Background information on the magistrates who deliberately interfered in the Demand for Special Grand Jury in the District Court of The United States in Ohio
From Sixth Circuit Web Site
Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington
Forms and Procedures
OFFICE ADDRESS
Federal Building, Room 523
200 West Second Street
Dayton, OH 45402
Phone: (937) 512-1570
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
From 1981 to 1988, Judge Ovington served as an Assistant County Prosecutor in the Montgomery County Prosecutor's Office. Her work included misdemeanor and felony prosecutions, representation of Montgomery County officials in civil litigation, and approximately two years of work in the appellate division.
From 1988 to 1992, Judge Ovington served as a Referee in the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court. Her work involved a total of more than 400 civil cases addressing a wide variety of issues under Ohio law. She graduated from the Harvard Negotiation Project in 1991, and thereafter contributed to the formation of the Common Pleas Court's Alternative Dispute Resolution Program.
In 1992 Judge Ovington entered private practice, becoming an Associate at the firm of Bieser, Greer & Landis where she worked in the area of general commercial litigation until 1994. From 1995 until her present appointment, Judge Ovington was a Law Partner at the firm of Greger & Ovington. Her practice focused on general civil litigation, misdemeanor and felony defense litigation, and death penalty and habeas corpus litigation.
Judge Ovington received an Outstanding Lawyer Award for her support to the Greater Dayton Volunteer Lawyers Project in 1992. She served on the Montgomery County Public Defender Board from 1996 to 2000. In 1988 she became the Chairman of the Alternative Dispute Committee of the Dayton, Ohio Bar Association, and in 1999 she became the Chairman of the Civil Trial Practice Committee of the Dayton Bar Association.
On October 28, 2002, Judge Ovington was sworn in as United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division at Dayton, Ohio.
COMMENT
AH, okay, so we must delve a little deeper, this attempts to address her in the most flattering light, and supply qualification to sit as magistrate. However, we must find any possible reason for her interference in the People's case against syndicated racketeering and other organized crimes in Ohio, Kentucky, and the Sixth Circuit.
From University of Dayton School of Law
Adjunct Faculty
Robert Bostick
David Hunter
Sharon Ovington
Stephen D. Brandt
Kirk Johnsen
David P. Pierce
James A. Brogan
James Kelleher
Ronald I. Raether
Todd B. Carver
Shawn Kelly Charles Russo
Len Cohen
John W. Kessler
Gary C. Schaengold
Christopher Conard
Thomas Kraemer
Susan D. Solle
Diana Dickinson
Mark Levy
Jennifer D. Theibert
Chris B. Epley
Karen Lindsay
Gretchen Treherne
Jeffrey Froelich
John M. McCann
Heather Welbaum
Diane L. Gentile
Michael R. Merz
Thomas P. Whelley
Barbara Gorman
Richard Mescher
Jennifer L. Wilhelm
Andrew Gottman
Erin Moore
Jeffrey Winwood
Lawrence Greger
Beth Myers
Julie E. Zink
Mary Kate Huffman
Jeffrey R. Myers
COMMENT
Now we have a basic idea why she may be willing to work to cover-up apparent unlawful, illegal, and unconstitutional activities. She is a professor at an Ohio University teaching Law.
We also now find the relationship between Sharon L. Ovington and Michael R. Merz, the two magistrates who deliberately acted without jurisdiction and authority, acting in apparent complicity. They both teach Law at Dayton Ohio Law School.
The Ohio Bar, Ohio government, and Ohio courts, were all to be brought for investigation of apparent participation in syndicated racketeering and other organized criminal activities before the Special Investigative Grand Jury.
END COMMENT
Staff Profiles
The Honorable Sharon L. Ovington
Adjunct Professor of Law
Education:
B.A., University of Cincinnati
J.D., University of Dayton
Since October of 2002, Sharon L. Ovington has served as a Magistrate Judge for the United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio.
After graduating from the University of Dayton School of Law, Judge Ovington worked for seven years as an assistant county prosecutor for Montgomery County, where she handled misdemeanor and felony prosecutions, civil litigation, and appeals cases. In 1988 she served as a referee in more than 400 civil cases for the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court before entering private practice in 1992. She was an associate at Bieser, Greer & Landis, where she specialized in commercial litigation, before becoming a partner at Greger & Ovington. She practiced in civil litigation, misdemeanor and felony defense litigation, death penalty and habeas corpus litigation at Greger & Ovington for seven years before being appointed to the U.S. District Court.
Judge Ovington received the 1992 Outstanding Lawyer Award for her support to the Greater Dayton Volunteer Lawyers Project. She is a 1991 graduate of Harvard Negotiation Project and subsequently helped form the Common Pleas Court�s Alternative Dispute Resolution Program. She has served as chairman of the Dayton Bar Association�s Alternative Dispute Committee and the Civil Trial Practice Committee, and also served on the Montgomery County Public Defender Board from 1996-2000.
Fall 2005 Courses
LAW 729 Negotiation/Mediation
COMMENT
Ms. Ovington is teaching law students, the question becomes: due to her apparent lack of regard and respect for Law and Rules (based upon her unlawful activities in the People's case), just what she is teaching them.
The Honorable Michael R. Merz
Adjunct Professor of Law
Education:
A.B., Harvard University, 1967
J.D., Harvard University, 1970
Michael R. Merz is a Magistrate Judge for the United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio. A graduate of Harvard Law School, Judge Merz worked as an associate attorney with Smith & Schnacke in Dayton for five years before becoming partner in 1976. He was appointed a judge in the Dayton Municipal Courts a year later, and became Magistrate Judge in 1984.
Within the legal community, Judge Merz served on the Ohio Supreme Court's Rules Advisory Committee for seven years and has chaired the Ohio State Bar Association Judicial Administration Committee. He helped found the Carl D. Kessler Inn of Court and has served as a president. He was the Sixth Circuit Trustee of the Federal Magistrate Judges Association from 1998-2000. In addition, Judge Merz is a past chairman of the United Way of Greater Dayton and past president of the Montgomery County Historical Society. He is currently a trustee of the Dayton Metro Library.
He has taught at the University of Dayton School of Law and the Ohio Judicial College since 1979. Judge Merz received the City of Dayton's Outstanding Service Award in 1982 and was named an Honorary Alumnus by UDSL in 1991.
Fall 2005 Courses
LAW 722 Jurisprudence
COMMENT
Here we find that the chief magistrate Merz of the 6th Circuit is adjunct professor at Dayton School of Law for JURISPRUDENCE.
It would, therefore, be reasonable to state that he is well aware that magistrates have no authority or jurisdiction to sit upon the issues which were presented in the People's case.
Moreover, it is claimed he is a judge, whereas, by law and Rule, he is not, merely a U.S. magistrate (Park commissioner) strictly limited to minor U.S. jurisdictional issues, petty crimes, and misdemeanors in UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, not District Court of The United States.
Neither of these parties could handle any of the matters or materials submitted to DCUS as their jurisdiction and authority lay solely in USDC, and ONLY pursuant the above mentioned matters and issues, and ONLY if both parties to the activity, agree to their presence.
Moreover, both would have a decided interest in the institution of, and outcome produce by, a Special Investigative Grand Jury investigation including Ohio and the Sixth Circuit. They should have immediately recused themselves IF they presumed magistrates had jurisdiction. Both, however, know the limits of their jurisdictions and authorities. They are, after all, professors TEACHING law in Ohio. (see: PDF of additional materials or Title 16 Ch.7 sub IV; Title 18 App. FEDERAL II, Rule 5; Federal Magistrate Act; Tile 18: 3040, 3060, 3161, 3163, 3401, 1073; Title 28 631-639; Rule 5, 6(f), 12, 54, 58; other
Therefore, they were properly named as defendants when they were listed as supposed magistrates to handle the People's demand, for their interference.