This contains the 2004-2005 Peoples' case in southern district of Ohio:
The People and their states of The United States of America against James Bonini
In case you haven't taken the time to show any concern for the criminal syndicate erected within the 6th Circuit, Ohio, Kentucky, and elsewhere in this nation, here are the federal case exhibits which were and are a matter of record as Peoples' exhibits on http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ as contained within the records.
5:94-CV-00035 Complaint against Ohio individuals corruption
Federal case exhibit 1
In 1994 a case was presented to the federal district court in Western Kentucky to recover damages due unlawful activities in Ohio.
Recovery of damages against officials in Ohio for active participation in or the furtherence of, criminal activities in the State was saught, along with other relief.
Violations of due process; equal Rights; sexual discrimination; complicity; misfeaence; malfeasence; non-feasence; other constitutional violations; along with the active participation of officials, judges, and others in unlawful, illegal, and criminal acts were the matters before the court.
The court determined it would not submit Order to investigate criminal activities in Ohio to the United States Attorney. Moreover, would not allow recovery of damages from these conspirators. Those defendants included Robert Taft.
Robert Taft, is the grandson of a former President, and justice of the Supreme Court.
Edward H. Johnstone handled the case dismissing all charges and requests for relief.
5:95-CV-241-J Complaint of conspiracy to violate state and federal Rights and denial of due process
Federal case exhibits 2
In 1995 a new case was brought before district court in Western Kentucky for false certification of Ohio records to Kentucky and a perjurous affidavit. A Kentucky district judge to refused to protect Maurice from this criminal activity, or allow defensive attack upon such unlawful activity.
Defendants were brought for violating constitutional Rights, due process, and active conspiracy to violate state and federal law along with Ohio "officials".
Edward H. Johnstone also handled this case, dismissing the complaint. Appeal filed 96-5313 while unlawfully incarcerated- dismissed-lack of filing fees
The United States Justice Department, Attorney General, Solicitor General, President, and Congress were advised by Maurice, of this unlawful activity by the federal judge, and state "officials".
5:96-CV-201(P)-R Complaint for violations of state and federal Rights, conspiracy, other; Writ of Habeus Corpus
Federal case exhibits 3 and 4
In 1996, COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, having been absolved by Johnstone of wrong through the prior dismissal; brought indictment and criminal prosecution against Maurice, disallowed presentation of defensive evidence to the jury, and falsely imprisoned Maurice. Matter Appealed in state, then brought to federal court because of willingness of Kentucky to allow this criminal activity. Proper showing of no available finances available for costs or fees due to imprisonment.
This federal case brought both Complaint for this illegal, unlawful, and criminal activity, with a Petition for Writ of Habeus Corpus. The Petition was ordered split from the complaint and was assigned as 5:96-CV-281-(J)R -W.D. King US magistrate recommended dismissal - Thomas B. Russell - denied Petition using Anti-terrorist Act of 1964 - 06/27/97 (as if Maurice was labeled a terrorist since he complained of unconstitutional activities against him, and had demanded relief, and damages)
Thomas B. Russell and W.D. King -1/28/97 Complaint dismissed pursuant 28 USC 1915;
Motion for relief-denied;
Motion for Writ SCUSA- denied;
certificate of appeal- denied;
appeal filed 97-5567-dismissed/denied supposed failure to supply funds/costs while falsely imprisoned
5:03-CV-258-R: 11/20/03 - MOTION TO TRANFER STATE ACTION TO FEDERAL COURT
Federal case exhibit 5
In 2003 another federal case was brought to recover damages, costs, and other relief from parties in Ohio for their participation in 11 years of unlawful activities, after showing in Ohio court of such activities (though in evidence on record for those years), and the Ohio judges, officials, and others, participation in furtherence thereof.
Brought before western district of Kentucky court [DCUS] under:
1. court of first contact;
2. court contaminated with previous unlawful. illegal, and criminal activity by Ohio;
3. all Ohio courts having previously certified these criminal acts as lawful, no court available, all judges in Appellate court and Chardon court had participated in furtherence of this unlawful, illegal, and criminal activity. Ohio Supreme Court repeatedly refused to review case and/or residuals. No court available within the state. Kentucky contaminated with Ohio corruption.
4. USDC judge Thomas B. Russell appears again to handle this case, issues order from United States District Court [USDC] territorial legislative court.
5. Objections filed; Demand for placement in proper district court of The United States [DCUS] with memorandum/brief. 2 Expose` Volumes submitted.
6. No resonse from any party respondent, Suggested Orders are placed, additional Volumes of the Expose` (2) are submitted in support.
7. USDC Thomas B. Russell enters ORDER in which he states "over courts in our commonwealth" indicating his ready willingness to conspire with state "officials" and judges in covering up their complicity in unlawful, illegal, and criminal activities.
8. DCUS is supplied with demand for relief, and complaint against Thomas B. Russell due to this obvious and open conspiracy. Additional Expose` Volume submitted.
6. USDC does not register demand for relief or complaint, send requested forms, or direct this relief, or complaint to the 6th Circuit (or anywhere) as required.
[Thomas B. Russell was a COMMONWEALTH attorney]
04-6-351-20 Judicial misconduct complaint in 6th Circuit
Federal case exhibit 6
In 2004, after dismissal of transfer, and continued cover-up of unlawful, illegal, and criminal activity in America by the western district court, and the judges and magistrates therein; Judicial misconduct complaint is filed in the 6th Circuit.
Chief judge Danny Boggs reviews these issues, claims they go to "the merits of the case" and dismisses complaint. Of course, these 10 or so years of criminal cover-up would go to the "merits of the case", but they would also be massive misconduct by federal judges and magistrates (in fact: these would also be severe criminal acts) who had acted in complicity and conspiracy with other state and federal individuals to subvert Law, justice, and the governments of Ohio, Kentucky, and America.
Judicial Council review June 30, 2004
On June 30, 2004, after dismissal by Danny Boggs, Petition for review by the Judicial Council was logged as submitted to the 6th Circuit by the circuit executive James A. Higgins.
10-14-04 Ohio Ethics Commission refuses to investigate Ohio corruption
10-17-04 Ohio Inspector General contacted concerning Ohio corruption
10-27-04 Ohio Inspector General refuses to investigate Ohio corruption
11-05-2004 Notice of Intent is supplied to all Ohio parties regarding Special Investigative Grand Jury
November 10, 2004 request for forms, subpoenas, other submitted to district court southern Ohio
On Nevember 8, 2004 the Peoples' counsel lodges request for Special Investigative Grand Jury to receive, review, and issue reports and / or indictments concerning continued unlawful, illegal, and criminal activity in America, particularly in Ohio, under the Bill of Rights clauses of the national constitutional contract, Amendments 9 and 10. Ohio Ethics Commission, Inspector General, Criminal Divison, Governor, 6th Circuit and others are advised via various means. Any applicable Forms are requested, subpoenas are also requested
James Bonini, clerk of federal court, refuses to file the documents, claiming (in return letter) a complaint must first be filed on UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT forms. These documents had been sent or otherwise delivered to: the President, Attorney General, Department of Justice, Ohio governor, 6th Circuit, and elsewhere; after refusals by Ohio officials to take action against continued Ohio unlawful, illegal, and criminal activities. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT forms are received on November 12, 2004.
Counsel prepares Complaint, fills out non-specific Civil Cover sheet and submits to court.
December 3-4, 2004 James Bonini refuses to file Peoples' request for creation of Special Investigative Grand Jury
Peoples' counsel files Demand for creation of Special Investigative Grand Jury. James Bonini again refuses to file the documents. Demands a complaint be filed and UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT forms, sent November 10, be used.
December 9, 2004 James Bonini refuses to file Peoples' request for creation of Special Investigative Grand Jury
James Bonini again refuses to file Peoples materials. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT [USDC - congressional territorial court] enters into the district court matter {DCUS].
December 12, 2004
December 22, 2004
On behalf of the People and as prior Noticed to the defendants, Peoples' counsel files Complaint in district court of The United States of America, against James Bonini for obstructing the Peoples' creation of, contact with, and potential issued indictments from the Special Grand Jury.
Questions are presented to the district court of Ohio, 6th Circuit, and Supreme Court regarding the government and various state and federal "officials" in the corrution of, and participation in, unconstitutional activities and apparent syndicated racketeering and other organized crimes in Ohio, 6th Circuit, and America.
December 27, 2004 Chief magistrate Merz issues ORDER in matter over which he has no jurisdiction or authority
Merz (apparently assigned by the 6th Circuit) ORDERS that the case be filed but the materials be placed in packet, until further ORDERS.
January 5, 2005 Reply to unlawful Chief magistrate ORDER
Magistrates have no lawful authority or jurisdiction to handle Amendment 9 & 10 issues, felony prosecutions, or matters concerning United States laws unless asked by both parties, and the matters must be petty crimes and/or misdemeanors.
Jurisdictional issues are presented, the two magistrates and the UNITED STATES judge assigned are added as defendants. Other issues are addressed.
January 8, 2005 6th Circuit Judicial Council affirmation of dismissal of judicial complaint
Having been supplied with enough materials and referenced cases to find not only misconduct, but criminal activities, the Judicial Council affirms the dismissal of Complaint against Edward H. Johnstone, W.D. King, Thomas B. Russel, and others.
Moreover, they fail to direct the materials to the proper parties for criminal prosecution and or removal from office.
January 10, 2005 Notice of addition of the judges and magistrates participating in criminal cover-up and conspiracy
Complaint is modified to include the judges of the 6th Circuit participating in the criminal cover-up of unlawful activities occurring in the 6th Circuit.
January 19, 2005 second unlawful ORDER issued by UNITED STATES magistrate with no jurisdiction or authority
Listed, named, and served Defendant Ovington issues Order to submit Show of Cause why complaint should not be dismissed. ORDER is issued by a defendant, by a magistrate who has no jurisdiction or authority, and whom has a decided interrest in ensuring the complaint is covered-up or dismissed.
Moreover, she ORDERS that all Peoples' submissions are to be returned to counsel without filing, until further ORDER of USDC, deliberately negating Show of Cause.
January 27, 2005 Counsel receives return of SHOW OF CAUSE based upon defendant Ovington Order
Clerk files submission, then voids it, and returns the document.
On January 31, 2005 counsel submits another show of cause to district court
February 2, 2005 clerk voids or refuses to file SHOW OF CAUSE and exhibits
Clerk again files submission, then viods it, and returns the document.
February 8, 2005 defendant Ovington issues recommendation of dismissal of Complaint falsely stating reasons
Sharon L. Ovington, listed and named defendant, and whom had been served with process, issues recommendation to dismiss the Complaint.
February 20, 2005 counsel submits brief in response to unlawful recommendation by defendant Ovington
04-27-2005 ORDER issued by Herbert Walter, Rice dismissing the case
Judge Rice issues ORDER based upon the criminally fraudulent
activities and recommendations of defendant Sharon L.
Ovington;
uses fraudulent statements concerning "show of cause" (that none
were submitted).
05-26-05 Counsel submits demand for Order based upon fact rather than deliberate fraud.
Response to the deliberately designed case by the 6th Circuit, done to cover-up its own participation in syndicated racketeering and other organized crimes.
Counsel receives 06-23-05 ASSIGNMENT OF APPEAL from the Sixth Circuit case manager Michelle M. Davis as 05-3772.
07-11-05 Counsel submits response to supposed assignment of appeal, to Sixth Circuit and district court of The United States of America.
By simple review of the above exhibits, even the most unintelligent should be able to discern the facts. There is an obvious complicity between Ohio, Kentucky state and federal officials, which is being sanctioned and furthered by the very federal circuit court which is to ensure it does NOT occur.
Now, if case this has failed to register in your brain:
- Complaints were lodged against the Ohio governor (now Senator); Ohio Secretary of State (who became governor); various state judges and a magistrate; various attorneys; agencies of government required to take action against this unlawful activity; and others, for active participation in criminal activities.
- Complaints and other were filed against Kentucky judges and prosecutors for violating due process, rules of court, Rules of Criminal Procedure and Civil Procedure, false imprisonment, and other.
- Three federal magistrates and numerous federal judges determined they would further this criminal activity.
- Two Presidents, Attorney Generals, Department of Justice, F.B.I., Congress, and others have been repeatedly advised of this unlawful, illegal, and criminal activity. No apparent action has been taken against this unlawful, illegal, criminal, and unconstitutional activity.
- Multiple false arrests and imprisonments have occurred against Maurice, Ordered and/or sanctioned by state and federal judges.
- The Supreme Court has refused or failed to review these issues during approximately 13 years of contacts: of requests for review; Certiorari; or, answers to questions.
- Two states and two federal courts (in the 6th Circuit) have refused to allow creation of Special Grand Juries to investigate criminal activities occurring in those states and in the federal system.
- The 6th Circuit and Ohio government received all documents (submitted or received) from the institution of the Petition for review before the Judicial Council. They are all well aware of the criminal activity in Ohio, both before the election of 2004 and after (last contact with Ohio government on 12-04-04).
If this doesn't show more than mere problems in America, then perhaps those visiting this web site should stop using all those drugs, and actually look at what is going on in America.