Question on bribery to deny records

[dumbluck1232]

Jurisdiction

Wisconsin

Hello, a member of the Kennedy family, who is now a lawyer funnily enough, committed perjury against me in a criminal court. As I tried to get the transcript of the testimony, she has bribed the clerk of courts to deny me access to the records. I have email proof of this from the clerk of courts. These people have violated numerous criminal and civil laws, and have essentially created rackets in my life for 5 years to prevent me from hiring a lawyer. I have a case against them worth millions, and I just need help spreading the word that this has happened, or finding a lawyer to take my case on contingency. Does anyone have any advice as to what I should do? I will attach the proof of testimony, and one of the many emails I have received from the clerk of courts. Notice how the commissioner mentioned has now retired. Also there is zero world in which a judge could give a ruling on a case and not be present for a probable cause hearing, not to mention the fact that all testimony is recorded for the simple fact of deterring perjury. Thank you

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Neither of your documents proves anything other than you made a request and that the information you requested is not available.

If that is what you are taking to lawyers, especially those you want to work on contingency I can see why you can't find one.

 

[Zigner]

Have you contacted the court reporter to arrange to pay for and receive a copy of the transcript(s)?

 

[army judge]

Hello, a member of the Kennedy family, who is now a lawyer funnily enough, committed perjury against me in a criminal court. As I tried to get the transcript of the testimony, she has bribed the clerk of courts to deny me access to the records. I have email proof of this from the clerk of courts. These people have violated numerous criminal and civil laws, and have essentially created rackets in my life for 5 years to prevent me from hiring a lawyer. I have a case against them worth millions, and I just need help spreading the word that this has happened, or finding a lawyer to take my case on contingency. Does anyone have any advice as to what I should do? I will attach the proof of testimony, and one of the many emails I have received from the clerk of courts. Notice how the commissioner mentioned has now retired. Also there is zero world in which a judge could give a ruling on a case and not be present for a probable cause hearing, not to mention the fact that all testimony is recorded for the simple fact of deterring perjury. Thank you

Danger Will Robinson, Danger!!!!

Accusing anyone of committing a crime if the accusation is false can lead to the accuser being sued for libel.

 

[Zigner]

Danger Will Robinson, Danger!!!!

Accusing anyone of committing a crime if the accusation is false can lead to the accuser being sued for libel.

Very true - and the request that the OP submitted wouldn't fall under the exception of being privileged.

 

[zddoodah]

a [person] committed perjury against me in a criminal court. As I tried to get the transcript of the testimony, she has bribed the clerk of courts to deny me access to the records. I have email proof of this from the clerk of courts.

No you don't. The email you attached states that the minutes for the 11/15/16 probable cause hearing "do not reflect that either (1) a Court Reporter was present or (2) that the matter was in any manner recorded." The same email indicates that the 11/22/16 final hearing was reported, provides the name of the court reporter, an indicates that you can contact the reporter to get a transcript.

The other document is nothing more than a request for records that you completed.

How do you figure that is "proof" of anything?

I just need help spreading the word that this has happened, or finding a lawyer to take my case on contingency. Does anyone have any advice as to what I should do?

I'm not sure why you think "spreading the word" will be of any value to you. However, in that regard, I suggest that your cause will not be served by claiming things that are obviously not true. As far as finding a lawyer, there's a "Find a Lawyer" link at the bottom of every page at this site.

all testimony is recorded

Wrong.

 

[dumbluck1232]

Danger Will Robinson, Danger!!!!

Accusing anyone of committing a crime if the accusation is false can lead to the accuser being sued for libel.

I would love nothing more than this person taking me to court.

 

[dumbluck1232]

No you don't. The email you attached states that the minutes for the 11/15/16 probable cause hearing "do not reflect that either (1) a Court Reporter was present or (2) that the matter was in any manner recorded." The same email indicates that the 11/22/16 final hearing was reported, provides the name of the court reporter, an indicates that you can contact the reporter to get a transcript.

The other document is nothing more than a request for records that you completed.

How do you figure that is "proof" of anything?



I'm not sure why you think "spreading the word" will be of any value to you. However, in that regard, I suggest that your cause will not be served by claiming things that are obviously not true. As far as finding a lawyer, there's a "Find a Lawyer" link at the bottom of every page at this site.



Wrong.

Buddy no judge would rule on a case in which they were not present to hear evidence given. It would violate my rights. You have cherry picked an excerpt to try and state a claim that is false. Secondly please feel free to provide examples of when witness testimony is not recorded, and apply it to a criminal proceeding. You seem to be quite popular on this forum, but seem shaky in legal proceedings IRL.

 

[zddoodah]

You have cherry picked an excerpt to try and state a claim that is false.

No I didn't (and I'm not your "buddy"). I simply refuted your allegation that the email chain you attached proved that someone bribed the clerk.

please feel free to provide examples of when witness testimony is not recorded, and apply it to a criminal proceeding.

If there's no court reporter and no audio recording, then there's no record. Are you suggesting that the clerk lied to you about there being no reporter and no other recording at the 11/15/16 hearing? I obviously wasn't there and have no reason to disbelieve what the clerk told you.

In any event, I replied to the one and only question you asked. To the extent you're requesting that folks here provide you with "help spreading the word that this has happened," that's not gonna happen.

You seem to be quite popular on this forum, but seem shaky and legal proceedings IRL.

And how exactly is it that you have purportedly acquired information about me and "legal proceedings IRL"?

 

[dumbluck1232]

No I didn't (and I'm not your "buddy"). I simply refuted your allegation that the email chain you attached proved that someone bribed the clerk.



If there's no court reporter and no audio recording, then there's no record. Are you suggesting that the clerk lied to you about there being no reporter and no other recording at the 11/15/16 hearing? I obviously wasn't there and have no reason to disbelieve what the clerk told you.

In any event, I replied to the one and only question you asked. To the extent you're requesting that folks here provide you with "help spreading the word that this has happened," that's not gonna happen.



And how exactly is it that you have purportedly acquired information about me and "legal proceedings IRL"?

Yes that is exactly what I am stating. I was there and there was both a court reporter present, and since the testimony was given by phone it was recorded. First of all do you not find disturbing that these people never mention her by name. Hence the need to post the request. I could have said you testified, there would be no way no way of knowing who actually did. Also just about everyone involved with this case has retired or longer works there. Why do you think that is? It is the equivalent of moving the body. Why keep everything secretive if it was above board? Secondly since if you are a lawyer you would have had to have taken the LSAT. So here is a CR logic test. A person who commits perjury, is the same type of person who bribes a court official to deny me access to the records. In for a penny in for a pound. Also could you actually please provide some evidence whatsoever to your claim that witness statement aren't recorded. I have looked into the matter and have not come across one instance where that is not the case.

EDIT: from the WI statutes:
970.03 Preliminary examination
(5) All witnesses shall be sworn and their testimony reported by a phonographic reporter. The defendant may cross-examine witnesses against the defendant, and may call witnesses on the defendant's own behalf who then are subject to cross-examination.

 

[zddoodah]

Yes that is exactly what I am stating.

Ok. Go ahead and prove it. I have no stake in your situation, so being argumentative with me will get you nowhere.

could you actually please provide some evidence whatsoever to your claim that witness statement aren't recorded.

I've been in more hearings that weren't reported than were. You can believe that or not. I am but an anonymous stranger on the internet.

 

[dumbluck1232]

Ok. Go ahead and prove it. I have no stake in your situation, so being argumentative with me will get you nowhere.



I've been in more hearings that weren't reported than were. You can believe that or not. I am but an anonymous stranger on the internet.

I have literally given you a direct Wisconsin statute that refutes your claim, literally proving it. Your response is I have been in hearing that weren't recorded. I am sorry but you have wasted your time and my time. I don't trust you and unlike Nora Conneely, there is no punishment if you are lying. I wish you the best going forward, but please stop wasting both of our times by spewing nonsense on my post.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I have literally given you a direct Wisconsin statute that refutes your claim, literally proving it.

All that paragraph of 970.03 shows is that in preliminary examination for a felony that the law states it is supposed "All witnesses shall be sworn and their testimony reported by a phonographic reporter."

Two problems.
1. You have shown nothing that shows the hearing in question was governed by the statute.
2. Even if it is it doesn't prove that the hearing was reported, only that it was supposed to be.

Wisconsin Legislature: 970.03
970.03 Preliminary examination.
(1) A preliminary examination is a hearing before a court for the purpose of determining if there is probable cause to believe a felony has been committed by the defendant. A preliminary examination may be held in conjunction with a bail revocation hearing under s. 969.08 (5) (b), but separate findings shall be made by the judge relating to the preliminary examination and to the bail revocation.
(2) The preliminary examination shall be commenced within 20 days after the initial appearance of the defendant if the defendant has been released from custody or within 10 days if the defendant is in custody and bail has been fixed in excess of $500. On stipulation of the parties or on motion and for cause, the court may extend such time.
(3) A plea shall not be accepted in any case in which a preliminary examination is required until the defendant has been bound over following preliminary examination or waiver thereof.
(4)
(a) If the defendant is accused of a crime under s. 940.225, 948.02, 948.025, 948.05, 948.051, 948.06, 948.085, or 948.095, or under s. 940.302 (2), if the court finds that the crime was sexually motivated, as defined in s. 980.01 (5), the court may exclude from the hearing all persons who are not officers of the court, members of the complainant's or defendant's families or others considered by the court to be supportive of the complainant or defendant, the service representative, as defined in s. 895.45 (1) (c), or other persons required to attend, if the court finds that the state or the defendant has established a compelling interest that would likely be prejudiced if the persons were not excluded. The court may consider as a compelling interest, among others, the need to protect a complainant from undue embarrassment and emotional trauma.
(b) In making its order under this subsection, the court shall set forth specific findings sufficient to support the closure order. In making these findings, the court shall consider, and give substantial weight to, the desires, if any, of the complainant. Additional factors that the court may consider in making these findings include, but are not limited to, the complainant's age, psychological maturity and understanding; the nature of the crime; and the desires of the complainant's family.
(c) The court shall make its closure order under this subsection no broader than is necessary to protect the compelling interest under par. (a) and shall consider any reasonable alternatives to full closure of the entire hearing.
(5) All witnesses shall be sworn and their testimony reported by a phonographic reporter. The defendant may cross-examine witnesses against the defendant, and may call witnesses on the defendant's own behalf who then are subject to cross-examination.
(6) During the preliminary examination, the court may exclude witnesses until they are called to testify, may direct that persons who are expected to be called as witnesses be kept separate until called and may prevent them from communicating with one another until they have been examined.
(7) If the court finds probable cause to believe that a felony has been committed by the defendant, it shall bind the defendant over for trial.
(8) If the court finds that it is probable that only a misdemeanor has been committed by the defendant, it shall amend the complaint to conform to the evidence. The action shall then proceed as though it had originated as a misdemeanor action.
(9) If the court does not find probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed by the defendant, it shall order the defendant discharged forthwith.
(10) In multiple count complaints, the court shall order dismissed any count for which it finds there is no probable cause. The facts arising out of any count ordered dismissed shall not be the basis for a count in any information filed pursuant to ch. 971. Section 970.04 shall apply to any dismissed count.
(SNIPPED FOR SIZE).

 

[Zigner]

Time to find and pay for an attorney. Good day.

 

[zddoodah]

I have literally given you a direct Wisconsin statute that refutes your claim, literally proving it.

The statute you cited and quoted doesn't refute anything I have written. First of all, just because a law says something must happen doesn't mean that law gets followed every time. By your reasoning, a law that says, "thou shalt not commit murder," would be absolute proof that no one is ever murdered. Section, none of my personal experiences have anything to do with Wisconsin. I've never once set foot in Wisconsin. Third, I have no knowledge one way or the other whether your hearing was recorded. I have your claim that it was and the claim of a court clerk that it wasn't. I have no ability to resolve that conflict; nor do I have any interest in doing so. All I have ever told you is that what the clerk is claiming is entirely possible.

you have wasted your time and my time.

Et tu, dude. As indicated, being argumentative with me will get you absolutely nowhere.

 

[justblue]

Time to find and pay for an attorney. Good day.

Preferably one with a JD and a PhD.