IN The constitutional Court of Common Pleas in Geauga County
Clerk of the Court of Record
|
In re: ex-parte` communication from H.F. Inderlied, JR. concerning: STATE OF OHIO de facto corporate government; et al, Petitioners, and The People and Citizens of Ohio state, et al, Respondents |
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) |
Public Response to ex-parte` communication removing lawful PUBLIC Notices and advisement and other, and, Expose` Volume II for presentation to the People's grand juries residual of 91-DC-000792 And in response to activities residual to 91-DC-000792 from various parties listed Petitioners, attempting to enforce and coerce acceptance of fraud and criminal activities in violation of law and Rights; and further criminal activities, collusion, and or other NOTICE OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE Grand Jury |
On May 13, 2002, Maurice Edward, Brahier received an ex-parte` communication from a party claiming to be a judge in some entity named COUNTY OF GEAUGA, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, 100 SHORT COURT STREET, SUITE 1-A, Chardon, Ohio 44024, a copy of which is attached.
Contained within the envelope were the two properly submitted documents to this clerk of the court of record concerning the apparent petitioners:
..., STATE OF OHIO corporate de facto government, GEAUGA COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, etc.
against
Maurice Edward, Brahier, and, the People and Citizens of The State of Ohio, and The State of Ohio, de jure.
However, the disk containing Volume II of the Expose` for presentation to the People's grand and petite juries was NOT returned.
Therefore, it must remain within the court of record somewhere, since, unless properly filed, and submitted to the grand jury (who should already have VOLUME I of the Expose`), a distinct fraud and obstruction of justice has been perpetrated. The clerk will, under oath and affirmation, inform Maurice Edward as to whether the disk was presented to the grand jury, and if not, where exactly it has been and exactly who has accessed it since, until publicly filed it is private property and an apparent theft and obstruction of justice has occurred.
To refresh the court record, copies (3 documents which appear in the court records) are attached to this document; concerning requests for special investigative grand jury; for investigation into apparent organized criminal activities within Geauga County; the State of Ohio; and these United States of America.
Included within those proper and lawful requests are indications investigation should include "this world wide conspiracy of attorneys" [per Robert Bork comment included in Volume I of Expose` and materials indications in Volume I and II] (see Objection-Appeal-Grand Jury.doc page 4); and should include ""The Bar", "STATE OF OHIO BAR ASSOCIATION", "THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION", NCCUSL and or other segments and or agencies, or affiliations thereof; under R.I.C.O. statutes and or other organized crime statutes, codes and or otherwise. And; " (see page 2 Response to supposed judgment of June 5TH , 2000 by one person named Robert A. Nader [footer] listed file: Response to-June 5-2000-Nader.doc)) which makes H.F. Inderlied, Jr.'s suggestion, QUOTE: {see attached copy}
"I suggest you contact an attorney-at-law authorized to practice in Ohio for legal advice."
a rather strange and disturbing comment since these are some of the very parties to be presented for indictment.
Particularly, when taken with complaint against various "legal" and "licensed" entities of GEAUGA COUNTY and STATE OF OHIO are also suggested for present to the grand jury for possible indictment, which might include Robert Taft or others.
WHEREAS, pursuant to indications within state and United States of America and rules and codes concerning "all courts shall be open" and "shall be courts of record", (public forum-public buildings-wherever government does business- Perry Educational Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association (1983), and United States v. Grace (1983) see also: Scales v. United States (1961) Supreme Court of The United States of America, and others of like nature)
AND pursuant Rights of the People of the State and United States of America to address their obligor servants of and in government in whatever form they choose,
IN ADDITION, to the previous apparent criminal activities perpetrated by GEAUGA COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, of which the grand jury is to review,
THEREFORE, the documents are, hereby, lawfully returned to the court of record for public filing in the "court of record" demanded by law and constitutions, for proper filing.
MOREOVER, the court may not fail to send the materials of the Expose`s (another copy of Volume II on disk has been sent with this present) to the grand juries for their review pursuant to contract violations, organized crimes and other as they might find during their investigations,
INCLUDING the records of: 91-DC-000792; the Appeals; the communications and Complaints to the Disciplinary Counsel of The Supreme Court of Ohio and responses, communications, etc. ; Supreme Court of The State of Ohio; the governor's office; Attorney General's Office; Secretary of State; and all the other documents and contacts and cases listed upon the Expose` including the State of Kentucky records both State and Federal, OR
Thereby, obstructing lawful access by the People to the grand and petite jury(ies) and further obstructing justice. (see Supreme Court of The United States of America rulings- reference search = obstructing justice; denial of/obstructing access; equal protection; discrimination; racketeering; and other of like nature.
FURTHERMORE, since the judges of GEAUGA COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS appear to be unable to keep corruption, conspiracy or otherwise unlawful activities from occurring in their judiciary, both on the bench, in the court, and within the areas of which they are to monitor under Code of Judicial Conduct, of which they were previously supplied in 91-DC-000792; and or other laws codes and Rules;
AND, pursuant to the apparent relative of a previous Inderlied (H. F. Inderlied vs. Robert Inderlied) claiming to be judge and Forrest W. Burt, who, ALSO, apparently believe they will continue this mode of corruption or allowance thereof, or that they may become a party directly or indirectly to unlawful activities.
THEREFORE, it is irrefutably apparent that the grand jury must take matters in hand, and the records and informations and other before them, to supply this function, that these failed "obligors" (see Constitutional contracts of Ohio and The United States of America, and as addressed in Volume II of the Expose`) can not supply their functions and duties and responsibilities to the People, the County, the State, and The United States of America.
ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE
Dated this 15th day of May, 2002
signature block removed
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Response to June 5-2000-Nader.doc
Objection-Appeal-Grand Jury.doc
NOTICES-objections-Relief.doc
Ex-parte letter from H.F. Inderlied