX

Taser

  • Jun. 13th 2015

Alan Williams

47

Greenville SC

Struck by vehicle

  • Jun. 15, 2015

Kris Jackson

22

South Lake Tahoe CA

Gunshot

  • Jun. 16, 2015

Jermaine Benjamin

42

Vero Beach FL

Death in custody

  • Jun. 20th 2015

Kevin Bajoie

32

Baton Rouge LA

Taser

  • Jun. 25, 2015

Spencer McCain

41

Owings Mills MD

Gunshot

  • Jul. 1, 2015

Kevin Judson

24

McMinnville OR

Gunshot

  • Jul. 8, 2015

Jonathan Sanders

39

Stonewall MS

Death in custody

  • Jul. 11, 2015

George Mann

53

Stone Mountain GA

Taser

  • Jul. 12, 2015

Salvado Ellswood

36

Plantation FL

Gunshot

  • Jul. 17, 2015

Darrius Stewart

19

Memphis TN

Gunshot

  • Jul. 19, 2015

Samuel Dubose

43

Cincinnati OH

Gunshot

  • Aug. 6, 2015

Troy Robinson

33

Decatur GA

Taser

  • Aug. 7, 2015

Christian Taylor

19

Arlington TX

Gunshot

  • Aug. 14, 2015

Asshams Manley

30

District Heights MD

Gunshot

  • Aug. 28, 2015

Felix Kumi

61

Mount Vernon NY

Gunshot

  • Aug. 31, 2015

James Carney III

48

Cincinnati OH

Taser

  • Sept. 5, 2015

India Kager

28

Virginia Beach VA

Gunshot

  • Sept. 7, 2015

Wayne Wheeler

41

Detroit MI

Other

  • Sept. 23rd 2015

Keith McLeod

19

Reisterstown MD

Gunshot

  • Sept. 28, 2015

Junior Prosper

31

North Miami FL

Gunshot

  • Oct. 17, 2015

Paterson Brown Jr

18

Midlothian VA

Gunshot

  • Oct. 17, 2015

Rayshaun Cole

30

Chula Vista CA

Gunshot

  • Oct. 27, 2015

Anthony Ashford

29

San Diego CA

Gunshot

  • Nov. 11, 2015

Michael Marshall

50

Denver CO

Death in custody

  • Nov. 15, 2015

Jamar Clark

24

Minneapolis MN

Gunshot

  • Nov. 19, 2015

Nathaniel Pickett

29

Barstow CA

Gunshot

 

  • Jan. 23rd 2015

Demaris Turner

29

Lauderhill FL

Gunshot

  • Feb. 25, 2015

Glenn Lewis

37

Oklahoma City OK

Gunshot

  • Mar. 6, 2015

Andrew Williams

48

Putnam Hall FL

Gunshot

  • May 12, 2015

DaJuan Graham

40

Silver Spring MD

Taser

  • May 20th 2015

Markus Clark

26

Fort Lauderdale FL

Unknown

Notice that Sandra Bland does not make the list – because her death is officially counted a suicide Nor does Andre Green who was killed Aug. 10, because a vehicle counts as a “weapon” Nor likewise would Walter Scott or Sam Dubose if there were no video.



Haaretz:
Israel Admits Ethiopian Women Were Given Birth Control
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-admits-ethiopian-women-were-given-birth-control-shots.premium-1.496519
Talila Nesher Jan 27, 2013 2:29 AM

*****Why is the birth rate in Israel's Ethiopian community declining?

*****Health Ministry Director General Prof. Roni Gamzu has instructed the four health maintenance organizations to stop the practice as a matter of course.

*****Gamzu’s letter instructs all gynecologists in the HMOs "not to renew prescriptions for Depo-Provera if for any reason there is concern that they might not understand the ramifications of the treatment.”  He also instructed physicians to avail themselves of translators if need be.

*****Gamzu’s letter came in response to a letter from Sharona Eliahu-Chai of the Association of Civil Rights in Israel, representing several women’s rights and Ethiopian immigrants’ groups. The letter demanded the injections cease immediately and that an investigation be launched into the practice.

*****About six weeks ago, on an educational television program journalist Gal Gabbay revealed the results of interviews with 35 Ethiopian immigrants. The women’s testimony could help explain the almost 50-percent decline over the past 10 years in the birth rate of Israel’s Ethiopian community. According to the program, while the women were still in transit camps in Ethiopia they were sometimes intimidated or threatened into taking the injection. “They told us they are inoculations,” said one of the women interviewed. “They told us people who frequently give birth suffer. We took it every three months. We said we didn’t want to.”

Mondoweiss: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/05/ethiopian-brutality-jerusalem
Baltimore Is Here’: Ethiopian Israelis protest police brutality in Jerusalem
http://mondoweiss.net/2015/05/ethiopian-brutality-jerusalem#sthash.abHxpnE8.dpuf

*****Ethiopian Israelis took to the streets of Jerusalem on the evening of April 30 to protest police brutality and systemic racism. Haaretz reports that approximately 1,000 protesters gathered, principally from the Ethiopian Israeli community.

*****The citizens condemned racism and police brutality toward the Ethiopian Israeli community, calling for the end of impunity for cops who harass them.

*****A video released of a white Israeli police officer attacking a black Israeli soldier in Tel Aviv on April 26 angered many in the Ethiopian Israeli community, which is disproportionately targeted by Israeli police. The video shows officers pushing Demas Fekadeh, an Ethiopian Israeli soldier, to the ground and beating him.

*****Ethiopian Israelis took to the streets of Jerusalem on the evening of April 30 to protest police brutality and systemic racism. Haaretz reports that approximately 1,000 protesters gathered, principally from the Ethiopian Israeli community.

*****The citizens condemned racism and police brutality toward the Ethiopian Israeli community, calling for the end of impunity for cops who harass them.

*****A video released of a white Israeli police officer attacking a black Israeli soldier in Tel Aviv on April 26 angered many in the Ethiopian Israeli community, which is disproportionately targeted by Israeli police. The video shows officers pushing Demas Fekadeh, an Ethiopian Israeli soldier, to the ground and beating him.

*****Zionist Union Member of Knesset Shelly Yachimovich remarked in a Facebook post “It wouldn’t be farfetched to expect that if [Demas Fekadeh], the soldier who was hit, was a light-skin soldier, preferably with an Ashkenazi appearance, he would not have sustained harsh blows without consideration from police.”

*****This is by no means an isolated incident. In March 2014, an Ethiopian Israeli by the name of Yosef Salamseh was in a public park with his friends when police approached him. They accused him of breaking into a house, a claim he adamantly denied. The cops then attacked him with a Taser gun, kicked him, handcuffed him, shackled his legs, threw him in a police car, and detained him in a nearby police station. His family later found him unconscious and tied-up. A few months later, he died. Police claimed it was a suicide.

*****In the wake of the incident, Salamseh came to be known by many as “Israel’s Michael Brown,” referring to an 18-year-old black American man who was walking down the street with a friend in Ferguson, Missouri when white police officer Darren Wilson shot him nine times, three times in the head.

*****Plaintiff's sister, Paula F. Guity was robbed of $12,000 by  Israeli attorney Scott M. Mishkin. Mr. Mishkin also sued Ms. Guity for breach of contract and quantum meruit for money he falsely claimed he deserved for litigating Plaintiff's sister's time-barred case. Included in the money Mr. Mishkin falsely claims he is owed is a day in his itemized bill in which he performed 30 hours of work in a 24-hour day. See page 1 of Scott M. Mishkin's itemized.  In spite of this glaringly ridiculous entry, neither the present justice, Honorable W. Gerald Asher, nor the Honorable Denise F. Molia, the justice who was forcibly recused, has volunteered to report Scott Mishkin's crimes. Mr Mishkin also sent a letter to NYS Justice Molia, in which he said: “I received a notification pursuant to my E-Law subscription, that defendant has filed a reply affirmation to my reply and I am respectfully requesting that same, which has been forwarded to Your Honor's chambers by the Clerk, not be considering plaintiff's Motion.” Attorney Mishkin tricked Plaintiff's sister into giving him $12,000 for a case that was declared time-barred by federal magistrate judge Kathleen Tomlinson and made res judicata by federal district judge Sandra Feuerstein. (http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nyedce/2:2012cv01482/328688/75.  http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nyedce/2:2012cv01482/328688/83.  http://www.thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.net/forgot_ethics.html.

*****As of August 6, 2014, Ms. Guity, victim of  Israeli attorney-turned-alleged-porn-actor-turned-thief had her action transferred from NYS Justice Paul J. Baisley to NYS Justice Peter H. Mayer; from Peter H. Mayer to Denise F. Molia; from NYS Justice Denise F. Molia to W. Gerald Asher; and lastly, from W. Gerald Asher to questionable-morals Justice Andrew G. Tarantino.

*****In the case Thomas Harrington, etc., et al., v. County of Suffolk, et al., attorney Scott Mishkin represented Dr. Harrington.  In the case that was heard by the federal court, it was decided that the complaint did not state a claim (although the case was prepared by attorney Scott Mishkin who should know how to state a claim.) Dr. Harrington lost the case. Scott Mishkin prepared the appeal, including the contention that Dr. Harrington was discriminated against based on his gender. Dr. Harrington is a white male. Dr. Harrington lost the appeal. Later on, attorney Scott Mishkin presented the same case to the New York State Supreme Court. The court decided that the case was time-barred. Scott Mishkin appealed the case and lost. At the time that Mr. Mishkin represented Dr. Harrington, Dr. Harrington's son died in a car accident. During Dr. Harrington's period of grieving, Mr. Mishkin took the opportunity to milk this man of his money. Worse, Mr. Mishkin charged this grieving father for litigating a time-barred case. (http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nyedce/2:2008cv00433/277321/14).   http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ny-supreme-court/1622252.html.

*****In the case Rosato v. New York County District Attorney's Office et al., the court decided that the complaint was time-barred. https://casetext.com/case/rosato-v-new-york-county-district-attorneys-office#U8stR_ldUk6.    Scott Mishkin represented Michael Rosato.

*****In the case Vincent Valenti v. Massapequa Union Free School District, et al., the court ruled that the case was time-barred. http://Docs.Justia.Com/Cases/Federal/District-Courts/Newyork/Nyedce/2:2009-cv-00977/289771/52/0.Pdf?1333035804.  Scott Mishkin represented Vincent Valenti.

*****In the case Gary M. Ehrhard v. The Honorable Raymond H. Lahood, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation, the court ruled that the case was time-barred. Scott Mishkin represented Gary Ehrhard. (http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FDCO%2020120330901).

*****That during the course of Defendants' illegal conduct as demonstrated above, the Defendants kept secret from the public their subjecting the Plaintiff to acts of war by deception and crimes against humanity, including the illegal imprisonment of the Plaintiff.  While the Defendants publicized and continue to publicize Israeli citizens' experiences in Nazi Germany in the news, the Defendants' still withhold from the public their acts of war by deception in which they still engage in immigration fraud, identity theft/fraud; withholding of Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere's true identity to avoid paying spousal support, that Defendants still use the internet (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=cheryl+uzamere;  http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/woman-suing-husband-arrested-threatening-judge-starts-ripping-clothes-courtroom-article-1.416793; see Plaintiff's Youtube videos at this website) to publicly defame Plaintiff as a violent "wacko" to disparage Plaintiff's complaint against the Defendants and kidnapping Plaintiff and imprisoning her in jail and in mental institutions to give the impression that Plaintiff's complaint is without merit based solely on Plaintiff's having a mental disability; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israeli attorney Scott Milkin's charging Gentile clients money to be represented by him when said clients' cases were time-barred and outside of the statute of limitations for filing with any court; withholding from the public historical information regarding the African Holocaust in which Israeli citizens enslaved sub-Saharan Africans; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's trickery and enslavement of white Gentile women from Europe; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's enslavement by tyranny of Thai workers; withholding from the public information regarding Israel's suspected involvement in the bombing and controlled demolition of Buildings 1, 2 and 7 of the former World Trade Center; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of the U.S.S. Liberty and murder of thirty-four U.S. serviceman; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of U.S. civil and military installations during the Lavon Affair; that Defendants' withholding of said information are acts of war by deception to hide Israel's and Israeli citizens obedience to the Laws of Israel's mandate to engage in predation against Gentiles in a manner that violates both national and international law; and that the following Defendants actively  prevent these issues and Israel's and her citizens' war-like predation  of Gentiles from being discussed in by the Israeli-controlled media, namely: Gerald Levin, in His Official Capacity as Chief Executive Officer and Director of AOL Time Warner; Michael Eisner, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Walt Disney Company; Edgar Bronfman, head of Universal Studios; Sumner Redstone/Rothstein, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of CBS, Inc.; Dennis Dammerman, in His Official Capacity as Vice Chairman of General Electric; Peter Chernin, in His Official Capacity as President and Co-Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation Limited; Jeffrey L. Bewkes, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Office, Time Warner; Philippe Dauman, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Robert A. Iger, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Leslie Moonves, President and Chief Executive Officer, CBS, Inc.; NBC Universal, Brian L. Roberts, Chairman, NBC Universal; Stephen B. Burke, Chief Executive Officer, NBC Universal; Mortimer Zuckerman, President and Chief Executive Office, Daily News, LP; Michael Bloomberg, Bloomberg News; Scott Shifrel, former Staff Writer of the Daily News, LP; the Daily News, LP; Rupert Murdoch, New York Post, New York Post.

Analysis

Defendants' Reliance on the Laws of Israel Encourage Genocide against the Descendants of Sub-Saharan Africans; Acts of War by Deception and Crimes Against Humanity and Have Abolished, Suspended and Rendered Inadmissible in Defendants' Courts of Law the Rights and Actions of Plaintiff and Gentiles as Hostile Parties

***** The intent of Israel and its citizenry is, and has been enslavement under tyranny, as is directed by the Talmudic Laws of Israel. As Plaintiff's reference to Israel's bombing of the United States during the Lavon Affair, Israel's bombing of the U.S.S. Liberty and the murder of 34 faithful servicemen; Israel's suspected insurance scam turned false flag controlled demolition of the World Trade Center; Israel's enslavement of Thai workers, Israel's involvement in human sex trafficking, and Israel's citizens immigration fraud and  identity theft/identity fraud committed against the Plaintiff and her daughter Tara, Israel's is and has always been is: 1) to allow the unconstitutional encroachment of the Talmud Laws of Israel; 2) to devalue and dehumanize Gentiles as a means to rationalize Israeli citizens' illegal acts; 3) to rely on the Talmudic doctrine Law of the Moser to ensure that Israeli citizens do not report the illegal acts of lawbreaking Israeli citizens to the secular (Gentile) authorities, and to ensure that those Gentiles who attempt to report the illegal acts of lawbreaking Israeli citizens are stopped by fellow Israeli citizens; and 4) to hold uncooperative Gentiles out as anti-Semites deserving of a social death or as close to a real death as possible.

*****The sum total of Plaintiff's living in an atmosphere where predatory Israeli citizens make fraudulent references to anti-Semitism  in order to hide their illegal predation of Plaintiff and her children, based on the encroachment of racist Israeli religious doctrines Curse of Dark Skin and Law of the Moser, has caused thirty-four (34) years of deprivation of Plaintiff and her family's constitutional, civil, marital, parental, social and financial rights. The Defendants' have staunchly refused to overtly acknowledge the legal relationship between Plaintiff, her children, and Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, and have instead, referred to the same, tired, old excuse of anti-Semitism to hide their crimes and to continue to prey on Plaintiff and her children. For thirty-four (34) years, Plaintiff and her children were condemned to the same Israeli religious generational curse that condemned millions of enslaved Africans to the permanent loss of their parents' proper African names, languages and customs associated with those names, and the wealth and social status that would have passed on to African children had they been able to bear their African forefathers' names. Because of the Defendants' determination to stop Plaintiff from reporting the original crimes that were perpetrated by those Defendants who helped Plaintiff's ex-husband commit fraud and aggravated identity theft, Plaintiff and her children are now victims in a hateful, racist environment that forgives and gives second chances to lawbreaking Israeli citizens, forever condemns the descendants of African slaves for being dark-skinned, and like the pedophile Jesse Timmendaguas, use past incidents of anti-Semitism to rationalize their abusive, hateful, predatory behavior towards Gentiles.

****That the Defendants plan to perpetrate the same inhumane enslavement against the Plaintiff that they have already perpetrated against her is borne out of the fact that, while conversation about Israeli citizens' experiences in Nazi Germany are openly discussed in the news, the Defendants' still withhold from the public their acts of war by deception in which they still engage in immigration fraud, identity theft/fraud; withholding of Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere's true identity to avoid paying spousal support, that Defendants still use the internet (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=cheryl+uzamere;  http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/woman-suing-husband-arrested-threatening-judge-starts-ripping-clothes-courtroom-article-1.416793; see Plaintiff's Youtube videos at this website) to publicly defame Plaintiff as a violent "wacko" to disparage Plaintiff's complaint against the Defendants and kidnapping Plaintiff and imprisoning her in jail and in mental institutions to give the impression that Plaintiff's complaint is without merit based solely on Plaintiff's having a mental disability; withholding from the public historical information regarding the African Holocaust in which Israeli citizens enslaved sub-Saharan Africans; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's trickery and enslavement of white Gentile women from Europe; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's enslavement by tyranny of Thai workers; withholding from the public information regarding Israel's suspected involvement in the bombing and controlled demolition of Buildings 1, 2 and 7 of the former World Trade Center; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of the U.S.S. Liberty and murder of thirty-four U.S. serviceman; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of U.S. civil and military installations during the Lavon Affair; that Defendants' withholding of said information are acts of war by deception to hide Israel's and Israeli citizens obedience to the Laws of Israel's mandate to engage in predation against Gentiles in a manner that violates both national and international law; and that the following Defendants actively  prevent these issues and Israel's and her citizens' war-like predation  of Gentiles from being discussed in by the Israeli-controlled media, namely: Gerald Levin, in His Official Capacity as Chief Executive Officer and Director of AOL Time Warner; Michael Eisner, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Walt Disney Company; Edgar Bronfman, head of Universal Studios; Sumner Redstone/Rothstein, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of CBS, Inc.; Dennis Dammerman, in His Official Capacity as Vice Chairman of General Electric; Peter Chernin, in His Official Capacity as President and Co-Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation Limited; Jeffrey L. Bewkes, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Office, Time Warner; Philippe Dauman, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Robert A. Iger, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Leslie Moonves, President and Chief Executive Officer, CBS, Inc.; NBC Universal, Brian L. Roberts, Chairman, NBC Universal; Stephen B. Burke, Chief Executive Officer, NBC Universal; Mortimer Zuckerman, President and Chief Executive Office, Daily News, LP; Michael Bloomberg, Bloomberg News; Scott Shifrel, former Staff Writer of the Daily News, LP; the Daily News, LP; Rupert Murdoch, New York Post, New York Post.

*****By reason of the foregoing irrefutable allegations, Plaintiff asserts that there exists a justiciable controversy with respect to which Plaintiff is entitled to the relief prayed for herein.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Defendants' Violation of First Amendment Mandate Regarding Separation of Church and State
is Act of War by Deception, a Crime Against Humanity and a Violation of Plaintiff's Human Rights

*****Plaintiff repeats and realleges the above paragraphs.

*****With regard to all natural Defendants, this claim is brought against them individually and in their official capacities.

*****Plaintiff is an African American citizen with a serious and persistent mental illness. Plaintiff has a mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.

*****Plaintiff is a descendant victim of the African Holocaust in which Africans, whose sale was caused by Israeli citizens, forever lost the ability to bear the correct paternal name of her African male forebears; and having married Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, now retains the right from now to eternity to have borne and to bear the name of Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, as does Tara A. Uzamere, the adult child of the marriage between Plaintiff and Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere and blood heir with the legal right to bear, and for her progeny to bear the correct Edo/Bini name and culture associated with Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere.

********That the Defendants plan to perpetrate the same inhumane enslavement against the Plaintiff that they have already perpetrated against her is borne out of the fact that, while conversation about Israeli citizens' experiences in Nazi Germany are openly discussed in the news, the Defendants' still withhold from the public their acts of war by deception in which they still engage in immigration fraud, identity theft/fraud; withholding of Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere's true identity to avoid paying spousal support, that Defendants still use the internet (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=cheryl+uzamere; http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/woman-suing-husband-arrested-threatening-judge-starts-ripping-clothes-courtroom-article-1.416793;  see Plaintiff's Youtube videos at this website) to publicly defame Plaintiff as a violent "wacko" to disparage Plaintiff's complaint against the Defendants and kidnapping Plaintiff and imprisoning her in jail and in mental institutions to give the impression that Plaintiff's complaint is without merit based solely on Plaintiff's having a mental disability; withholding from the public historical information regarding the African Holocaust in which Israeli citizens enslaved sub-Saharan Africans; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's trickery and enslavement of white Gentile women from Europe; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's enslavement by tyranny of Thai workers; withholding from the public information regarding Israel's suspected involvement in the bombing and controlled demolition of Buildings 1, 2 and 7 of the former World Trade Center; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of the U.S.S. Liberty and murder of thirty-four U.S. serviceman; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of U.S. civil and military installations during the Lavon Affair; that Defendants' withholding of said information are acts of war by deception to hide Israel's and Israeli citizens obedience to the Laws of Israel's mandate to engage in predation against Gentiles in a manner that violates both national and international law; and that the following Defendants actively  prevent these issues and Israel's and her citizens' war-like predation  of Gentiles from being discussed in by the Israeli-controlled media, namely: Gerald Levin, in His Official Capacity as Chief Executive Officer and Director of AOL Time Warner; Michael Eisner, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Walt Disney Company; Edgar Bronfman, head of Universal Studios; Sumner Redstone/Rothstein, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of CBS, Inc.; Dennis Dammerman, in His Official Capacity as Vice Chairman of General Electric; Peter Chernin, in His Official Capacity as President and Co-Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation Limited; Jeffrey L. Bewkes, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Office, Time Warner; Philippe Dauman, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Robert A. Iger, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Leslie Moonves, President and Chief Executive Officer, CBS, Inc.; NBC Universal, Brian L. Roberts, Chairman, NBC Universal; Stephen B. Burke, Chief Executive Officer, NBC Universal; Mortimer Zuckerman, President and Chief Executive Office, Daily News, LP; Michael Bloomberg, Bloomberg News; Scott Shifrel, former Staff Writer of the Daily News, LP; the Daily News, LP; Rupert Murdoch, New York Post, New York Post.

*****Defendants owed Plaintiff and her family the duty, pursuant to 5 USC §3331, to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; to bear true faith and allegiance to the same; to take said obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and to well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which Defendants entered. This requires the Defendants to establish a clear separation of church and state, and to distance themselves from the Laws of Israel in their application and enforcement of U.S. Constitutional law. Defendants owed Plaintiff and her children the duty to give themselves over to the transparency of U.S. law, and not the secrecy and deception associated with the Laws of Israel.  Defendants owed Plaintiff the duty, pursuant to 5 USC §3331 not to discriminate against Plaintiff's because of having a mental disability, and that said mental disability should never have been used by the Defendants to deny her right and her daughter Tara's right to bear the correct name of their relative, Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, and that the Defendants should never have conspired to employ the laws of Israel to subject the Plaintiff to becoming a victim of war by Israel's deception, thereby relegating the Plaintiff to revisiting the same loss of family name and culture to which Israeli citizens forced sub-Saharan Africans; and that the attention and obedience that was rendered by Defendant United States of America and her dual-citizenship-holding Israeli defendants constitute seditious conspiracy and treason. As public entities, Defendant United States of America and the dual-citizenship-holding Israeli defendants owed Plaintiff the duty to comply with Title II regulations by the U.S. Department of Justice. These regulations cover access to all programs and services offered by the entity. Access includes physical access described in the ADA Standards for Accessible Design and programmatic access that might be obstructed by discriminatory policies or procedures of the entity.

*****Defendants failed in their duty to meet their legal obligations as detailed by the First Amendment mandate regarding the separation of church and state. Defendants, at the behest of Defendant Garaufis and other Israeli judiciary Defendants have conspired to force the tenets of the Talmud and other Israeli religious dogma on the Plaintiff based on the Talmud's viewpoint of the Plaintiff's as a Gentile/non-Israeli, African-American slave to prevent Plaintiff from filing civil and criminal complaints against  immigration attorneys Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Jack Gladstein. Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer injury because she is still under a victim of crimes against humanity at the hands of the Defendants, who, at the clandestine behest of Defendants Judge Garaufis, Judge Schack, Judge Sunshine and Judge Gerstein, have continued the same government-wide hostile environment that Plaintiff complained about in her prior lawsuits, Uzamere vs. Uzamere (Plaintiff's divorce action) and Uzamere vs. Cuomo, et al, 11-cv-2831/11-2713-cv. Plaintiff has been forced by Defendant Garaufis to obey the Talmud, Tractate Abodah Zarah, folio 26b, Tractate Sanhedrin, folio 108b and footnote 34; Israeli doctrine Law of the Moser, the doctrine that prohibits anyone from reporting the crimes of Israeli citizens to secular, Gentile authorities; and the Curse of Black Skin, the doctrine that requires people of dark-skinned African descent to be obedient to Israeli citizens and white people because dark-skinned Africans are meant to be slaves. In Plaintiff's prior lawsuit Uzamere vs. Cuomo, et al Case Nos. 11-cv-2831/11-2713-cv. Plaintiff provided Defendant Garaufis with proof that employees of Defendant New York State conspired with Defendant Shifrel of Defendant Daily News, LP , to defame the Plaintiff as an “anti-Semitic wacko”, to illegally publicize Plaintiff's psychiatric and marital information to give their false publicized statement regarding Plaintiff's ex-husband being “Godwin Uzamere” believability. Defendant Garaufis violated Plaintiff's rights in the same manner by relying on the Talmud, Tractate Abodah Zarah, folio 26b and the Talmudic doctrine Law of the Moser, not the U.S. Constitution to prevent the Plaintiff from reporting the commission of aggravated identity theft by  Israeli attorneys Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Jack Gladstein.

*****Plaintiff hold that Defendants State of Israel, United States of America and the United States crimes against humanity caused by the racist and excessive entanglement of a religion in a secular government – a religion that has already played a part in the possible enslavement of Plaintiff's ancestors in a manner that will not allow Plaintiff to discuss Judaism's involvement in the African slave trade an injury. In the case Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), the Supreme Court ruled that government may not “excessively entangle” with religion. The case involved two Pennsylvania laws: one permitting the state to “purchase” services in secular fields from religious schools, and the other permitting the state to pay a percentage of the salaries of private school teachers, including teachers in religious institutions. The Supreme Court found that the government was “excessively entangled” with religion, and invalidated the statutes in question.

*****Plaintiff submits that Defendants' violation of the First Amendment is an injury, and is a violation of the Rome Statutes regarding genocide; the Rome Statutes regarding crimes against humanity; the Rome Statutes regarding war crimes; the United Nation statutes with regard to United Nations human rights; Defendant United States of America's statutes regarding the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 USC §1983 and §1985, conspiracy against civil rights.  Furthermore, Plaintiff submits that Defendants' pretense with regard to their use of deception and use of armed force by withholding honest governmental services from the Plaintiff which she should have received from the Defendant United States of America's executive and judicial branches constitutes a Talmudic, Mossad-like act of war by deception, crimes against humanity and a violation of Plaintiff's human rights.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Defendants' Violation of The Americans with Disabilities  is an Act
of War by Deception, a Crime Against Humanity and a Violation of Plaintiff's Human Rights

*****Plaintiff repeats and realleges the above paragraphs.

*****With regard to all natural Defendants, this claim is brought against them individually and in their official capacities.

*****Plaintiff is an African American citizen with a serious and persistent mental illness. Plaintiff has a mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.

*****Plaintiff is a descendant victim of the African Holocaust in which Africans, whose sale was caused by Israeli citizens, forever lost the ability to bear the correct paternal name of her African male forebears; and having married Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, now retains the right from now to eternity to have borne and to bear the name of Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, as does Tara A. Uzamere, the adult child of the marriage between Plaintiff and Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere and blood heir with the legal right to bear, and for her progeny to bear the correct Edo/Bini name and culture associated with Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere.

*****That the Defendants plan to perpetrate the same inhumane enslavement against the Plaintiff that they have already perpetrated against her is borne out of the fact that, while conversation about Israeli citizens' experiences in Nazi Germany are openly discussed in the news, the Defendants' still withhold from the public their acts of war by deception in which they still engage in immigration fraud, identity theft/fraud; withholding of Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere's true identity to avoid paying spousal support, that Defendants still use the internet (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=cheryl+uzamere; http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/woman-suing-husband-arrested-threatening-judge-starts-ripping-clothes-courtroom-article-1.416793; see Plaintiff's Youtube videos at this website) to publicly defame Plaintiff as a violent "wacko" to disparage Plaintiff's complaint against the Defendants and kidnapping Plaintiff and imprisoning her in jail and in mental institutions to give the impression that Plaintiff's complaint is without merit based solely on Plaintiff's having a mental disability; withholding from the public historical information regarding the African Holocaust in which Israeli citizens enslaved sub-Saharan Africans; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's trickery and enslavement of white Gentile women from Europe; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's enslavement by tyranny of Thai workers; withholding from the public information regarding Israel's suspected involvement in the bombing and controlled demolition of Buildings 1, 2 and 7 of the former World Trade Center; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of the U.S.S. Liberty and murder of thirty-four U.S. serviceman; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of U.S. civil and military installations during the Lavon Affair; that Defendants' withholding of said information are acts of war by deception to hide Israel's and Israeli citizens obedience to the Laws of Israel's mandate to engage in predation against Gentiles in a manner that violates both national and international law; and that the following Defendants actively  prevent these issues and Israel's and her citizens' war-like predation  of Gentiles from being discussed in by the Israeli-controlled media, namely: Gerald Levin, in His Official Capacity as Chief Executive Officer and Director of AOL Time Warner; Michael Eisner, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Walt Disney Company; Edgar Bronfman, head of Universal Studios; Sumner Redstone/Rothstein, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of CBS, Inc.; Dennis Dammerman, in His Official Capacity as Vice Chairman of General Electric; Peter Chernin, in His Official Capacity as President and Co-Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation Limited; Jeffrey L. Bewkes, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Office, Time Warner; Philippe Dauman, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Robert A. Iger, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Leslie Moonves, President and Chief Executive Officer, CBS, Inc.; NBC Universal, Brian L. Roberts, Chairman, NBC Universal; Stephen B. Burke, Chief Executive Officer, NBC Universal; Mortimer Zuckerman, President and Chief Executive Office, Daily News, LP; Michael Bloomberg, Bloomberg News; Scott Shifrel, former Staff Writer of the Daily News, LP; the Daily News, LP; Rupert Murdoch, New York Post, New York Post.

*****Defendants owed Plaintiff the duty, pursuant to Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act, not to discriminate against Plaintiff's because of having a mental disability, and the said mental disability should never have been used by the Defendants to deny her right and her daughter Tara's right to bear the correct name of their relative, Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, and that the Defendants should never have conspired to employ the laws of Israel to subject the Plaintiff to becoming a victim of war by Israel's citizens' deception, thereby relegating the Plaintiff to again revisiting the same loss of family name and culture to which Israeli citizens forced sub-Saharan Africans; and that such attention and obedience was rendered by Defendant United States of America, the dual-citizenship-holding Israeli defendants  that their acts constitute treason. As public entities, Defendants owed Plaintiff the duty to comply with Title II regulations by the U.S. Department of Justice. These regulations cover access to all programs and services offered by the entity. Access includes physical access described in the ADA Standards for Accessible Design and programmatic access that might be obstructed by discriminatory policies or procedures of the entity.

*****Defendants failed in their duty to meet their legal obligations as detailed by the First Amendment mandate regarding the separation of church and state. Defendants, at the behest of Defendant Garaufis and other Israeli judiciary Defendants have conspired to force the tenets of the Talmud and other Israeli religious dogma on the Plaintiff based on the Talmud's viewpoint of the Plaintiff's as a gentile/non-Israeli, African-American/schvartze slave to prevent Plaintiff from filing civil and criminal complaints against  immigration attorneys Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Jack Gladstein. Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer injury because she is still under a victim of crimes against humanity at the hands of the Defendants, who, at the clandestine behest of Defendants Judge Garaufis, Judge Schack, Judge Sunshine and Judge Gerstein, have continued the same government-wide hostile environment that Plaintiff complained about in her prior lawsuits, Uzamere vs. Uzamere (Plaintiff's divorce action) and Uzamere vs. Cuomo, et al, 11-cv-2831/11-2713-cv. Plaintiff has been forced by Defendant Garaufis to obey the Talmud, Tractate Abodah Zarah, folio 26b, Tractate Sanhedrin, folio 108b and footnote 34; Israeli doctrine Law of the Moser, the doctrine that prohibits anyone from reporting the crimes of Israeli citizens to secular, Gentile authorities; and the Curse of Black Skin, the doctrine that requires people of dark-skinned African descent to be obedient to Israeli citizens and white people because dark-skinned Africans are meant to be slaves. In Plaintiff's prior lawsuit Uzamere vs. Cuomo, et al Case Nos. 11-cv-2831/11-2713-cv, Plaintiff provided Defendant Garaufis with proof that employees of Defendant New York State conspired with Defendant Shifrel of Defendant Daily News, LP , to defame the Plaintiff as an “anti-Semitic wacko”, to illegally publicize Plaintiff's psychiatric and marital information to give their false publicized statement regarding Plaintiff's ex-husband being “Godwin Uzamere” believability. Defendant Garaufis violated Plaintiff's rights in the same manner by relying on the Talmud, Tractate Abodah Zarah, folio 26b and the Talmudic doctrine Law of the Moser, not the U.S. Constitution to prevent the Plaintiff from reporting the commission of aggravated identity theft by  Israeli attorneys Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Jack Gladstein.

*****Plaintiff holds that Defendants State of Israel, United States of America and the Federal Republic of Nigeria committed crimes against humanity by holding Plaintiff out to be publicly scorned because of the Defendant's publicized perception of Plaintiff as “wacko.”

*****Plaintiff submits that Defendants' violation of the her rights as mentally disabled in act of treason,  also violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 USC §1985, conspiracy to interfere with civil rights, such that Plaintiff's Verified Complaint rises to the level of an action in the manner of Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 with regard to those Defendants who are natural persons. Plaintiff understands the U.S. Supreme Court's application of Bivens to natural persons and its refusal to extend Bivens to agencies.

*****Defendants failed in their duty to meet the obligations as detailed in Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act. Defendants continue to discriminate against Plaintiff based on Plaintiff's status of having a mental illness because Plaintiff will not stop filing complaints against  Israeli citizens immigration attorneys Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Jack Gladstein.

*****Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer injury because Plaintiff is still under attack by all the Defendants,who, at the clandestine behest of Defendant Garaufis, Judge Schack, Judge Sunshine and Judge Gerstein, have continued the same government-wide hostile environment that Plaintiff complained about in her prior lawsuit, Uzamere vs. Cuomo, et al, 11-cv-2831/11-2713-cv. Defendants continue to discriminate against Plaintiff by using Plaintiff's status of having a mental illness to falsely and to publicly hold out that judicial Defendants will not allow Plaintiff to file criminal and civil complaints against  Israeli Defendants  immigration attorneys Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Jack Gladstein because Plaintiff's complaints are unintelligible based on her status of having a mental illness.19, 20, 21. Defendants New York State, New York State Office of Mental Health, New York City, New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, Brookdale Hospital Medical Center and their employees intentionally misdiagnosed Plaintiff as psychotic and violent so as to deprive Plaintiff of her right to due process and equal protection under the law. Defendants accused Plaintiff of the commission of 18 USC §115, threatening a federal employee and discriminated against the Plaintiff by using her status of having a mental illness as an excuse to deprive her of the right to defend herself in criminal court against said criminal charges. Proof of Defendant New York State's and New York City's continued conspiracy to attack the Plaintiff based on her status of having a mental illness is at http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-11-05/local/17938323_1_supreme-court-judge-criminal-court;   and http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202435221996&slreturn=20120729115138; see Daily News article dated November 5, 2009 in which staff writer Scott Shifrel publicly defames Plaintiff as a “wacko.”

*****The courts of Defendant the United States of America recognize discrimination based on disability as an injury. The Supreme Court held in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999), that “[u]njustified isolation . . . is properly regarded as discrimination based on disability,” observing that “institutional placement of persons who can handle and benefit from community settings perpetuate unwarranted assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable of or unworthy of participating in community life.” 527 U.S. at 597, 600.

*****Plaintiff submits that Defendants' violation of the Title II, Americans With Disabilities Mandate to integrate Plaintiff violates the Rome Statutes regarding genocide; the Rome Statutes regarding crimes against humanity; the Rome Statutes regarding war crimes; the United Nation statutes with regard to United Nations human rights; Defendant United States of America's statutes regarding the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 USC §1983 and §1985, conspiracy against civil rights.  Furthermore, Plaintiff submits that Defendants' pretense with regard to their use of deception and use of armed force by withholding honest governmental services from the Plaintiff which she should have received from the Defendant United States of America's executive and judicial branches constitutes a Talmudic, Mossad-like act of war by deception, crimes against humanity and a violation of Plaintiff's human rights.

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Defendants Violation of the Sixth Amendment Mandate to Provide the Criminally Accused Plaintiff with a Criminal Attorney
and Witnesses is an Act of War by Deception, a Crime against Humanity and a Violation of Plaintiff's Human Rights

*****Plaintiff repeats and realleges the above paragraphs.

*****With regard to all natural Defendants, this claim is brought against them individually and in their official capacities.

*****Plaintiff is an African American citizen with a serious and persistent mental illness. Plaintiff has a mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.

*****Plaintiff is a descendant victim of the African Holocaust in which Africans, whose sale was caused by Israeli citizens, forever lost the ability to bear the correct paternal name of her African male forebears; and having married Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, now retains the right from now to eternity to have borne and to bear the name of Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, as does Tara A. Uzamere, the adult child of the marriage between Plaintiff and Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere and blood heir with the legal right to bear, and for her progeny to bear the correct Edo/Bini name and culture associated with Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere.

********That the Defendants plan to perpetrate the same inhumane enslavement against the Plaintiff that they have already perpetrated against her is borne out of the fact that, while conversation about Israeli citizens' experiences in Nazi Germany are openly discussed in the news, the Defendants' still withhold from the public their acts of war by deception in which they still engage in immigration fraud, identity theft/fraud; withholding of Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere's true identity to avoid paying spousal support, that Defendants still use the internet (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=cheryl+uzamere;   http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/woman-suing-husband-arrested-threatening-judge-starts-ripping-clothes-courtroom-article-1.416793; see Plaintiff's Youtube videos at this website) to publicly defame Plaintiff as a violent "wacko" to disparage Plaintiff's complaint against the Defendants and kidnapping Plaintiff and imprisoning her in jail and in mental institutions to give the impression that Plaintiff's complaint is without merit based solely on Plaintiff's having a mental disability; withholding from the public historical information regarding the African Holocaust in which Israeli citizens enslaved sub-Saharan Africans; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's trickery and enslavement of white Gentile women from Europe; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's enslavement by tyranny of Thai workers; withholding from the public information regarding Israel's suspected involvement in the bombing and controlled demolition of Buildings 1, 2 and 7 of the former World Trade Center; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of the U.S.S. Liberty and murder of thirty-four U.S. serviceman; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of U.S. civil and military installations during the Lavon Affair; that Defendants' withholding of said information are acts of war by deception to hide Israel's and Israeli citizens obedience to the Laws of Israel's mandate to engage in predation against Gentiles in a manner that violates both national and international law; and that the following Defendants actively  prevent these issues and Israel's and her citizens' war-like predation  of Gentiles from being discussed in by the Israeli-controlled media, namely: Gerald Levin, in His Official Capacity as Chief Executive Officer and Director of AOL Time Warner; Michael Eisner, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Walt Disney Company; Edgar Bronfman, head of Universal Studios; Sumner Redstone/Rothstein, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of CBS, Inc.; Dennis Dammerman, in His Official Capacity as Vice Chairman of General Electric; Peter Chernin, in His Official Capacity as President and Co-Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation Limited; Jeffrey L. Bewkes, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Office, Time Warner; Philippe Dauman, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Robert A. Iger, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Leslie Moonves, President and Chief Executive Officer, CBS, Inc.; NBC Universal, Brian L. Roberts, Chairman, NBC Universal; Stephen B. Burke, Chief Executive Officer, NBC Universal; Mortimer Zuckerman, President and Chief Executive Office, Daily News, LP; Michael Bloomberg, Bloomberg News; Scott Shifrel, former Staff Writer of the Daily News, LP; the Daily News, LP; Rupert Murdoch, New York Post, New York Post.

*****Defendants owed Plaintiff the duty, pursuant to the Sixth Amendment, to provide Plaintiff with defense counsel and witnesses in Plaintiff's favor, More importantly, Defendants owed Plaintiff the right to confront Defendants' adversarial witnesses in order to prevent Plaintiff from being prosecuted based on what turned out to be the falsified hearsay of the Defendants.

*****Defendants failed to meet the obligations as detailed in the Sixth Amendment. Defendants accused Plaintiff of the commission of 18 USC §115, threatening federal employees and then deprived Plaintiff of her Sixth Amendment rights to notice of accusation, witnesses and appointment of defense counsel even though Defendants' criminal accusation against the Plaintiff required them to file a criminal complaint pursuant to 18 USC §4, misprision of felony. Plaintiff strongly alleges that Defendant Garaufis, in orchestrating the conspiracy with Defendant U.S. Marshal Service, Defendant Denis P. McGowan of Defendant the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and defendants of the New York State and New York City mental health agencies, has opened the means by which, at any of the Defendants can accuse Plaintiff of any crime and prevent Plaintiff from speaking to an attorney. Plaintiff alleges that the only way that Plaintiff can avoid Defendants' intimidation, false criminal allegations and Defendants ' use of psychiatric inpatient hospitalization as a substitute for prison is by keeping silent and not filing papers against  Israeli immigration attorneys Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Jack Gladstein.

*****Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer injury because she is still under attack by all the Defendants, who, at the clandestine behest of Defendant Garaufis, have continued the same government-wide hostile environment that Plaintiff complained about in her prior lawsuit, Uzamere vs. Cuomo, et al, 11-cv-2831/11-2713-cv. Defendants continue to wrongfully accused Plaintiff of the commission of 18 USC §115, threatening federal employees; nor have the Defendants sent correspondence apologizing for wrongfully accusing Plaintiff of a crime she did not commit; however, Defendants continue to deprive Plaintiff of the right to be informed in writing of the nature and cause of the criminal accusation Defendants raised against Plaintiff, to allow Plaintiff to confront adversarial witnesses and witnesses in Plaintiff's defense, and to have the assistance of counsel. In Plaintiff's prior lawsuit Uzamere vs. Cuomo, et al Case Nos. 11-cv-2831/11-2713-cv, Plaintiff provided Defendant Garaufis with proof that Defendant New York State conspired with Defendant Daily News, by Defendant former staff writer Scott Shifrel to defame Plaintiff as a “wacko”, to hold Plaintiff out at a violent criminal for a crime or which Plaintiff was eventually declared not guilty – as she was declared not guilty when Defendant McCarthy – a federal attorney – falsely accused Plaintiff of committing 18 USC §111(a), simple assault – while Plaintiff was 260 miles away in Brooklyn, New York. Defendant Garaufis and the other Defendants – most of whom are Israeli citizens, have revisited the same act of fraud for the same reason – to enforce the Israeli religious doctrine Law of the Moser to prevent Plaintiff from filing complaints against  Israeli attorneys Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro and Jack Gladstein, who hid and continue to hide their aggravated identity theft on behalf of their client, Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, thereby depriving Plaintiff and her daughter Tara of the right to bear Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere's name.

*****The courts of Defendant United States of America recognizes a poor defendant in a criminal case that does not have counsel as an injury. proceeding In Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938), the Supreme Court ruled that in all federal cases, counsel would have to be appointed for defendants who were too poor to hire their own.

*****The courts of Defendant the United States of America recognize that a criminal defendant not having been given a notice of accusation an injury. Individuals who have been accused of a serious federal offense have the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. The Supreme Court held in United States v. Carll, 105 U.S. 611 (1881) that “in an indictment ... it is not sufficient to set forth the offense in the words of the statute, unless those words of themselves fully, directly, and expressly, without any uncertainty or ambiguity, set forth all the elements necessary to constitute the offense intended to be punished.” In Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), the Supreme Court increased the scope of the Confrontation Clause by ruling that “testimonial” out-of-court statements are inadmissible if the accused did not have the opportunity to cross-examine that accuser and that accuser is unavailable at trial.

*****Plaintiff submits that Defendants' violation of the Sixth Amendment's mandate to provide the accused Plaintiff with witnesses, and with an attorney for her defense is an injury that violates the Rome Statutes regarding genocide; the Rome Statutes regarding crimes against humanity; the Rome Statutes regarding war crimes; the United Nation statutes with regard to United Nations human rights; Defendant United States of America's statutes regarding the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 USC §1983 and §1985, conspiracy against civil rights.  Furthermore, Plaintiff submits that Defendants' pretense with regard to their use of deception and use of armed force by withholding honest governmental services from the Plaintiff which she should have received from the Defendant United States of America's executive and judicial branches constitutes a Talmudic, Mossad-like act of war by deception, crimes against humanity and a violation of Plaintiff's human rights.

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Defendants' Violation of Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI, §601 Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted
Programs is Act of War by Deception Designed to Enslave Plaintiff and is a Crime Against Humanity

*****Plaintiff repeats and realleges the above paragraphs.

*****With regard to all natural Defendants, this claim is brought against them individually and in their official capacities.

*****Plaintiff is an African American citizen with a serious and persistent mental illness. Plaintiff has a mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.

*****Plaintiff is a descendant victim of the African Holocaust in which Africans, whose sale was caused by Israeli citizens, forever lost the ability to bear the correct paternal name of her African male forebears; and having married Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, now retains the right from now to eternity to have borne and to bear the name of Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, as does Tara A. Uzamere, the adult child of the marriage between Plaintiff and Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere and blood heir with the legal right to bear, and for her progeny to bear the correct Edo/Bini name and culture associated with Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere.

********That the Defendants plan to perpetrate the same inhumane enslavement against the Plaintiff that they have already perpetrated against her is borne out of the fact that, while conversation about Israeli citizens' experiences in Nazi Germany are openly discussed in the news, the Defendants' still withhold from the public their acts of war by deception in which they still engage in immigration fraud, identity theft/fraud; withholding of Defendant Ehigie Edobor Uzamere's true identity to avoid paying spousal support, that Defendants still use the internet (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=cheryl+uzamere; http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/woman-suing-husband-arrested-threatening-judge-starts-ripping-clothes-courtroom-article-1.416793;  see Plaintiff's Youtube videos at this website) to publicly defame Plaintiff as a violent "wacko" to disparage Plaintiff's complaint against the Defendants and kidnapping Plaintiff and imprisoning her in jail and in mental institutions to give the impression that Plaintiff's complaint is without merit based solely on Plaintiff's having a mental disability; withholding from the public historical information regarding the African Holocaust in which Israeli citizens enslaved sub-Saharan Africans; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's trickery and enslavement of white Gentile women from Europe; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's enslavement by tyranny of Thai workers; withholding from the public information regarding Israel's suspected involvement in the bombing and controlled demolition of Buildings 1, 2 and 7 of the former World Trade Center; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of the U.S.S. Liberty and murder of thirty-four U.S. serviceman; withholding from the public historical information regarding Israel's bombing of U.S. civil and military installations during the Lavon Affair; that Defendants' withholding of said information are acts of war by deception to hide Israel's and Israeli citizens obedience to the Laws of Israel's mandate to engage in predation against Gentiles in a manner that violates both national and international law; and that the following Defendants actively  prevent these issues and Israel's and her citizens' war-like predation  of Gentiles from being discussed in by the Israeli-controlled media, namely: Gerald Levin, in His Official Capacity as Chief Executive Officer and Director of AOL Time Warner; Michael Eisner, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Walt Disney Company; Edgar Bronfman, head of Universal Studios; Sumner Redstone/Rothstein, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of CBS, Inc.; Dennis Dammerman, in His Official Capacity as Vice Chairman of General Electric; Peter Chernin, in His Official Capacity as President and Co-Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation Limited; Jeffrey L. Bewkes, in His Official Capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Office, Time Warner; Philippe Dauman, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Robert A. Iger, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company; Leslie Moonves, President and Chief Executive Officer, CBS, Inc.; NBC Universal, Brian L. Roberts, Chairman, NBC Universal; Stephen B. Burke, Chief Executive Officer, NBC Universal; Mortimer Zuckerman, President and Chief Executive Office, Daily News, LP; Michael Bloomberg, Bloomberg News; Scott Shifrel, former Staff Writer of the Daily News, LP; the Daily News, LP; Rupert Murdoch, New York Post, New York Post.

*****Defendants owed Plaintiff the duty, pursuant to the Civil Act of 1964, §601, to ensure that no person in the United States, including the Plaintiff, shall be excluded from participation in or otherwise discriminated against on the ground of race, color, or national origin under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

*****Plaintiff submits to this Court that the federal courts are paid for with money from the U.S. Department of Justice and other federal agencies.

*****Defendants failed to meet the obligations as detailed in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Defendants discriminated and continue to discriminate against Plaintiff based on the Talmudic view of Gentiles in general, and blacks in particular. Plaintiff's ethnicity as a gentile/African-American/schvartze. See documentation regarding the Curse of Dark Skin and Law of the Moser attached as Exhibit Q. In addition, while refusing to accept from the Plaintiff irrefutable proof of Israeli citizens Allen E. Kaye's, Harvey Shapiro's, Jack Gladstein's, Mortimer Zuckerman's and Scott Shifrel's commission of misprision of felony, fraud, identity theft, aggravated identity theft, racketeering, obstruction of justice and extortion/blackmail, Defendant Barack H. Obama, Andrew Weissman, General Counsel for Defendant Federal Bureau of Investigation, James X. Dempsey, Defendant, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; Elisebeth Collins Cook, Defendant, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; David Medine, Chairman, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; Rachel L. Brand, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; and Patricia M. Wald, Defendant, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; Keith B. Alexander, General, National Security Agency; Rajesh De, General Counsel, National Security Agency; Eric H. Holder; U.S. Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice; Charles Schumer, Senate Judiciary Committee; Dianne Feinstein, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Chairperson; Senator Saxby Chambliss, Patrick Leahy, Senator Judiciary Chairman, Hon. Goodlatte, Chairman, U.S. House Judiciary Chairman, Mike Rogers, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, U.S. Marshals Service Director Charles Dunne, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Protection Service, Threat Assessment Branch employee Denis P. McGowan, FBI Assistant Director in Charge, George Venizelos and Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis engaged in overseeing a criminal, unconstitutional system of government that specifically discriminated against the law-abiding, psychiatric-treatment-compliant, mentally disabled African American Plaintiff by allowing Defendant Judge Garaufis and other Israeli citizens to fraudulently use the PATRIOT Act to spy on non-criminal, constitutionally-protected telephone calls regarding Plaintiff's HIPAA-protected mental health and other HIPAA-protected issues; that said telephone calls were spied on at the behest of Defendant Judge Garaufis and other Israeli citizens, not based on the belief that the Plaintiff had violated the law, but to enslave the Plaintiff by extorting/blackmailing her; by using Plaintiff's confidential, non-content information regarding Plaintiff's telephone calls to her outpatient psychiatric care provider that maybe embarrassing or shameful if publicly disseminated; to fraudulently accuse the Plaintiff of the commission of a crime and to associate the fraudulent criminal allegation with Plaintiff's confidential non-content information; to frighten the Plaintiff by publicizing embarrassing or shameful information associated with Plaintiff's psychiatric non-content information for the sole purpose of forcing the Plaintiff not to petition the government for a redress of grievances with regard to Plaintiff's First Amendment right to report the activities of lawbreaking Israeli citizens to the secular/Gentile law enforcement authorities; that those Israeli citizens' violation of Plaintiff's and other Gentiles' right to privacy is based on the Talmudic doctrine for Israeli citizens to enslave Gentiles, with an emphasis on the enslavement of people who are dark-skinned or considered by Israeli citizens to be Africans, Cushites, Hamites and Canaanites. See Exhibit Q. In the meantime, Defendants Allen E. Kaye, Harvey Shapiro, Jack Gladstein, Mortimer Zuckerman and Scott Shifrel, who engaged in illegally obtaining and publicly disseminating information regarding the crime (for which Plaintiff was falsely accused, for which Defendants never had any intention of confronting Plaintiff in any court of laws and that was eventually dismissed), Plaintiff's mental illness and her marriage and who are still engaging in misprision of felony, fraud, identity theft, aggravated identity theft, racketeering, obstruction of justice and extortion/blackmail have never been investigated for the continued commission of their crimes.

*****Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer injury because she is still under attack by all the Defendants, who, at the clandestine behest of Defendant Garaufis, have continued the same government-wide hostile environment that Plaintiff complained about in her prior lawsuit, Uzamere vs. Cuomo, et al, 11-cv-2831/11-2713-cv. Defendants continue to deprive Plaintiff of her civil rights because Plaintiff is both Gentile and African American.

*****The courts of Defendant the United States of America recognize

          I, Cheryl D. Uzamere, certify that I have read the above Verified Complaint and it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I certify that I have provided tangible, irrefutable proof of my allegations before this Court; that I researched both facts and relevant law to the best of my ability to ensure accuracy so that my Verified Complaint is presented to this Court in good faith. I certify before this Court that I do not present this Verified Complaint to embarrass, annoy or defame the Defendants.


          I certify the foregoing pursuant to the laws for perjury.

CHERYL D. UZAMERE
APPEARING PRO SE

 Cheryl's Signature

______________________
Cheryl D. Uzamere
1209 Loring Avenue,
Apt. 6B
Brooklyn, NY 11208
Tel.: (718) 235-6836
Fax: (718) 235-2408
E-mail: cuzamere@netzero.net

 






Print

 

███████████████████████████████████████████████

Page 5 of 7


▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀


███████████████████████████████████████████████

What effect did the events have on the life of the victim and others around him/her?
Describe physical or mental injury, emotional suffering, harm to reputation, economic loss and/or damage to property or any other kind of harm

*****The plaintiff continues to suffer Judaic/Talmud-oriented defamation of the plaintiff, and being blacklisted from federally-funded, not-for-profit mental health facilities that are controlled by Israeli citizens. Social stagnation based on hatred from members of Israeli community; continued inability to file criminal complaints against Israeli lawbreakers because of the Law of the Moser Doctrine; publicly identified as anti-Semite (which, in and of itself does not bother me because I am), but the publicity, along with my inability to prove that the term “anti-Semitism” is related, not to my feelings, but to the Israeli citizens projecting their hatred of Gentiles onto the Plaintiff.

TheSergeant001: (8:58 AM) Damn, njide chukwumezie You're an ugly Son of A bitch! I down Loaded your picture, will posted on the wall of my barn to scare off the rats! Ha Ha Ha LMAO
TheSergeant001: (8:59 AM) Ha Ha Ha I took a closer look at your picture, Damn you are an ugly bitch!
My lawsuit is listed here:
http://www.thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.net/verified_complaint_to_intl_criminal_court_and_united_nations.html.

Website:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpuRplCpX0U.

My petition is listed here: https://www.change.org/p/int-l-criminal-court-u-n-ofc-high-comm-for-human-rights-israel-usa-nigeria-petition-to-end-judaism-s-encroachment-in-u-s-government.

Duke Lewis:  You better remove that igbo name from your name. fuck you and your child. you are a bad woman. Nigeria is not America. there is no child support. if you want a man to support your child you be good to him. period. you can fuck around and think a man will be around you and your child.that shit is white man's law. No man forsakes a good woman. so if you are good to him. you would have have him.

Bernard Sussman: This woman is claiming to have been married, then abandoned, by an important Nigerian politician. She has filed at least ten court cases in various places based on this assertion - and then arguing that there is a Israeli conspiracy controlling all the courts in favor of that Nigerian politician. But it turns out that her ex-husband has come forward and made very clear that he is the (poor) cousin of the politician and the politician has nothing to do with their marriage.
Uzamere v. Daily News LLP(NY Cnty Supm Ct, Nov. 10, 2011) 34 Misc.3d 1203(A), 2011 NY Slip Op. 52421(U), 946 NYS2d 69(t), http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13879595403336403090

Website:  http://www.thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.net/eugene_third_attorney.html.

Pointblanknews.com further quoted the younger Uzamere thus: 'Most of her commentaries are misguided, and I won’t give credence to them. She is basically crazy. I won’t give credence to insanity. She is certifiably insane. That is all I have to say. She is crazy."
But what Eugene failed to disclose to pointblanknews.com included whether his elder brother and the lady in question were ever married; if the distinguished senator abandoned his wife and daughter as Cheryl claims, and if indeed he has been paying child support.
There are many instances of gang-stalking and cyberstalking. Use search term “Cheryl D. Uzamere.
Website:  http://www.google.com/#q=cheryl+uzamere

"Wacko goes into fit in court starts screaming, ripping off clothes Cheryl Uzamere, 50, known around courthouse circles for her anti-Semitic screeds, was declared mentally unfit and taken to Bellevue Hospital for observation”; and, that “she's a smart person and she really know how to use the system, said one courthouse source.she comes in here and files all these papers and threatens people. Uzamere was in a Criminal Court holding cell when she started stripping and screaming about her “senator” husband in Nigeria loud enough to be heard in the courtroom. The senator, however, is a cousin of her actual ex-husband, Godwin Uzamere, according to an affidavit he filed in Supreme Court. . .”; and that “the senator, however, is a cousin of her actual ex-husband, Godwin Uzamere, according to affidavit filed in Supreme Court”; and “Her obsession with his destruction has taken her mental ailment to a new level which should not be encouraged, Godwin Uzamere said. . .”
Website: http://nypost.com/2009/11/11/clouded-woman-threaten-judge-sunshine/

Clouded Woman Threatens Judge Sunshine
A woman in a muddled divorce case against a Nigerian senator was arrested and sent to psychiatric  evaluation after she threatened the life of the Brooklyn Supreme Court Judge overseeing divorce proceedings.Officials said that Cheryl Uzamere allegedly called the Inspector General’s office of New York County and threatened to “put on a disguise and shoot Judge Jeffrey Sunshine in the head” according to the New York Law Journal, which first broke the story.Uzamere, who has detailed her litigation woes on her website http://www.thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.com/,  is also accused of leaving 10 threatening voice mails and sending three frightening faxes to Judge Sunshine’s chambers, officials said.Uzamere surrendered to authorities on November 3.On her website, she accuses Judge Sunshine of “adjourning divorce action nine times for no-show defendant; denied child support; accepted fraudulent, unauthenticated foreign counter-affidavits and rendering falsified decisions in favor of no-show defendant and no-show defendant’s immigration attorneys.”There are five other judges listed with Sunshine on the “Hall of Shame” section of Uzamere’s website. All of her comments stem from her bitter divorce and custody battle with Nigerian Senator Ehigie Edobor Uzamere, who reportedly didn’t come back to the U.S. to attend any of the court proceedings.
Website:  http://workitoutmom.blogspot.com/2011/06/woman-sues-federal-government-for-not.html

Woman Sues Federal Government For NOT Deporting her Husband

"Mrs. Uzamere should've read the fine print. In Uzamere v. Bush, et al., Cheryl D. Uzamere alleged that her "American" husband Ehigie Edobor a.k.a. "Goodwin" Uzamere was a ringleader in a green card scam marriage. After filing her complaint with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Office in 1980 Mrs. Uzamere pursued her allegations in the Federal Court system.

She claims that her husband, Mr. Uzamere tricked her into signing his immigration paperwork and ultimately abandoned her and their daughter. She claims that she had no idea his name was fictitious, that he was not a United States citizen and that he had obtained entrance into the United States illegally. She claims that Mr. Uzamere, a Nigerian Senator, and his immigration attorneys created this scheme to outsmart someone that had no knowledge of the law or his true origin.

I was beginning to feel sorry for the woman, but then the case took a unusual turn:The funny part of this case is that in addition to suing the husband and his attorneys she is also going after New York State (yes, the entire state), New York State Grievance Committee for the 2nd and 11th Departments, City of New York (yes, the entire city), New York City Police Department, New York City Human Resources Administration / Department of Social Services, Google Corporation (yes, the entire Google) and YouTube Corporation (same here), Condoleeza Rice(what did she do?), Michael Chertoff, Julie Myers, The United States Of America (ok, wow), United States Department of State, United States Department of Homeland Security, United States Department of Citizenship and Immigration Services, United States Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Why? Because she thinks that they should have known that he was lying. She believes that they should have discovered the fraud and uncovered the truth. See the remainder of the complaint here.

There is no surprise that Mrs. Uzamere's complaint was dismissed for not stating a claim as to the Federal government defendants and for having a frivolous cause. But it sure was entertaining!"

Website:  http://www.thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.net/fegs_conspiracy.html.  

Private psychiatric facilities are owned by Israeli citizens; Plaintiff blacklisted from using them based on being anti-Semitic.

Statement from Diagnostic Report: “Client remains incarcerated at this time and given client's history of anti-Semitic remarks treatment at a FEGS facility is inappropriate for her.”

Website:  http://www.thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.net/uzamere_v_usa.html

Affidavit of Child of the Marriage Tara A. Uzamere, Holding Senator Ehigie Edobor Uzamere to Be Her Father.

*****I, Tara A. Uzamere, being duly sworn, depose and say that: I am the daughter of the Plaintiff and the Defendant in the above entitled action. I make this Affidavit based on the following facts:
*****That the Plaintiff has always told me that Defendant is my father since I was a child.That I met the Defendant for the first time at JFK Airport in Jamaica, New York around the year 2004 to the best of my recollection.
*****That I took a photograph of the Defendant during the aforesaid visit; photograph taken at JFK Airport is hereby attached as Exhibit A.
*****That on the day that I first met the Defendant at JFK Airport, I called my friend Eusi Patterson on the cell phone that I used to take a photograph of the Defendant.
*****That on the aforesaid day the Defendant openly and notoriously introduced himself to Eusi as my father.
*****That while I was a resident in Freeport, New York, I experienced a car accident, and that George Uzamere and the Defendant openly and notoriously sent checks to pay the rest of my car note to Drive Financial, a financing company based in Dallas, Texas.
Website: http://www.thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.net/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/davisconversation.mp3

Racist federal district court-fomented audio conversation in which Ms. Davis falsely accused Plaintiff of making threats to Medicaid (actually Center for Medicare and Medicaid) that Plaintiff never made.
Website:  http://www.thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.net/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/FBIconversation.mp3

Appellate brief; Audio conversation in which plaintiff was blackmailed by FBI agent with mental health hospitaliztion
Website:  http://www.thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.net/find_unbiased_court.html

Letter from U. S.  Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Our records show that you placed calls to 1-800-MEDICARE1-800-MEDICARE FREE on the dates and times listed below (all times Central). We can confirm that none of these calls contained threatening comments: June 14,2010, 10:38 AM; June 1,2011, 7:39 AM; July 8, 2011, 12:56 PM; May 18, 2012, 11:17 AM, 1:29 PM, 3:51 PM; July 2, 2012, 10:47 AM; July 10, 2012, 2:24 PM; July 17, 2012, 1:09 PM; July 18, 2012, 11:14 AM; July 19, 2012, 5:02 PM; July 23, 2012, 2:51 PM; July 24, 2012, 5:21 PM, 5:43 PM, 5:47 PM, 6:05 PM, 9:56 PM; July 26, 2012, 9:39 PM; July 27, 2012, 5:48 PM; September 9, 2012, 4:39 PM; October 18, 2012, 2:26 PM; November 16, 2012 7:38 PM; November 26, 2012, 1:46 PM; December 12, 2012, 11:13 AM; December 13, 2012, 4:29 AM, 5:05 PM, 5:09 PM.
Website:  http://www.thecrimesofsenatoruzamere.net/find_unbiased_court.html

Federal District Judge Nicholas Garaufis and USDHS Gentile Servant Denis McGowan Spied on Plaintiff’ Phone to Extract Non-Content Telephone Information and Created a False Story Around Plaintiff’s Non-Content Information
On or around August 18, 2011, Defendant New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation's East New York Diagnostic and Treatment Center's Assertive Community Treatment Team received correspondence from U.S. Department of Homeland Security on its original letterhead bearing the name “Denis P. McGowan, Chief, Threat Management Branch.” The letter stated:
On July 06, 2011, Federal Protective Service (FPS) was notified of a telephonic threat made by CHERYL UZAMERE to the Centers for Medicare & Medi-caid call center. The threat consisted of HER stating: since SHE did not get the job, SHE was going to “COME DOWN THERE AND KILL EVERYBODY. Since FPS has investigated UZAMERE multiple times for similar behavior, we are well aware of HER mental health history. Based on that information, a referral was made to LifeNet for mental health intervention on July 07 2011. Subsequently, UZAMERE's Intensive Case Manager (ICM) Bridgett Davis of the New York State Office of Mental Health has advised that UZAMERE's treatment has been transferred to the Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) program. We were informed that CHERYL D. UZAMERE is being treated as a patient by your program and we would like to keep you abreast of this situation as it evolves. We also request that we be notified as HER status changes in particular any change from in-patient to out-patient treatment and in the case of the latter any refusal of treatment. In addition, please notify FPS of any relapses or deterioration of HER condition that may pose a risk to life or property.”

*****Plaintiff alleges that the level of oppression by members of the Israeli community is so bad that her ability to go back to work, to make money, to develop a social reputation have all been ruined because of the Israeli community's determination enforce Law of the Moser to stop plaintiff from filing complaints against lawbreaking Israeli citizens.


 

Joint Participation/Reparation Form for Individuals
 

You'll need Skype CreditFree via Skype

Print

 

██████████████████████████████████████████████████

Page 6 of 7

▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀


███████████████████████████████████████████████████

+

35. If reparations are ordered, who does the victim want the benefit to go to? Tick more than one box, if necessary

 

___The victim

___The victim's family

___The victim's community (African American/Afro-Caribbean, native African)

     ___Other: See Question 34.

 

PART F........................................................................................................T

LEGAL REPRESENTATION

 

36. Does the victim have a lawyer?


___YES      X  NO



37. If yes, please provide the lawyer's contact details:

 

Name:_____________________________________________________

 

Address:_____________________________________________________

 

E-mail:_________________ Telephone number(s)____________________

 

38. If the victim does not have a lawyer, would the victim like assistance from

the ICC to find a lawyer?

 

   X  YES ___NO

 

39. Until the victim does not have a lawyer would he/she like to be

represented by the Court's lawyers for victims(the Office of Public

Counsel for Victims)?

 

   X  YES ___NO

 

PART G.........................................................................................................

 

COMMUNICATION OF IDENTITY

 

Please note that the present application will be given to the defence (the accused person and his/her lawyers) and to the ICC Prosecutor. When this happens, the Judges may decide not to reveal the identity of the victim.

 

40. Would the victim have any reason to be concerned about his or her security, well-being,

dignity or privacy or that of any other person if his or her identity were to be revealed to the defence or the ICC Prosecutor?

 

   X  YES ___NO

 

If yes, what are the reasons:


Below are the New York State Court laws regarding confidentiality of litigants' case information:

See Daily News Article below:

Conduct for Nonjudicial Employees

 

Conduct for Judges

New York Codes, Rules and Regulations
Title 22. Judiciary

Part 50. Rules Governing Conduct of Nonjudicial Court Employees

Court employees shall respect and comply with the law.

Court employees shall not disclose any confidential information received in the course of their official duties, except as required in the performance of such duties, nor use such information for personal gain or advantage.

New York Codes, Rules and Regulations

Title 22. Judiciary

Part 100.3 Judicial Conduct

A judge shall not make any public comment about a pending or impending proceeding in any court within the United States or its territories. The judge shall require similar abstention on the part of court personnel subject to the judge's direction and control.

 

A judge shall not disclose or use, for any purpose unrelated to judicial duties, nonpublic information acquired in a judicial capacity.

Neither divorces nor divorce records are open to public inspection. Mental health records are also not open for public inspection. Criminal cases and records are handled with some degree of privacy. Information regarding my divorce, my ex-husband identity, my mental health status, my criminal case, while all false, should never have been put in the newspaper, but it was. It is part of a Jew's modus operandi to publicly defame an enemy without giving the enemy his/her due process right to a unbiased hearing in court. The Jewish community’s use of public character assassination is engrained. Plaintiff wrote about this issue seven years ago at her website http://www.africandiasporalenterprises.net.

 

 

Joint Participation/Reparation Form

36. In orderto represent victims before the ICC, a lawyer must be on the ICC list of counsel. Lawyers who are not on the list may apply for inclusion.

 

39. The OPCV is an independent office within the Court

which looks after the legal interests of victims and which represents victims free of charge.

 

40. The victim may have concerns not only about physical danger but also about harm to his or her psychological well-being, reputation, privacy and/or dignity or those of his or her family.

The identity of the victim will not be revealed to the public while the application is being considered. If the application is accepted, the victim may be asked again about disclosure of information.

Print

 

██████████████████████████████████████████████

Page 7 of 7


 
▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀


██████████████████████████████████████████████