Archive for the ‘law’ Category

greater part of valor

August 17, 2013

1)I apply Article 1 2a and interpret Judicial Constitutional Article, and govern so to, “based on thinking that matters, of interpretation or application of organic documents of government, and of fundamental right and obligation, warrant a second judicial look at…because they are intrinsically of basic importance. Tidewater v. Mayor, Council of Carteret. 44 N.J. 338,341 (1965)

2)The basic right is assured by arranging honest talking which is civil due process.

3)My allegations, do not depict the only senseless device in society. Even, where, “sufficient arguable potential for the denial of a basic right” especially since I am quite particular…. ”substantiality, will be found” State v. Pometti N.J. 446, 450, (1953)

4) There has not been, nor maybe may be, a conclusive judicial or governmental, determination of the safety generated by the concentration of justice in a few judges, if there be a quantifiably much greater network of crime. The record reflects this.

5) If by design, how can there be settled law; nor notion of lawyers working things out, and not courts; nor that spirituality and justice must be together; nor the people more capable of justice together, than a judge alone?

6) How can this totalitarianism, succinct with crime, be?. Public interest may demand a guide, but these terms go beyond set judiciary.

7)“Do moments of silence violate the constitution” was not rejected by the supreme court. Morsi v Wermer 86 N.J. 232, 237. My allegations would subsume due process.

8)The court admits, “We strive to avoid reaching constitutional issues, unless required” Recall Menendez v Wells, 204 N.J. 79, 95,96,201 (2010). The design is to ignore the pressure on constitutional structure. Are they now required to, by docket? The 2010 Court here also admits the obligation to the ideal of court.

9) The court is sworn to uphold the constitution. The constitution entertains my claims. Yet I petition “Government”, as “government” desires expressing a true condition, and negotiate a way to conceive what we are, more than “judiciary”, as generally and particularly, a first chakra issue.

10) This case is in public interest; what goes on in Hudson County, and New Jersey Appellate, is as definitive a public issue as what enables it.

11)The citizen becomes the court.

12) Constitutional cases are like class action
cases, bonding people, as does a state’s right
to tax foreign business, municipal ordinance, or
the right to fire someone.

13) Yet I am outside History, questioning three
basic components of our constitutions, focusing
on a pressure, tended to ignore.

14) This shakes public opinion. So discretely,
examine the relation between media, and public
knowledge.

15) There is a grain of salt, to the claim you can
reduce crime by altering and reforming
constitutionalism, as it takes a higher power
to keep History from having shared this.

16)Such is required to hear terrible stories.

17)This case is compelling because it is a common
denominator to other countries.

18)This is more than collateral examination of the
justice system, because the constitutional issues
of the case, merges into matter, as the matter,
to docket.

19) Liability and proceeding, discretionarily,
due to criminal network in the background,
and not atheistically.

Understanding Rules

August 15, 2013

3) Likewise, the fee requirement seems to be something I would contribute to pushing this forward.

4) These are extraordinary experiences.

5) The crimes are easy to see, the judicial obeisance thereto, and the control of opposing party and the silenced.

6) This is pushed forward, to sink in, the way of right, for court is a right. If people have fallen along the way, then it is meant for the person who can.

7) This is pushed forward, as a right is stood up for, because the supreme court of N.J. is a percentage of Constitution, the constitutions give N.J.’s Supreme Court power, the supreme court is much less than the constitution. When we question the constitutional concentration of power, in few, as vulnerable to larger criminal network, the supreme court loses its right to deny the case a court.

8) This goes further. Government gives the constitution’s power; By definition government comprises the people for this. Government, in original form, is far greater than the constitutions. This issue is about government, and why the supreme court must entertain me.

9) Government should be sophisticated and not take things at face value, but aware of complexity.

10)         And because I am asking for very little, merely some help from the attorney general’s office to look into this thing, so I may open the flood gates of people I know who know, (and talk others in this light), determine the story, and explain the situation.

11)         Success then seems grounded in admitting, even dealing with, what is.

12)         Article 1 2a application to alter and reform government for public good, can be seen as the same mineral in the pushing forward of the rules.

13)         You have to know, and the structure of the rules of Appeal of Right seem to reflect, knowledge that the constitutional concentration of power in a few judges is harmful to the people, and government.

14)         Therefore the mechanism logically must not lie in your hands, to pull this further, but in my ability to push it further, meeting the appendix requirement to appeal.

15)         This core of government, is grounded in what naturally government is; an awareness of complexity, a concern and spreading to people.

16)         My appendixes will arrive shortly.

The Liability of Atheism

August 13, 2013

nNot only does constitutional concentration of power create vulnerability to wider criminal network, and crime, and this seems designed so, and not only is article 1 2a, of state constitution, a device to look into this by the people: But the adherence to atheism by government is very foolish.

Should the kingdom of god, or the being transformed from human be shown, (of concern to numerous professions, exposing market economy as dictated by higher power, on paper and not at all what it claims, something very apparent to me and others in small business, I had an organic agriculture 6 years before this)the public good would greatly benefit.

Working with a number of people, as it takes many to grasp the trauma and loss of life of the kingdom of god, rather than be ruled through it, The Kingdom of God is easy to show, upon which true economy, though purposely diverted, may be created, and light cast upon war and our justice system, as merely killing and oppressing.

People seeing the still bodies, we would arrange, would then have to discuss what steps to take, path to go on. Such sight would effect medicine, show folly of crime, and deem what is truly most important.

This is what government would concern itself with. The people, and their sense of responsibility may have been undercut by a design of government designating seriousness for itself. Government, certainly, has means, resources, charter, for this work. The people have trouble with this comprehension, contradictory and illuminating a negative as it is, and sad, and thus working through it with the seriousness of government, is a part of this appeal and action.

Aug 13, 2013  Victor Fedorov

1)      Atheism is at the root core of our problems. It is purposely there, by design on higher power, to keep us from fundamental knowledge and this is the nature of totalitarianism, I  attempt to convey.

2)      Were atheism recognized as specious assumption upon the human race, as ignoring the transformation to being, which Christian Terminology calls the Kingdom of God, we would have a more even bead upon society’s ills and healths.

3)      Atheism places a great deal of pressure upon judges and parties.

4)      It takes many, and seriousness and respect to apprehend the trauma and loss of life, The Kingdom of God, or Being, signifies. Atheism is consistent with isolation, misplaced seriousness, alienation.

5)      It is hoped, working with the division of law, or the people, the kingdom of god, and stillness to the body can be shown. Resource, seriousness and many, can easily prove and show a transformation to the human, that media and government, purposefully if unconsciously obscures.

6)      There is a professional relevance to determining this information, and certainly, great public benefit, and shows things as they are; totalitarian falsehoods fulfill this system now.

6à) The psychology of the problem is more be the contradiction of long operating assumptions, and not the easily understood truth of the matter.

7)      I have been denied by opposing party, and a casp conference, by judiciary the opportunity to sit and seriously discuss this. (motion for casp conference). One would assume, communication is where justice begins.

8)      I spoke on this in oral arguments, as the most important and pressing thing for the judges to be aware of. For they totally neglect this comprehension. It was beyond them.Nor did lower court allow my leadership, for the spiritual is contingnent upon recognizing injustice.

9)      Showing the kingdom of god, would reveal paths and steps to public good, and destroy atheistic assumptions governing government, market economy, medicine, and use of media.

10)   Atheism, denies an important loss of life by the human race, creates the wrong kind of seriousness, is inimical to justice, and seeing the true underpinnings and condition of injustice or conflict. Thus druids of justice were spiritual among Germanic tribes.

11)   Revealing The Kingdom of God would turn the Justice system upside down. Yet as higher power controls things, factor in whether higher power wants such, or allows us discussion.

12)   Atheism causes despair, inability to functional and apprehend, increases vulnerability to and victimization by crime, and a root from which crime flows. It is another artificial device to make society more dangerous and harmful, in what is shown, for the ends we seek to discuss. Atheism is part of the plan creating harm and danger to the people, and government.

13)   Atheism is a legitimate constitutional issue, as it seems to found our government’s assumptions, in many branches and acts. It’s discussion, particularly as we cut to the quick and show how human race really physically is, a goal that requires work but is very rewarding.

14)   The matter of this case, and crime in general, is posited upon atheism. Were the people more spiritual over the years, this could not have happened. Were people not a totalitarian society grounded in atheism, there would be less oppression.

Athenian Constitutions

June 18, 2013

Athenian History, no matter how I slice it, is complicated, the narrative not as unified, as say the story of Rome’s ascendcy, or American History; much like the growing pain herself of History, starting off so as it does with Greek History.

Now though I see Greek History as narrating mini-rises, and falls, sort of like tragic? lòwer class follies, contrasting the order and ascendancy of rome

I was studying Constitutionalism, positing such document as fundamentally in error, via its atheism assocciated with voting, not in public squares, with ayes and nays, but privately, in polling places; the atheism that invests so much in the face value of “the people” while ignoring how ineffective the people have been.

So I wanted to see what the Athenian Constitution actually wrote. And in googling such, found a discertation by a student of Aristotle regarding Athenian History that is too rich and ripe a product to pass up remarking as a deacon upon “Athens” might.

My method is as easy as saying good morning. I read this text from 350bc, and anything out of today’s ordinary, I note.

1) There was much more class war back then. Athens was agricultural. A few countrolled all the land and rented it out to the many. The many would go into debt, and the collateral for debt, and this was in their constitution, was themselves, so that more and more ended up in slavery. The author refers to this as serfdom, and says the lower classes involved, were very disaffected with it. The people had no political power or share in decisions. Athens, in these early years, I guess before the fifth centurey bc, was essentially an oligarthy.

My only remark on this situation; is it is hard to believe the people dont change the situation with reason. Later Athens, according toBurkhardt,; the lower classes understood their prosperity depended on a wealthy upper class, and the upper class understood abusing the lower, was inconsistent with a prosperous way of life. Yet this was not the case in the beginning. Yet it is hard to believe, the poor could not be reasonable with the wealthy. Indeed, the going into debt may be incurred by the wealthy land owners neglecting the land because they dont work it, and the renters neglecting to improve the land, because they don’t own it. Indeed, it is difficult to believe the rich can be mean to the poor, for the conscience would then oppress the enjoyment of life. Greek History, is then, an asciatic movement away from tribal paganism of daily circles, to a removed historical form of power, that does not make sense, prima facea. When I look at the remaining jobs at wal-mart, etc, I see a corporatism domianating, that is harmful to the economy. Yet whatthis infrastructure of early athens might pronounce, is a criminal element hiding behind the rich, and possibly manipulating the poor through sexual abuse. For we have to ask, how can the oppressed not stand up and resolve things? And how can the oppressors, go on?

You can say the poor are apathetic, and the rich are mean, but that’s simply not true, to blame the sheeple. This is God’s recorded History. What we are subjecteed to. And this may explain the illogical gaps, as consistent with the avatar nature to History, that history serves up human kind, as playthings to its story and ways and purpose.

The first constitution, rich ruled over the serf for this oligarthy, had a king, a leader of the council, and leader of war, and then all that served as leader of council, automatically joined a council, of themselves upon retiring. The terms were for ten years, but there could be nine leaders of council, like the prime minister to a parlimentary system; and yet only the upper classes, as defined by how much taxes they put out for the war effort, were available for these upper positions. There were lower positions, and the lower the class, the less eligible the citizen.

I note that back then, war was a rich man’s sport, and paid for by the rich, even by the government confiscating the property of a wealthy person, to pay for a few days of soldiers. The political leader did not stay back in the capital, but led battles, and marched along as a soldier. The surest way to avoid draft, was to be poor as can be, and do agriculture work, as agriculture was very important.A certain Morris, who became governor of N.J.. Was a rich oligarth who practically provided the american revolutionary army with their whole navy. There is a little idea thus here, that the upper classes can be more oppressed than the lower classes, insofar as they must go to war, or are more vulnerable to a systemic crime, as wealthier targets, as having less reoourse by virtue of a power that hides wealth behind a dubious justice system. Specifically, the author cites as a requirement for voting, being abe to furnish military equipment. The archons, nine in all, led a council of 401. Missing council was punished with fines, but the richer classes werefined more for missing them. Everyone of the higher council was to serve once on council before another could serve twice. So in this sense council was inclusive and precluded career politicians.

Constitutions then, place power, or at least have so far, in the wealthy. So how can the disapointed people, or America and Athens, not find fault with constitutions? It’s iexpliquable, right? Constitutions have led to corruption and folly, yet the constitutional system, escaped scrutiny for such per se. Is this the effect of pro constitution propoganda? Do we really not exist enough to determine a way oflife without constitution, an alternative form? Does the constitutions assumptions of everyone’s sentience in effect rule public opinion of constitutions, as that public has the energy of individualism, without honest individualism? Does constitutionalism relegate public opinion atheistic enough to preclude questioning constitutionalism?

Anyway these rules led to an oppressive way, of debt leading to slavery, and oligarthy, and the people of athens rose up against the upper class, and the two sides were divided and living in competing camps. They then though, appointed Solon, to resolve things, who wasa bit of a poet in his mediation of the issues. He was respected, but wealth-wise, middle class, and he exhorted the upper class not to be greedy, but understand humilty. Whereas I think the thing to understand is, how easy people are to be controlled, and therefore how obvious it is people dont want to be greedy, but work together, and the whole class division, a product of the control ofan oppressed human race and earth to effect of history, and way without sacrifice, but foolish society.

So Solon then ended slavery as a way of debt forfeit, and passed laws forgiving and the people were happier. Apparently athens was of four tribes, as well as classes, and each tribe could pick a hundred for the 401 council, yet again, I dont see how tribal environment,could be consistent with oligarthy and serfdom. Therefore it must be like all the inconsìtency and what does not make sense, of society and life; another system, that does little good, that would obviously result, were there real people, and not avatarsrepresenting a way and form, that is little now more than symboliic, or cloaking, way for society. Solon was respected for ending the surfeit of oneself for debt, establishing the right to petition a court for redress of grievance, forcing a court to deal with pperceived wrongs by citizens, but most important, that these disputes be decided by juries. For this last gave power to the poorerr people the most. And yet, again, lets ask why can’t disputes be resolved in simple circles of those that know the principles? Why the formalities of court that tend to hold back justice? Again, because the creation of history, is this way, the oposite of sensible, and so that inverse, is what the athenian, went through; a suppllication to history, at the expense of reason, with all the complicated ramififications of spirit therein.

Solon angered the upper class by forgiving debt. And the lower classes by not redistributing property. Yet he did not cling to power byadhering to one party.He chose theemnity of both to the security of enfolding by one.. There was still officially disapointment, but things were better. Yet his relying on written law, rather than people reasoning together, of a constitution limiting powerful places tothe richer, but also the few, who are then eassier to control than the people, suspect origin of constitution. He clearly dealt with the leaders of the two parties, who having weight behind them, were not easy to deal with, and his poetry put down both sides.

So Solon left, and after four years there were troubles again. For which the tribes agreed, the pivotal archwhich numbered ten now, shall have so many from each tribe. And yet still there was strife, and only four tribes, which had their own rules each.. History though, has moved up from an oppressive situatoin of serfdom, to a gaudy situation of poilitical entertainment, if admittedly more foolish and folly and causing the reaction that something is wrong, rather than a reaction of satisfaction, nevertheless, For after Solons laws, 30 years later, of the three factions, limited government, excessive democratic government, and oligarthy, P. Of cemocratiy won, but he was no true democratic, but seeking power, and achieved such by claiming injuries by political rivals, and gaining bodyguards because of that, who turned into a goon squad that then took over the acropolis.

So he ruled, then fled, was paid to come back, then left again due to the danger. The third time, after leading a colony, he had mercernaries and allies, like thebes, and they took athens. He then asked the athenians to parade in military gear, upon which his soldiers confinscated their weapons and told them it was ok, he would be good, and handlle affairs of the state. Thus here you can see an atheistic vanity to athenians that accepts their troubles as too daunting to face, and accepts accapting immersion into their privateaffairs as the way to go. It is not just P.’s tyranny, but a state of mind, or state of people, that accepted the situation, as precursor of history, being accepting, and not demonstrating the charactor of the people to tyrnanny, nor the natural reason of tribes and pagans, that way being metaphysically shit down, for a covert way of sacrifice through society and gaudy history.

Fightin for the people

May 14, 2013

This defense in my hometown municipal court admitedly over something miniscule, worked. However the issues it raises, were not delved into. The court was not a catlyst to passion and change, but very cold blooded, and uncaring about the general ills of society, i pointed out, that it is possible for court to improve.

Vic Fedorov

219 Yardville-Allentown Rd

Yardville N.J. 08620

HT 152492

Driving without license(since renewed)

May 8, 2012

Judge Douglas Hoffman:

First let me say I am grateful for the police officer discerning I was driving without a license, because I was unaware of the fact, and needed this brought to my attention. My license had expired at the end of 2012. I was unaware of this and failed to renew it because I had moved once, in 2011, to a new address, and got my license changed to match my new license, and then moved again, to Yardville, upon which I tried to change the address on my license, for which the dmv corresponded I would have to do this in person. When I received my renewal of my license by mail form, I confused that as corresponding to the issue of getting my current address on my license, and so neglected to renew. This was disorganized, I know. I was distracted by a case I have before N.J. Appellate Court which attracts a significant portion of my attention and concern. (A-000478-12)

However, my conscience would twinge, if I did not bring up the following in this motion, and seek relief of dismissal or otherwise, in its consideration.

1) Peaceful Assembly is a form of local decision making through ayes and nays of all present, or quorums of hundreds. It was practiced in N.J. into the 1900’s, in New England today, and in classical times. This is what is protected in the bill of rights. This is what is abridged by local officials, and their incorporation through the state constitution of 1947.

2) The tenth amendment, (The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.) reserves powers not given to the federal government by its constitution, to the state or the people. Local officials are neither. The tenth amendment is violated. This ignorance and difficulty accepting this, is due to our media and education being ignorant. If these assertions, were in the domain of our news media, they could be readily apprehended and discussed honestly. As they are not, it seems our dialogue and ability, restricted to what media covers. This makes our media suspicious. The only way to explain it, higher power. Yet that too, is not covered, by that that deems importance and public. Yet it is important, for courts to consider this, and to see the hypocrisy of enforcing laws, while unaware of the important ones, which allow an illegal concentration of local power.

3) Rule 7:7:1 states if an ordinance is unconstitutional, it is not valid. “A defense or objection capable of determination without trial of the general issue, shall e raised before trial by motion to dismiss or for other appropriate relief, except that a motion to dismiss based upon lack of jurisdiction or the unconstitutionality of a municipal ordinance may be made at any time” This latter is what I assert and seek.

The entire structure of local organization is unconstitutional. A mayor, who is neither state, nor the people; appointing a municipal court judge; exercises a power not given to the federal government, in defining how local offenses are handled, so then do you have the right to adjudicate? The structure of police, defined by ordinance created by local officials, is thus unconstitutional. While I completely agree the offense of an expired license, wrong, and worthy of correction, which I have done, see enclosed, I am inflicting collateral damage in my assertions, upon the forces empowered to punish local offenses; with the intent of rendering their authority here, to fine me, nugatory. Again, I seek this relief, out of my ability to apply laws, and the inherent good within: consistent with political power being inherent in the people, and their right to alter and reform government to public benefit. In no way, do I not understand your situation and predicament, and am grateful for your consideration and court. To me, this matter, is not a man-made one, but signifies something greater, and worthy of consideration, important, consistent with court.

4) State v. Barchevski 181 N.J. Super.34, 436 A.2d 550 speaks to this. “A defendant has an essential and fundamental right to interpose a defense based on the invalidity of a legislative or quasi legislative action upon which the prosecution is predicated.” “The Law Division apparently overlooked the authority of the rules of  the court above cited, which expressly recognizes the right and opportunity of a defendant in a criminal or quasi-criminal matter to attack, by way of defense to the charge,…the validity of the regulation upon which the charge is based”

5) Recognizing here, Article 1 2a of the N.J. Constitution, is analogous to be certified as class action. Class action is for economic relief, and lumps together cases so they may adjudicated easier: And so that people of less means, may petition for redress of their grievance, against a corporation of much greater means. 2.  a.  All political power is inherent in the people.  Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people, and they have the right at all times to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it.

I argue, 2a, enables the same for political issues. A recognition, of a need for reform or altering government, in this case the manifestation of state constitution, and/or seeking such, for public benefit; empowering the party pursuant to 2a, serves same purposes, of enabling taking on a government whose ways are much stronger than the individual; and forcing the courts to deal with issues, it otherwise, ignores, or easily avoids.

Class action has been supported by the N.J. Supreme Court,
Consistently, and I hope courts here see the analogy of
purpose for political concerns, such as here.

6) In this sense, you may see this motion as a writ quo warranto, questioning the authority of the authority over this case.

7) This protective action combats unconstitutional deprivations, consistent with the 14th amendment, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”

8) As I have little faith, in your ability to manifest concern for these larger issues,  I ask you respectfully dismiss the case, aware, that my license, long renewed.

9) Pursuant to title 42 Section 1983 Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory
relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.   

 

 

                         Gratefully Yours

                  Vic Fedorov

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

PLEADINGS
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

PLEADINGS regarding
Vic Fedorov
219 Yardville-Allentown Rd
Yardville N.J. 08620

HT 152492
Driving without license(since renewed)

For Hamilton N.J. Municipal Ct
Pleading 1

1) Having brought this up before, people make two mistakes, I wish to preemptively address.

2) The first is that peaceful assembly is a form of protest. It is not. What is protected is a form of local decision-making by the people with ayes and nays. This is practiced in New England towns, which require quorums of 240. Was practiced in N.J. into the 1900’s; and a form to registering popular opinion throughout classical times. (This is a good issue for courts to balance)

3) The second mistake, alleges, if the tenth amendment reserves powers not given to the federal government by U.S. Constitution, to the state or the people; the state can give those powers to local officials through an incorporation of the Constitution of 1947 of N.J.. This also is frankly ignorant. Local officials are neither state nor people. The law library is filled of the annals of state legislature regulating towns, town by town. But the constitutional alternative to that, is ayes and nays by many locals in peaceful assembly, not incorporation.

4) I’d like to explain how these misgivings can be had. These two concepts, of the same nature, in the bill of rights, are neither taught, nor known through news media. That these are ideas are outside the realm of public opinion, and unintroduced, so there is not formula or knowledge for the mind to draw upon. We can see how limited and close we are, to what public opinion is aware of. Do not disparage ideas with ignorance, address the issue of ignorance, per professional concern.

Pleading 2

1) Both article 1 2a 2. a. of the new jersey constitution “All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people, and they have the right at all times to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it,” and the notion of class action, accomplish similar goals. They force and enable courts to examine and address, what power and authority, may weigh against. (As does the right to petition the government for redress of grievance”)

2) Certainly there is a class action concern, to the issues of local official and local government in general; But in particular, to Judges and Prosecutors and Public Defenders, not being chose by local officials, but the state or the people.

3) If you can not be entrusted with constitutional concerns, may I through the courts, reassure you, that unconstitutional appointments, absolvable?

4) These concerns can addressed in motions for relief, or dismissal, but they are undeniably class action concerns, and article 1 2a, gives us the chance to affirm the benefit and discussion of these benefits honestly, in court. For Article 1 2a, seems naturally meant to invoke in a court case.

5) When we individuals disparage the classical notion of the people coming together, and thinking together, empowered and awakened, by peaceful assembly, it is not on the merits of peaceful assembly, but hiding something preceding local community. They have yet to realize the absence and absolution truly peaceful assembly attains—the recognition the people haven’t come together, because they couldn’t. And the recognition corruption, and perversion, can keep authority from leaning in this right direction.

6) Rutgers Law Journal: 2012 ” The N.J. Supreme Court extended the virtues of class action device as a means of gaining equal access to Justice for those who have small claims and unqual bargaining power.” Lee “Class action is a devise that allows an otherwise vulnerable class……thus providing a procedure to remedy a wrong that might otherwise go undressed.”

Plead three: What I expect

Hamilton Township Municipal Court
Judge Hoffman
Summons Number HT152492
Violation Date 1/23/13

State v. Victor A. Fedorov

Pleading: How I expect the matter to go

1) How I expect trial or hearing to go
2) Make as easy to see as possibleg local officials violate tenth and abridge peaceful as possible, includes appointing local judiciary.
3) No right to your authority, appointed wrong; case going around where ca.prosecute for marijuanna, as schedule one, when recognized medicinally – dismissal, further inquiry
4) To be sure, you prosecute and reform people, so fair for me to attempt so with you.
5) 7:7:1grounds for dismissal. ETrust in people who know law
6) Judiciary and local officials, by concentrating power, create vulnerability to criminals, statutes need judges. So th.is violation of appointment; super concentrates local officials and judges through appointment, whatever graft is possible, a little more simple now.
7) The corrupted are least likely to circle or peacefully assembly, for they fear their past deeds. Yet were decisions made in local peaceful assembly, public benefit, very good
8) The second part then would be your decision to dismiss case, as court is constitutionally constructed, and 7:7:1 ; or realize there are important issues here to act on for public benefit.
9) At this point, I would cite article 1 2a of the N.J. Constitution, which empowers people to reform government, as made for the court s, much the way right to petition government for redress of grievance has “government” meaning “courts” ex A and petition, a court term. We may have the right to alter and reform the government at all times, but the law only realistically applies in court.
So the third part would be what I compel through this. 2a, and we can discuss these options.
These are remedies to suggest, we could invoke under2a. a) Report the flaw to appropriate state agency, judicial or legislative b) Refer case to law division c) What would you do, suggest? d )make this an agenda item council meeting the 16th, by which I mean include the issue of letting the people assembly and make local decisions with ayes and nays of all present. e) Inform the media of this issue f) Discuss how this omission and ignorance and corruption of law go on, the only answer is a spiritual explanation, that explains how easy this scenario is created. This last discussion would have wide ranging effect

Hamilton Township Municipal Court
Judge Hoffman
Summons Number HT152492
Violation Date 1/23/13
State v. Victor A. Fedorov
Plead 4
1) I Could use some feedback, It’s not about the case, but you, the system. Do you need more focus on the facts, the laws; or more focus on the spiritual.?

2) Why not have responded to me, raise issues in advance of the court? That would be professional.

3) Because it’s obviously true, and a bad situation, and you would have corrected it long ago. If you can’t have corrected this in the past, how can we expect a professional reaponse now?

4) This implies the situation is out of control, and local government, bad for its flaws. You would know this better than me. Out of control, unlawful situation, by which I mean, you can’t control it. Can you admit you see the hypocrisy here, as so many must, before you.?

5) What holds you back; from correction, from responding in advance? Is the crime nexus making money off local officials and courts, threatening you? Are you worried the exposure of unconstitutional local incorporation, across the news media, will embarrass you? Or, are you as restricted now, as you have always been, by higher power? Is the lord here? Holding you back?

6) For these questions, I need to call the prosecutor to the stand and if he ably objects, any official should do.

7) Is it possible to get into a discussion of how control by higher power is possible?

Pleading 5 More about the stand

8) Now to me, the matter, is not about my case, and laws therein; but the ability of judges to enforce law; We are not a nation of law, but a nation of judges, limited to what judges are capable of, and not the free and easy rule of law. We can have good, just laws, in our constitutions protecting peaceful assembly and reserving powers to the state or the people; but as we see, without judges to enforce them, without journalists, and lawyers aware of them; these laws do nothing; are the sugarcoating of a constitutional apple with a rotten core. The work is here is critical, mysterious, important, and beneficial to public and state.
9) So we have to get into the issue of whether officials are held back, by their acqueiscence to crime, and all the interests who ostentasibly benefit from ignorance, or whether this totalitarian and constitutional nature is caused by higher power, as such seems beyond human will and desire. Do you believe there is a design, to constitutions, to facilitate crime hiding behind few officials?
10) Have you ever of these laws cited they way I cite them? Is the illegality of this system, ever factored into your thinking.? Can I ask if you know of crime, or criminal integration into system, and would that hold back a recognition of law? But then how would the media, and how would lawyers not know of this? There is no purposeful cover-up, is there, of the virtue and validity of local decision-making in peaceful assembly, that you know of? If you are aware of this, would you or would you not, see and correct this, and why. What do you think of the equation that surmises these lapses in law, are through God? Do you feel any control upon you?
12) This is a huge thing, the ignorance of local benefit of local peaceful assemblies; Is it too big for you to deal with? Where is the psychology of seeing something wrong and correcting it. Don’t you do this for a living? Is questioning your own authority, honestly too hard? Or just beyond what God allows?
13) We need to understand how the state is thinking, for which we’d like to call an official, preferably the prosecutor, and or a policeman, to the stand.

It’s like we have a real problem here is judges can’t understand this.

Notes from a law library

May 7, 2013

I was reading at a law library, and thought I’d share my notes.

One of potential concerns of post revolutionary, pre-constitutional, America, was protection against standing armies. As the second amendment legitimized militias, for leverage should the federal government encroach; so each former colony, in the 1780’s had one of three policies regarding armies. One was to have a standing army, which a few did; another was a policy of being able to call up an army if needed, and a third, was not to worry about having an army. The notion of a federal military, that wasn’t standing, but to be called up as needed; the protection from the concept and actuality, of an army, during times of peace: was considered a potential amendment. It’s a very nice concept, we’ve forgotten, or fail to hold as a goal. Our incentives have lessened: There is less carrot on the stick, then there was 200 years ago.

Rhode Island and North Carolina did not ratify the federal constitution.

There is too much emphasis on a free press in the constitution. It is the first right. I’m not against a free press one bit; but thinking a free press, will stave off bad leaders, isn’t true, because our press isn’t free. They don’t report the Kingdom of God, or Heaven, or any other ways and terms towards that phenonoma described by those terms. The press is the most atheistic an therefore unwise thing about. The press, is a function of History, which the kingdom of god is made for. I’m not against a free press, but all the stock placed in it. I’m for creating a free press, but there is no free press now, only perhaps relative to say communist states, nor was there one much back then. So the emphasis given to a free press, in context of History, is deceptive and designed towards the same negativity of History; the put down of Humanity in History, through the ages.

I was reading an article in the Cornell School of Law that explained Thomas Jefferson was not a big separation of church and state guy at all. Back then they “asessments” where a portion of taxes went to support religion. Jefferson did stop that in Virginia. But the universities he founded, he expected religion to be taught and core requirement. What Jefferson thought no laws respecting religion intended, was the federal government was to have a hands-off policy upon religion: And thus leave the states to regulate religion as they saw fit, per tenth amendment. It was about limiting federal government, not allowing them to make laws respecting religion, not prohibiting states from the freedom to deal with religion as they saw fit. And yet, as a statesman of Virginia, Jefferson authored bills outlawing work on the Sabbath, as well as protecting religious activity from disruption, through the threat of jail sentences, to disrupters; slightly reminiscient of Putin’s incarceration of those women who bared their breasts in church to protest Putin. Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolutions are fairly specific about ensuring religious freedom, not protecting government from religion.

Now this is very interesting. While the context for Constitutions, and branches of government, is classical times; the states of Rome and Carthage, the tribes of Italy and Europe, the confederations, leagues and city-states of Greece; generally had Senates, Judicial process, and main leaders, and constitutions: there was a multitude of religions, or rather palpable phenonoma, pagan times worshiped. There was an array of them, from Isis to Jupiter, to Venus to Fire, to meteor stone that landed on Earth; and each and any State, generally respected all of them, but chose to especially focus on one or a few; like Rome, with Mars, would condescend to Jupiter; and The Volsaci Tribe would worship Vulcan, or Fire, and Egypt, Isis. So one was aware of the literally hundreds of different phenonoma and ways to worship, but each state or tribe had its own favorites, which culturally defined that state or tribe. If there were many objects and forms of worship, would separation of church and state be conceivable, or is this a condition circumscribed by the paucity of religions today, the limitation of Christianity being so prevalent, and pagan religions, pagan as nonchristian, so few? The answer would be the actual effectiveness and gain of those form of worship. Should any spiritual practice gain benefits, from consensus, to observation of palpable phenonoma, the proof is in the pudding, and relevance directly related to productivity.

I interpret one specific level of “Congress shall make no law respecting religion” as allowing Congress to make a law that disrespects or bans a bad religion. This interpretation has classical roots. The Roman Republic, generally liked all religion, assenting to the popular spirit, religion, the pagan worship of palpable phenonoma, was good. Pagan tribal times, where daily local circles were frequent, didn’t have atheism. Atheism arose with the state, with governments proclamation of the sanctity or existence, of the individual; or more so, with History, for History really grew after pagan tribal times, and History ascribes all to Humanity, and little to Creators, from the universe, or afterlife, that control Humanity.

Thus, because of the multitudes of different religious forms, Rome would scrutinize and liscence each applying to practice in Rome. Generally they would approve very nearly all of them, and even respect them in ceremony; yet they understood, a religion could be bad, could be used to corrupt spirit and be destructive, and so, religions had to be liscenced by the state. Notably a sect of the religion of Baal, (Baal centered on an awareness of the sun and moon) that had only female priestesses, and castrated a few monks for them, and encouraged it’s men to be drunks and run maypoles to obstruct traffic, and its women to learn healing arts, and treat upper class women, and so gain some wealth; this religion for instance, was allowed to travel through and practice in Rome, for it could be nomadic, like traveling hippies, but not allowed to convert any from the city of Rome.

Any debate on Religion and Government,  must recognize our age of basically one religion in America, Christianity. Again, that is a little Not like religious freedom, to have such a dominant religion. Our Constitutional Structure is based on classical times. Our constitutional structure signaled a death knell to medieval times, and warring kings. Yet Constitutional structure, in classical times, was in context of many, many religions. A villification of religion by government, or popular sentiment, can only come, I think, when there is only one or two religions to choose from. If we returned to a world of many palpable forms to choose from to worship, would there be any context for the elimination of the relevancy of religion to government?

Federal government, contrasted to state government, for Jefferson, consistent with a popular spirit back then that resisted federal government, spoke for federal government handling foreign affairs, and states, their own domestic concerns.

Now I think the federal government, may trump state government, by the following morale: that as representing more people, than state government, it has an inherent larger quantity of goodness and morality, and that is why we turn to the federal government to protect our rights, when smaller state governments violate them.

The prevailing attitude for government was “seizing doubtful ground”. Amputate or unempower states, so they could not war each other. Worry about insurrection, by having a tight control upon the people, such as the power to enforce taxation. And yet I have to say; this is overly uptight. See how the states relate first, before condemning them, the principle, is act, if there are complaints, or problems, otherwise let be. There should be no statist impulse to resolve, what isn’t conflict. And that ripples a problem to today. The complete authority of the state, often embodied by the judiciary, over citizens, a great problem today; stems from worry and anxiety over insurrections and wars between the states and being conquered by European powers, and disrespected by Indians, 230 years ago.

Jefferson’s sentiments imply that a federal government, that unites and rules smaller states, is more likely to tend to monarchy, or that forebearance, than smaller state governments. I suppose the principle, the greater the ocean, the more power its leader may assume; yet it is true, our presidents dominate and lead policy, and are focused on by people, obsessively; whereas our governors, are more prone to the trappings of state legislatures, and less the cult of personality; so this axiom seems true.

Of course the problem with government, is it is not honest, fundamentally: and this is not government’s fault, when History, (herself) is not honest, in exactly the same way. Yet it is also true, that smaller governments and less prone to faults than those over larger areas, and Montesquieu points to the famous example of Rome, as a Republic over Italy, was fine; but as it expanded beyond, and legions spent years far from Italy, they replaced their loyalty to the Republic, with a loyalty to their generals, (out of bribes of plunder), and this loyalty so superceded loyalty to government, that the generals of different regions, marched on each other, in chaotic decades of civil war.

This is true today. The later western states of America have a great inherent rejection of DC, than the states that have been under federal rule longer. Likewise, resentment to the federal government increasing each decade, may be due to expansion and collapse from the federal government increasing power through its naturally increasing seniority derives.
Thus Montesquieu writes, the focus on morality and spirit of government, by the people, is replaced by a worship and following of individual leaders. And this is certainly true today. The federal government, is so far flung, in so many ways, people today focus less on its spirit and morality, and more on particular leaders; and pointedly this is more true among the hero-worshippers of Barrack and Hilary, god bless them, than conservatives, whose adulation for the Rands, Palins, and Rubio’s of the political world shifts, evaporates, and reemerges in a focus on the failure of government, rather than a the cult of personality. America has grown too large, and federal government in enough ways, for the common good to be lost.

Yet let us not sugarcoat constitutional government and three branches. The argument the three branches check each other, simply pales before the notion of government, policing government semi-absurd; That the concentration of power in a few, makes the few vulnerable to those more powerful.

The problem with separation of church and state, it focuses on religion per se, rather than the wisdoms of religion. The wisdoms of religion, Christianity’s belief in love and sharing, and its terms, on the face of it, very useful tenets for government; the essential rejection of religion, per se, is vague and cloudy, as it eliminates all religion, without once focusing on specific wisdoms of religion. Thus specific ideas are not considered, as the category they are under, rejected.

One thing, I and the supreme court inquires into then, is the right to abridge speech, or even discriminate. If Congress may make no law therein regarding, may a head of household or boss limit speech? They are not congress. If Congress has no right to, may you? Jefferson’s interpretation seems based that if the federal government may not, the state still can. Yet the 14th amendment is about securing rights the federal government goes by. So to me the issue, of whether if congress may make no law regarding, can entities or states, for they are not congress? The intent of the constitution is unclear and long has been here, to me, as well the reasoning to any firm decision on the matter.

You couldn’t buy a condom legally in Connecticut, in 1966. That’s prima facie backwards. So the supreme court stepped in, and said that is wrong, albeit not straightforwardly, by valueing the privacy of individual intention, and not the right to avoid reproduction. One would want a federal government to step in on that type of repression of its subjects. So there are planes federal authority should exercise in regarding state moralities; regarding an injunction or imposition of Catholicism, whose part of Christianity, differs from the first three gospels, as the new testament itself, like many good intentioned things, like education, and sports, are compromised, out of fear, from design, of a good history.

It’s not hard to miss, how often litigation against the state, fails, because the judiciary defends the state. While the problem is we need a better way of resolving disputes, that there are just forms good, or bad; for resolving history; that the problem is form of government itself; the doctrine of sovereign immunity, where one can’t sue the state, without the state’s consent is ludicrious and malevolent. Authority must be grounded in challenges, to remain authority, or then let other authority be sought. The notion the state is good, because these rights we have are good, or better than worse states, can not lead to a stasis where the state has no responsibilities for its behavior, where the welfare of state, supercedes the welfare of anything else. Before the 11th amendment in Chisholme vs George, it was agreed, the judiciary must handle disputes between states and citizens. Then the 11th amendment protected states from suits sby individuals out of state. The 11th amendment then, is a very worthy debate. Then in the 1880s can Hans V. Lousiana, where because bonds invested in were not paid off, because they were used to fund flood relief, so one can not sue the state. On that I agree, a state is not a bank, it is primarily an entity with far wider ranging concerns; constituting a legitimate risk investors must consider. Yet on political matters, such as the violations of making decisions in peaceful assembly locally, by local officials, who are also neither state nor people, violating the tenth amendment; these are of a political nature, and that is what the state nature is about, politics, and not banking. Often Sovereign Immunity protects the state from the effects of its negligience, such as in public hospitals or injuries and loss through its sewer operation or property maintenance; and that invoacation here, also makes no sense, for manifested ably, the state would question itself and adapt, as is natural.

Again, let us Jefferson’s separation of church and state; as, existing at a federal level: To limit federal government: To avoid the imposition of a federal religion upon state religions(New England states and others, supported a state church) And to keep states free to regulate religion as they see fit. The wall is between federal and state. The wall is against big federal government. As governor of Virginia, Jefferson proclaimed several thanksgiving, which, back in those halycon days, would last several, not one day. And there would be fasting and prayer, not gorging and tv football.

Jefferson’s simple goal was no tyranny to the federal government, by having a weak federal government with limited powers, able to solve the issues of the articles of confederation. The tenth amendments reservation of powers to the state or the people, must encompass the regulation of religion, especially in so as the first amendment outlaws congressional regulation of religion, therefor, that regulation must be left for the states.

Jefferson’s anti-federalism is signaled in his opposition to a national bank; as no specific power allows that. It will be a breach to unlimit federal government. Jefferson famously argued all laws necessary to the welfare of the people, not all laws convenient. In other words, echoes of the distant refrain, there’s got to be a better way to achieve the same results. By emphasizing conforming to the limitations of government, rather than achieveing goals by expanding government, Jefferson, the lawyer, is essentially speaking to the nature of contracts, being complicated enough, to achieve goals within limits; compromise manifest.

Before the Constitution, people were concerned about standing armies, about monopolies. Couldn’t you have a bill of rights, or Christian principles, the mere principles of good. As Patrick Henry says, the constitution fails to delineate it’s reasons for being and goals, and fails to be a contract between states, for only states would have the power to stand up to it.

Because there weren’t scores of religion as in the first constitutions, atheism has set to restrict and avoid federal endorsement of any; though before, they endorsed most, seeing worship as a positive thing.

article 1 section 2 paragraph A, of the N.J. Constitution

April 25, 2013

Motion for disposition on application of Article 1, 2a, of N.J. Constitution towards this matter

______________________________________________________________________________

April 23, 2013

To the Court:

Please consider the motion for a disposition subjective to Article 1 2a, of N.J.’s constitution; 2.  a. ” All political power is inherent in the people.  Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people, and they have the right at all times to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it;”   as grounded in the significance of these words to this case. Raised issues and dimensions to this case give it class action appeal; does 2a propel judges, to protect me as because the public security and good requires it? I apprise of this issue, in advance of oral arguments, in hope for feedback to address in oral arguments, and Supreme Court relevance.

Table of Contents

P.1             Procedure

P.3             Material Facts

P.5             Legal Arguments

P.5                 Can the Judiciary Police Itself?

P.6                 I’m Unique

P.7                 Commission

P.9                 Thoughts?

P.9                 Concern

P.10                “Petition” “Government”

Procedure

I have been denied due process every step of the way. From unsigned will in 1994 being signed in 2010 by the recently paralyzed, not deemed suspicious, to probating in a county not domiciled through lies under oath, little discovery, not aiding medical records,etc: PA2,18,265,163-165,152-63,191(Grey v. Cholodenko), (PB1CASP Motion) Due process is a process that reflects inherent power in the people; because due process reveals what is true and what is false; and knowing what is true and what is false, inherently benefits the people.

The procedural nature is: If due process is denied to me, it must easily be denied in many matters, for these widespread mechanisms, cannot affect me this matter alone. Analysis addressing these issues, benefits the people. Concerns of security and protection, benefit the people: Especially analysis how we alter and reform a government, to 2a goals, through a judiciary that has almost, (through discretionary power given judges, by numerous statutes, for instance), where the means for, and manifestation of the denial of due process, conceivably, and actually, institutionalized, and issues of this matter.

So we seek a procedure where the power inherent in the people, is able to manifest itself through a court that commissions the power and respect of inquiry through me, of those I know, to those about, that will then lead to the reform that benefits the people.

If the power is inherent in the people to the goal of reform, must courts reflect or refract and enable this power, to duly process these issues, as they apply to cases, in systemic form of precedence, on their own, or to resolve particular matters? Does the court think the sole manifestation of the inherent power of the people, be in Peaceful Assembly? Or other means, and what would they be if so? For without factionalism, the inherent power of the people, must go through the form of peaceful assembly, or judicial due process, in certain  matter. This then raises a level where the adjudication of cases procedurally and by design, takes on potentially Historical issues, and shows legal form lends itself to an understanding of 2a, as where 2a takes place, and I write this for confirmation of such affirmation.

So far, the procedural nature of across the board civil discussion, is not here, because I would convert the situation, as due process lends itself to. Denying pre-argument conference is suspicious.

Material Facts

1) There are too many suspicions to not implicate the judiciary link. PA385-87, 391-95,401-02, 163-65, PBR1 (Not showing will while Vera alive, lying under oath to probate in Hudson County, not fulfilling significant discovery, not recognizing email resolving revenues off six million for future generations, slandering me not recognizing my agricultural trade, and how close to Vera that was, not including me in work managing investment properties, people not calling back, not meeting with me, not discovering medical records)

2) My mother’s death and taking of wealth, was planned with the judiciary in mind.

3) That may be where the money went, and why due process denied.

4) This is through a constitutional structure

5) The Constitutions place power in a few

6) This makes official vulnerable to criminals, for now only a few need to be controlled; a critical mass out of twelve judges, and a whole county controlled; widespread long term abuse, and appellate, secured.

7) Numerous statutes secure judicial discretion.

8) Government structurally polices itself.

9) Law enforcement franchising is the same principle of acute structure, obtuse for crime.

10)        What is the alternative to one or a few, judges, resolving conflict? The people assembling together for knowledge of the matter.

11)        In the Roman Republic, and The Jersey Plan, the judiciary was designated for ratifying law and codifying treaty. Tribes, or state institutions, handled criminal issues. Historical perspective is judiciously required to reform for the people’s benefit.

12)        Other cases are not bringing up these issues, looking at nuts and bolts, not the whole engine.

13)        “petition the government” means “ask the court”

Legal Arguments

Can the Judiciary Police Itself?

Can the judiciary police itself? Denials of due process, such as investigating probate fraud, recognizing legitimate suspicions, calling will witnesses, compelling truth and good faith from defense counsel, suggest a paid off and/or threatened judiciary. We’ll see. So far, through denials of conference and concern, it hasn’t; and this mode for justice, what we seek to reform, so an appropriate and potential conundrum or issue for Supreme oversight. Your advisors and analysts, I recommend, talking with me.

The fallibility of History, and corruption of society; starts from an admission of wrong, the state may be hard pressed to do; its own corruption, may be  psychologically beyond the consciousness that takes in History; It is only through talking with me, we may step beyond that. So citizens help with the policing process.

“The Constitution protects individuals, men and women alike, from unjustified state interference, even when that interference is enacted into law for the benefit of their spouses.” Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 847 (1992)

The nature of tragedy is very much whether protagonists can rise above their fate. And what if the lack of conscience that disables due process, is because organized criminals are telling you what to? We want 2a to protect individuals from unlawful codifications, but if criminals control the judiciary, then we have to  work out that, and this is important. The way out of this totalitarian structure is seeing how easily it is controlled, how that signifies a higher power, which you must be a part of; frankly, a rejection of atheism, is required, to rise above this tragedy. Then you are not dealing with criminals, but control of them by higher power, metaphysics.

I’m Unique

These are important, ignored issues, and rare approach. These issues can be handled quietly. The structure and fact makes this mental health. I offer a way out of bad structure, and benefit all. Law enforcement and the judiciary has not treated the causes of these issues. Talking with me, shines light on secrecy, in the name of knowledge, of that which atheism inherently refutes. Behind the scenes people would know I’m spiritual, and this is trascendant, exculpatory, reward, that sees History, as controlling, the lack of talking, totalitarian, so benefitting the people, and altering government.

Commission

Commission me, through 2a, my assertion and art. I am harmless. I know the human is altered in womb, that Christian terminology calls this the kingdom of god, and is to produce history; which is why Christians forgive. My contrast to mistaken atheistic government facilitates means countering the removal of power from people, as this investment of individuals as officials, is atheism manifest. Commission me to quietly talk with the many people I know caught up in this, and lead.

This is a way through totalitarianism, through  the judiciary, and compels interest, through all the lacks of due process, addressing real issues, and the intent of 2a. Totalitarianism is the tight control of people.

The notion, of totalitarianism, is consistent with heaven and earth, the physical world, bound up in some contract, which to free itself from, the courts make logical opportunity as an investment in critical searching; at least on paper and actuality. So the vulnerable and criminal must consider the control of people and officials by mind, as vehicle of society’s design, with corrupt accessories.

Article1 2a, of N.J.’s constitution; 2.  a. All political power is inherent in the people.  Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people, and they have the right at all times to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it.

Because talking with Mark, would reveal corruption to me, and I would try to cure it, to benefit the people, than per 2a, you must somehow say to Mark, “Vic really is trying to do something good, and it is difficult, please work with him” And then Mark would. This sort of subpoena power could eventually be applied to anyone, but starts with facilitating talking with friends and family I know, caught up in this, unable to talk with me so far.

Unwinding conspiracy, contextually, each may have a meta-issue that determines the next person and issue. It’s hard to entreat Mark that there are suspicious items, it involves many people, higher power, important, mental health issues as well: we can talk esoterically. Yet you could entreat him, if you could understand you are a part of higher power.

Thoughts?

Historians would say history controls the people, hence the focus on people in power in Histories. Historians would say, war is contrived and unacceptable to reason, such; but must be understood in context of people controlled by history, and history a product of metaphysic, and metaphysic, relation between universe, kingdom of heaven and earth and humans.

Concern

I’ve little doubt, Ron Fraoili and Mark, are in fear of Christopher Garvin, our tax attorney, and the potential violence to the nature of this control. So what is to keep you from fearing your own handlers in the adjudication of justice? Can controls be broken here through the opportunity to unite to the benefit of all, per professional interest, despite structure creating officials as victims, should unity and faith be seen, and an unatheistic recognition of higher power, and spirituality, protect you, and show you what is true, and false. Or, is totalitarianism still stronger?

“Petition” “Government”

The right to petition the government for redress of grievance, is the very  good right of the individual to bring up issues before courts. “Petition” means to ask, and “government” means the judiciary, or, courts. So 2a, is an extension of this most important protection. The issue, of course, is whether this first amendment right, and 2a, can allow the initiation of constitutional issues. Standing is hard to achieve a judge and docket number, Courts’ required to consider their Creation. Yet say I tried to bring up these issues, independent, per grievance of oppressive government structure, per right to reform local officials with peaceful assemblies, or dispute resolution with involvement of many? Can we say the courts would or could honor these claims? And yet, in this particular case, mitigated by the structural impairments we would naturally, in a less totalitarian society essay to have fixed, applying both principles of redress and reform, through 2a and motions on accepted cases, critically achieves the same intent.

—————————————————————————————————————–

Since here, I have done a little more research on the subject of 2a, and concluded: 2a is like class action. And 2a applies most before the courts.

Let’s be honest here; the people may have the right to alter and reform government at all times, but most times don’t provide that opportunity, organizing people is hard, that’s why the right to petition the government manifests the rights of one individual. When one is before the courts, the chance exists, to motion for relief which alters government to benefit public good; Thus logically, this may be construed as a legal documentation of a legal principal.

Likewise, let us show a similar dimension between class action, and 2a. The purpose of class action, is to let poor people have the court hear their case. 2a, is similiarily and inexpensive, reductive form of looking into matters, it’d would cost to much, if at all possible, to bring up without great resources. Class actions are against corporations. 2a, against powerful entrenched government; both force courts to examine that which power might avoid. Both also let the court handle some efficiently and instant perhaps, that which might be tattered across political economic landscape.

Let’s also consider a natural feature of 2a to avoid violent action, through an endorsement of power being in the people, a stepping back, as possible, as foment and propulsion possible and benefitting.

Rutgers Law Journal ‘ The N.J. Supreme Court extended the virtues of class action device as a means of gaining equal accesss to Justice for those who have sall claims and unequal bargaining power.” Lee “Class action is a device that allows an otherwise vulnerable class……”thus providing a procedure to rememdy a wrong that might go undressed.” Can’t allow “safe harbors for misconduct”

Internet Sports Betting in N.J.

March 26, 2013

Governor Christie’s offense, is pushing through sports betting in New Jersey; when, through decades old act, only four states are allowed to offer sports betting.

This could be about secession, how the federal government can not make decisions for states, as States are closer to the people. And yet the federal government may be able to protect the people, from State government, through the 14th amendment. N.J., has a historical legacy to Secession, insofar, the Jersey Plan goes.

Even though there were no huge problems upon secession from England, the leading men of the states, thought it safer to unite, than let each state have too much power. In this constitutional debate, there was the Virginia Plan, which we have now, and the Jersey Plan, which advocated a federal judiciary, that approved treaties, much the way, the Roman Judiciary, was required to approve legislation. Criminal Matters would be heard by the states. And ethical and legally principled issues, debated through federal Judiciary. States would have been allowed to make treaties with each other, and trade pacts, both of which they are not allowed to do now, and the jersey plan, would have had those pacts and treaties require judicial ratification. The Jersey Plan, potentially could have included, state legislators appointing congresspersons and Senators, and thus state national representatives, would vote the way the state government desires; then there may would be more friction between states and regions.

So Internet Gambling in N.J., may not be about gambling, alone; but state’s rights, as it  plays out in court, where our  governor is unabashedly taking the ball.

Gambling per se is an iffy proposition. For one thing, any understanding of the kingdom of god, and kingdom of heaven, points to Sporting Events, being controlled by the Kingdom of Heaven. You are not betting on what it Appears, you are betting on. And yet Sports Betting is ultimately superior to any other form of gambling, so far the pretext of being smart enough to predict future events, prevails to be a challenge to mental abilities, more than games of chance. One might venture poker is the greater challenge to character; but in sports gambling, you just relax and watch the game, there’s no one else directly betting against you being an asshole or jerk, it’s just you and the house; and while the house is by no means the purest of creatures, at least it is removed enough so, that personal irritations of another, never manifest.

 

What I am trying to say, is Sports Betting is like competing against yourself, like running.

There are inherent problems with state government getting involved with gambling. While state run lotteries have always prevailed, I am irritated when we go to upstate ny, where video screens of chance grace bars, so bars allow the state, gambling action. I do not go to a bar to be distracted by Keno screens. Preying upon the drunk for lottery tickets just further corrupts the state.

The problem with sports betting, is you can lose too much money; and that can feel bad. Thus it is important to use caution. I participate in an internet site, which accepts one dollar bets; and thus I can test my knowledge of sports and gambling, with just one and if I’m confident, two dollar bets. This is very important. Gambling, or at least sports betting, like any trade, or profession, is something you grow in comfort with every year of practice. Seven years of practice, in any trade, should be superior to three, and inferior to seventeen. And like any trade, there is a spiritual path, and inner cordon of enlightenment or salvation available and sought. With gambling, its through hanging on, and getting good enough, whereby you can unite with other gamblers, and make money, and do good things with the money; but even more so, balance those benefits with acts aware of The Kingdom of God, which is the foundation of wise betting, anyway. That way, the house won’t get upset about the pay-outs, because the transcendence, of application of knowledge of the kingdom of god, beyond gambling, through the actions of your associates, will karmically ripple back to benefit the house in a more cool enlightened salvation than it may be now. For there is no way to consistently choose winners as an atheist.

let me take charge

March 7, 2013

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
APPELLATE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. A-000478-12

Vic Fedorov Pro Se CIVIL ACTION
Appellant ON APPEAL FROM
V. HUDSON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Mark Fedorov SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Veronica Fedorov
c/o Ron Fraoili Esq.
304 Hackensack St.
Wood-Ridge N.J. 07075
Respondents

_________________________________________________________
Plaintiff Reply Brief
___________________________________________________________

Vic Fedorov Pro Se
219 Yardville-Allentown Rd
Yardville N.J. 08620
201 232 1154

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 …………………………………PROCEDURAL HISTORY
3 ……………… …… …… MATERIAL FACTS
6 ………………… …. LEGAL ARGUMENTS
6 Due Process, Recovery, Healing
6 Does It Make Sense?
7 Monell
7 Article 1:1 N.J. Constitution
7 Rules
8 What to Do
8 A miscarrying judiciary is the origin
10 Why Litigate, Explain, Civil
11 People behind in Hoboken.
12 SUMMARY JUDGEMENT?
12 They’re made
13 The universe is less, that’s why we have the kingdom of god.
13 Rebuttals by Plaintiff
16 Judgment, Individual Stories, Want Reform,

PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Was Vera’s demise, planned long ago, able to hide behind Court? By widespread means and organization capable of controlling other instances, as well.
Certainly for Veronica and Mark, to either show they are managing, or say they are oppressed, and do neither, is not a constructive scope or adequate counsel, or capacity to manage their affairs.
The control, of so much, to get here, I would like to examine, and question people about, untoward remedy and reform, trusted. This is what a farmer comes across? Corrupt in laws, merger of law and crime, widespread silence? How does one believe in Justice? Is this merely an opportunity to point out people are made, at the highest order of society, and try to change thing?.
Can the court get my siblings, or anyone to work honestly with me? Even if I am restored to power, there are scores of criminals who conspire and network; people and spirituality has to lead to them. Injustice goes on too easily and dangerously to detriment of family and people and ethics.
The courts erred in issuing letters of administration, allowing foreign venue upon fraud, not recognizing the lack of discovery is consistent with crime, and money taken from Mark and Veronica: Nor that I am trying to protect them, or their counsel and Defense, suspicious and works for those who control them, not them. That will and trust immediately are suspicious; That people are silenced, that it is important to know how. That people know Vera had several much later wills. That honesty, as precondition to settlement, means due process, and professionalism. The Court erred not recognizing slander, in dismissing the case without Discovery, or medical records, in not discussing fraud, and not promoting honesty, and duly processing what the lack of discovery implies, and what my siblings state, and opposing counsel implies a too easy acceptance of, should be helped, what did they go through, and others. I need to know to protect myself family and people. They can not and have not protected the wealth, nor were intended to. For as I have written, and you know most of all, the design of Society is purposefully unsafe. This is a vehicle for that exploration and yourself, and court.

MATERIAL FACTS

1) There is a litany of errors made in lower court, all of them harmful, and conscious.
2) No due process, which would show the way of honest constructive talk, as goal of civil court, and calm.
3) Slandering me as mentally ill, when no doctors, complaints, medications, since February 1993; and years of steady work.
4) Dr. Lyndahl, of St Vincent’s l then explained to Vera, it was just difficulty of expression, not mental illness. In 2010, I had income and resources from a more than full-time 6 years in organic agricultural, as well as income and resources from, working for my mother for which I I had a monthly retainer; and a trust from my grandfather for 80,000. That is what should be said about me and Vera.
5) The harmful and conscious, criminal, error, of not recognizing Slander, and other suspicions such as old 94 wills, unsigned when drafted, little discovery, is a tort that harmed the estate, siblings, others, by allowing untrustworthy murderers and criminals to loot and manage the estate and family.
6) Slander, tort, deny, honest talking, constructive truth.
7) They want to keep my family? I would convert people to morality from subjective conscience? They can control others, but not me? Psyches damaged from abuse, trafficking? See the destructive nature we need to work with? Communication crumbles it.
8) I never desired Hudson Venue, I went along with it to secure discovery quicker. When I saw the foreign unfair venue, I moved to change venue, per fraud too.
9) Defense obscures connection between conspiring powers in Hudson County, desiring Vera’s wealth, in Hoboken; probating falsely abets. Their response is dismissive, ignoring.
10) Counties taking care of their own. Denial of due process
11) When I worked with Vera, we would enter our company bills into the computer, per vendor and building. I was aware of mortgages, monthly revenues, and their distribution. This is far from what it is now. I saw quarterly mutual fund statements.
12) Standards of Appellate Review, resists summary judgment upon incomplete Discovery. If Discovery’s not there, Crime is.
13) Judges, Mark, isolated, protected, to so fly in face of facts.
14) Defense claim their executorship, (obtained fraudulently) could have helped in Discovery is vexing. Medical records, due process, would show Vera’s state of mind, and how well I calmed her down and made her happy, force honesty or trial.
15) The will from 94 had stipulations for ages over ten years ago. A real will would have mentioned a farm.
16) People are too scared and impaired to discuss this.
17) The scope is whether my siblings and others can be honest, in face of threat, and psychology.
18) What is capable of influencing judges, commerce, law enforcement, lawyers, banks? The Democratic Party, Frank Hague’s legacy, with lower orders of oppression, prostitution. This is what I have to look into, for them, and the people.
19) I will show the link between higher power and totalitarianism, how that is reasoning relief to crime.
20) Summary Judgment, negated a declaratory May 4 order for mediation? They are 14th amendment violations, when state deprive protected rights and immunities.
21) The cause of errors: too much judicial discretion, concentration of too much power in too few, sex trade.
22) Sandusky is in a schizophrenic state of denial, and critically not apologizing, because such moral steps would take him closer to revealing the culture of pedophilia. Crime, like addiction, seems comes with a culture of many.
23) A jury would see the suspicious story, harmful and calculated.
24) Vera relied on my guidance, shown here, and wanted me to guide family more.
25) Mr. Garvin, who advised on the will signing and probate, PA 131 never gave me the due process of any explanation or face questions. Mark and Veronica sadly have denied me any due process of honest serious on the level discussion.
26) This is because people are made. The Kingdom of God is real. People are easily made to be something, a long time. There is no choice. And what is done, so low, and aimed against, harmful psychologically.
27) This metaphysic invested in the negative now, has to understand we are interested in its interest.
28) Mark is not a capable fiduciary or disinterested trustee called for.
29) Vera’s murder, and how my family went and goes along with it, as well, as obstructive, lying treatment of me, who is trying to help, is crime; yet I am trying to resolve and reform it, civilly. Atheism does not explain this.
30) Defense never shared much requested Discovery, and lie, about me, their clients, and Vera, fundamentally, particularly, calculatedly.

LEGAL ARGUMENTS

Due Process, Recovery, Healing
Due Process in Civil Court: Honest, Civil, Respectful discussion of issues. Not punishment, but figuring out what to do, recognizing no one wants to do bad, that there are serious issues here, that this involves many people, that we have to work through what went on; and that my spiritual background is helpful. This isn’t even about money, but reform. Mark and Veronica need help to work through, and others, the lives that they have had. Their unpleasant sexual oppression occludes honesty, conscience. This could be widespread. And an opportunity, to sort out what is really going on through due process. There can be wholesale control. and giving up, of lives and dignity; a secret side of, Constitutionalism, we’ve long meant to cure. Vera’s murder, and how my family, and officials, went and go along with it, as well as obstructive, false treatment of me, who is trying to help, is crime, atheism does not explain. I have to get behind this matter, in the interests of good, and find out what happened, because it doesn’t look isolated. Why no one like me has come along, I don’t know; another inquiry. Serious psychological inquiry is needed.

Does It Make Sense?
Could humans do all these bad things? Could we all be controlled by higher power? Totalitarianism defined as ignoring that? How could Journalists, Judges, Lawyers, not have reformed, this, what no one could want. This demonstrates how people are made, how there isn’t serious discussion; people don’t choose this dark route. They didn’t get a life, that’s the psychology to it; you’d rather invest in tragedy, hard and painful to discuss, and yet done for you: That crucible being the lack of discussion of this serious deprivation in the media; which in turn can be brought up through discussion here. Too many people are too easily roped in, for it to be explained ignorantly.

Monell
Any widespread culture of oppression, shocking as it is, has to be protected by police; and this is where Monell may be used to prosecute municipal abuse of law. Monell v. Department of Social Services308 holds that local governments may be liable for damages, as well as declaratory and injunctive relief, whenever “the action that is alleged to be unconstitutional implements or executes a policy statement, ordinance, regulation, or decision officially adopted and promulgated by that body’s officers. Moreover . . . local governments . . . may be sued for constitutional deprivations visited pursuant to government ‘custom’ even though such a custom has not received formal approval through the body’s official decision-making channels.”

Article 1:1 N.J. Constitution
Among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.” This was denied my mother. I pursue it. Is it hollow? Look at the wink of Defense brief to you.

Rules
There are many genuine issues. There have been false affidavits. Rule 4:50 that fraud is basis for new trial. Rule 4:80, to probate where domiciled, statutes, witnesses to will in domiciled county 3b:29. Don’t eschew the eschatological principle of counties taking care of their own; PA Foreign county enables exactly theft. Wouldn’t it be wonderful to just work through this honestly, civilly? Is that too high a bar? Were there any subjective desire for this, it would have been civilly explained to me. Statutes call for inquiry into fraud. Fact-finding, would find verifiers. The court erred in not concerning with medical records, because nurses noted how close and helpful I was to Vera and what a special relationship we had, especially compared to notes on sibling. Any due process shows what’s right, what’s wrong, and what there is to work out. But these apparent enough to signify deeper structural error; Such as how can a Judge, be able to ignore consciously, suspicions, and what magnitude is this grievance, for people? So order talking. Let’s figure and work.

What to Do
Things are tight, we have to consensus an obvious consensus; that something bad is happening that has to be worked out, for which people have to trust the opportunity to talk with me, without fear or insecurity about issues, or confusing fearing truth, with fearing criminals. We can review those issues before initiating honesty. Credibility, defense, my sister and brother are neither free, nor in the right community to talk with me about what really happened in their life; (and their defense lawyer, isn’t immune from his stories, how they happen, how this could be agreed to). Are people too embarrassed by experience, to talk to me? Wouldn’t their embarrassment conduct through others? Obviously not, so questions. The alternative of not talking, seems dangerous for all.

A miscarrying judiciary is the origin

Whether the motion was granted or denied, the standard on appeal for review of the decision on the motion is: The trial court’s decision on such a motion shall not be reversed unless it clearly appears that there was a miscarriage of justice
There are clearly miscarriages of Justice here. For instance, “Generally, where discovery is not complete, summary judgment is not appropriate, at least where it is clear that at least one of the parties still wishes discovery. See, for example, Crip pen v. Cent/ Jersey Concrete Pipe Co., 176 N.J. 397, 409 (2003). But in Liberty Surplus Ins. Co. v. Amoroso, P.A., 189 N.J. 436, 451 (2007), It decides first whether there was a genuine issue of fact. If there wasn’t, it then decides whether the lower court’s ruling on the law was correct. Walker v. Alt. Chrysler Plymouth, 216 N.J. Super. 255, 258 (App. Div. 1987).”
What judge doesn’t see the natural quest for me to account for What judge doesn’t see the natural quest for me to account for an estate whose information I could and did access anytime, through Vera, or the natural volition and preservation of my siblings to either reassure me, or admit the estate is being looted, and you’ve lived a life secret to me that went on without me. Now with me, it will stop?

“The ground in subsection (f) allows vacation for “any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment or order.” For this subsection. Relief is available only when “truly exceptional circumstances are present. “Used “sparingly” and only “in situations in which, were it not applied, a grave injustice would occur.” Housing Auth. of Town of Morristown v. Little, 135 N.J. 274, 274, 286 (1994), quoted in First Morris Bank and Trust v. Roland Offset Service, Inc., 357 N.J. Super. 68, 71 (App. Div. 2003). The appellate court will reverse where that discretion has been abused. Mancini v. E.D.S., 132 N.J. 330, 334 (1993). There were abuses of discretion, grave injustices will and have occurred and truly exceptional circumstances are about.
“Decision on whether to remove a fiduciary, such as a trustee under a will, is addressed to the trial court’s discretion and will not be disturbed on appeal absent a manifest abuse of discretion.” Wolosoff v. CSI Liquidating Trust, 205 N.J. Super. 349, 306 (App. Div. 1985).

If a judge makes a discretionary decision, but acts under a misconception of the applicable law, the appellate court need not give the usual deference, exercises of discretion “are entitled to respectful review under an abuse of discretion standard.” Serenity Contracting v. Fort Lee, 306 N.J. Super. 151, 159 (App. Div. 1997).
“To decide if there was a miscarriage, the appellate court defers to the trial court with respect to “intangibles” not transmitted by the record (e.g., credibility, demeanor, “feel of the case”) but other-wise makes its own independent determination of whether a miscarriage of justice occurred. Carrino v. Novotny, 78 N.J. 355, 360 (1979);
“Trial judges must make fact findings that are sufficiently clear and complete to permit review. Otherwise the court will remand, for fact-findings, to the agency (Matter of Vey, 124 N.J. 534, 544 (1991); Matter of Issuance of a Permit, 120 N.J. 164, 173 (1990)), or to the court. If the findings are bad enough and the record sparse, the court may order a whole new trial. Hewitt v. Hollahan, 56 N.J. Super. 372, 382-84 (App. Div. 1959).” What fact-finding? There was no fact found. The transcript PA336 shows Judge Velazquez has no idea Vera was worth 14 million, or that my motions have case law PA269. Even though the transcript references 14 million May 4, 2012., PA 272. He is given a lot of latitude to ignore their lack of credibility, in this sense, like Mark, even though it is obvious, his psychology enables the cahoots of crime, despite common knowledge.

Summary judgment must be granted if “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact challenged and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment or order as a matter of law.” R. 4:46-2. But there are many material facts challenged by me.

Why litigate, explain
A widespread powerful conspiracy could admit their power to me. Do they not because to me they have a conscience, but as construed, they don’t? Due process could have already led to this. But Defense Counsel’s nature is not communicative, but about taking over wealth, available via murder; nevertheless, honesty, is the main thing I want. Certainly the first; from there, we have to think, but things calm down, because lying is not impeding thought. I realize they think their control is paramount, yet are they of free will and discussion? And what about simply putting freeing Mark and Veronica or others, on the table?

People behind in Hoboken.
It seems there is an order of ring powerful enough to control law enforcement, lawyers, the judiciary, even commerce; to the nefarious end of murdering Vera Fedorov, and taking her wealth, through the trafficking of her offspring, Veronica and Mark; These means, widespread, applicable. This higher ring looks like the remnant of Frank Hague’s machine. The lower ring maintaining sex trafficking probably has its own circle around New Mexico and Veronica, and around Mark.(There was recently a case linking internet prostitution in N.M. and N.J.) Insofar one ring serves the other may protect it. Hudson County was a critical venue for running this operation. That defense counsel ignores and obscures siblings own interest, might be harder in a county, where Vera and I shared the same household in Princeton on and off, since I fixed up the house from renters in 1996; an experience Mark and Veronica, being married, totally missed, except two months at the end. It would be easier to see the estate is paying for their lawyers, that I outshone them in local schools years ago, and earned respect through agriculture, and local politics. Citing the crime about compels recognition of horrible situation I can lead correction of, as no one else has; through 2a, altering and reforming, benefitting people, freeing from crime within totalitarianism, helping Veronica and Mark.

SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

Who wants to intimidate medical directors? Who can’t talk about what they do? How do we apply and put together, knowledge of higher power? Can that make higher up civil, and discussing? Can the Community, I transmit; replace the courts, even while courts order civil proceedings? Am I and 2a more appropriate to lead this, because the people are community, and the courts, as tighter, closer to this origin? I see safety’s locus in community circles. We do not have safe society, we have some sacrificial design; a media outright and immaterially controlled, and corrupted; whose grace may be given us, or not; the context of the universe, for which there is the kingdom of god; I don’t know. But let us acknowledge, our world is where government, dominates over non-atheism, and where the Judeo-Christian replacement of paganism, wiped out the dialogue sought here. So maybe there is more fear, or ease, than there should be; still Plaintiff hopes the slander and lack of due process signals a point that must be controlled. Can all benefit, like adults, or will that not be allowed a priori? The context of spirituality where we admit our own interests, and recognize the totalitarian facility going on, is important. This might be done, one by one, each by each, through movement of consensus, or threat of judgment, or conference means or any means.

They’re made
Mark and Veronica threaten me, but also are threatened themselves? How real to them, is the threatening world they live in. It exists because they are made. I need to sit with Vern and Mark each and explain to them they are made, that the kingdom of god makes it easy for bad people to be made, and they are just bad people, they had no say in the matter, its higher power determining the way people are made and they are clearly forced. And I think that is the problem in generating honesty. They can’t admit they were made and had no say, but they also can’t admit what they’ve gone through, and that’s important. it’s atrocious, it’s not shame of particular actions, its shame of total control.Incapable,psychologically impaired by life experience, this, not talking, or getting love, going on.

The universe is less, that’s why, the Kingdom of God.
The universe is much less than earth. Yet older and harder and behaving as it does now. Sympathy or a lessening, which is what the Kingdom of God is, is in sync with the universe. Compare, the abundance of earth, and cold poverty of universe; our sensitivity, and outer space. Though Jesus introduces the term, he does not say what causes the kingdom of god nor what design, control and History, it enables. Those of Hebrew descent, may think of it as being made from clay why from clay. So metaphysic, which means relations between parts not necessarily tangible, may be examined, here as a wonderful needed opportunity, concerning Justice.

Rebuttals by Plaintiff
1) Their claim I am not allowed to challenge will, when both statute and case law says otherwise, is not grounded in law, (as is a lot)
2) Their complaint about my letter to show cause as a few days late, ignores good faith, and statute 4:50- about fraud being immune to durations; but most, they merely have to reassure me, or talk honestly. Maybe we have to recognize how truly rare that may be.
3) Their claim transcripts weren’t served properly when, case manager said it was fine they were in appendix.
4) Quoting the judge I’m “Self-serving”. Farmers are not greedy, and am trying to help Mark and Vern, with this, now aware.
5) It’s their job to fess up to lying under oath, according to statute and professional guidelines. With Vera and my grandfather trust gone, no money for estate lawyer, much less crime-concerned, or long-term management.
6) Their claim, PA, 415when a case is dismissed, interlocutory appeals are dismissed with it, is not grounded in law. While interlocutory appeals are consolidated with general appeals, alone, they critically allow the case to go forward as they would cast a mitigating light upon summary or final judgment.
7) Material facts gloss over a suspicious trust, unknown witnesses, that Vera was severely anxious, and that Veronica and Mark have failed to show me they have the money or are in control, so there is little credibility, over several issues, and I have worked full time since 1999, and part time, since 1996, as earlier, there have been no doctors, medications or incidents since February 1993, I filed federal tax returns every year since 1999, on my own. This inference otherwise, they know is not true. I was not on disability benefits before Vera’s downfall, and was bullied into it, afterwards and was qualified, by virtue of four months in St Vincent’s in 1992, and not any current medical diagnosis. There are rules in N.J. about slander, and this, a trailhead to calm.
8) That I waited 7 months to file regarding changing venue, a) I just wanted discovery to see if there were criminals who have taken the money, or Mark and Vern are managing the money; an urgent primary concern. As soon as I saw otherwise, I motioned to change venue. They did the fraud, where is their credibility, they don’t even own up to fraud. They also ignore how I mentioned the wrong venue in the second sentence of the complaint and that the primacy of changing venue wasn’t explained. Shouldn’t their concern be about where the money is, and the eschatological wherewithal of a county looking after its own? They ignored R.4:80, they lied under oath. Defense Counsel are bullies. They denying Hudson County venue didn’t facilitate theft? I could show a jury how contrary to professional conducts rules. By just beginning now, I hope we see how more things can be brought up. I essentially did not get a fair court in Hudson County, and that is the main of changing venue. Moreover, I can see why assignment judges are meant to oversee venue hearings. This should have been caught in probate. You can’t justify fraud for this intent, when its design is so obvious. How does an Industry or trade, allow this? Not knowing an old trick of foreign county manipulation?
They claim the will, signified a Hudson domicile. They ignore they lied in claiming Vera had an apartment in Hoboken, and that she hasn’t had an apartment in Hoboken since 1992. The will was drafted two years before I returned to and fixed up the house in Princeton in 1996, which had been run down by renters who eliminated our mortgage, and by the end of 1998, they were gone, and my mother and I were relying on it as a resource and household in our peripatetic lives. This return to Princeton, for we all abandoned the house by 1990, by my mother and I that lasted till her death was a powerful bond my siblings did not share with her, being married, and with children.
9)Their claim they have no obligation to account for the bulk of Vera’s wealth…if they can’t reassure me, then there is something very suspicious going on. If the will is fraudulent, then so are the entire assets transfer. Anything Vera gave them, before she died, or in her lifetime, they should be transparent about, that’s just good business, and trustworthy, and bankable and legal civil. I was unaware of particulars of any transfer from Vera to her offspring before she died, though they were represented as percentages in her schema; and was made aware that assets were being transferred as she was injured, to avoid taxes, and so in good faith, at least, to say nothing of reassuring my dark fears, these accounts should be shared, in this matter. Due process is about justice. If something’s up, lay it on the line, don’t lie.
10) Their financial narrative is something I’ve always wanted counsel about; Vera was trying to merge three LLC;s into one, and operate out of Florida; but that never precipitated; that is my narrative, and I add to that, I think Vera got to know them more and more, as 2010 was the most either had worked with Vera in many years, and she saw I was the respectable one, and had a will with me in charge; for which they attacked as planned, somehow, and from there, the mind frame is never the same, upon this alleged additional duress.
11)This expectation of proof from me is again, not grounded in law, nor reasonable jury trial. Reducing furthering criminal oppression, and its occupation with overcoming its blind obedience, tactically, compels some compliance from courts to facilitate some initiation of honesty and trust, from which a lot of good will benefit, and crime reduce.
12)What is the big deal about helping me get medical record, if you have the interests of my family? What is defense counsel covering?

Judgment and Individual Stories, Reform, Wanted
All the people I know, in this, and all the people they know, all have some story, that is beyond some known human character, and therefore hidden, as well as not really sensible or humane.
They need compassion, to overcome the psychology of giving in to bad people, and not helping. People close to people, family, has the unique opportunity for evil to get close to someone, and the nature of many institutions, insensible towards liberating truth. Judgments may force talking, consensus and conference and general admission, as well, the recognition of this vehicle to wholesale reform, also. Can Murder, controlled oppression, silence, widespread means, compel the consensus, we need to talk honestly, and Spirituality and Reform, public benefit, better justice, less oppression, a better earth

Honesty and Due Process, in Civil Court

February 26, 2013

Motion for CASP or Pre-Argument Conference
————————————————————————————————–
To Court:
It is obvious Defense is lying, and they have to work with me, as honesty and civil recourse, cure. There are RICO violations here; but the principle of civil due process, is destructive nature deep down, wants to go straight. I am not an atheist. Justice and Peace, requires Truth. And truth here predicated on a divinity, faith will examine in CASP or Pre-argument conference; the opportunity for natural honest consideration of this absolutely destructive situation of pedophilia and prostitution rings, ability to control judges, and widespread oppressive conspiracy: Things one couldn’t clearly desire. Settlement, predicated on Honesty, Honesty, aimed at reform, is vital to due process. Spiritual vitality may be explained in pre-argument conference. Criminal nature has avoided parley. I facilitate my motion for settlement or issue conference with material facts of issues involved we would discuss in resolving the matter. PA 94,363,180

Options, thinking, examined, as family, concerned citizens, seeing Truth, with some greater divinity of good will in the dark universe. The oppressed lack the community honesty requires, and a connection to universal good. Many were a positive part of my life. What happened? Settlement explains, and entertains the option to unify or help, oppressed.. A critical mass of care and concern and community, is essential to turn Mark (and others) to honesty, options, security. Raising a Scope and Decision protective of siblings, could join me in recovering money and rectifying the situation. They do not have the capacity to manage their affairs without me. Recognize my guardian-nature, with the right to cure tragedy, civil court intends. Again, the problem, that this is widespread, is also the solution. Opportunity, balance and heals, the Tragic.
,
Whatever impedes the natural and necessary sensible conversation that should have flowed from this scenario, in other people, doesn’t flow through me. I want to discuss the issues, a real need and relief. Settlement is based in Honesty: Civil Court, a mandate, for Honest Resolution: A basic point, opposing counsel never demonstrated, managing the scope and decision, in the interests of Mr. Garvin and the monitors and enforcers of my family and friends, and others, CASP or pre-argument conference may remedy.

There has been so little honest dialogue that we haven’t looked into the honor of the state in this matter, for instance, in discounting my leadership and protecting criminals, or originating crime. Is lack of apology due to the will of higher design, or sexual abuse has so hurt them; or is the point of totalitarianism, release upon understanding? In which case, healing grows from avoiding bad influence. We must show them, their immorality. Let them help.

The matter happened so easily, because society is imposed upon The Kingdom of God. Working through these issues, requires getting there.

It is not just Mark and Veronica, but the people behind them, and government whom the piths of issues resolve benefits They have not negotiated because no judge pointed out to them what they seem. My safety and others, is a compelling concern perhaps better broached through conference, than Judge. Honesty is the condition for civil settlement right? Is Honesty the condition for Civil Court? Is their control of Mark and others, judges, so tight? Indeed, is the hurt of being forced, in totalitarian society, keeping them from apology, and is this in harmony with a metaphysical control of Earth? Do we have a vehicle that gets us closer to a truth, and the truth providing perspective upon tragedy? (Per grounding in harmful sexual deviance, treated with twelve steps, over the enforcement).

Mark’s and his culture’s experience, may have halted his communication here, yet the mystery is how so much communication by so many is halted? CASP or pre-argument conference regarding, can provide the communication missing. If Hiding behind the courts shows the courts and jurisdiction precipitate solution, a future.

Vic Fedorov Appellant Pro Se
219 Yardville-Allentown Rd
Yardville N.J. 08620
201 232 1154

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Overview
1 Procedure
5 Material Facts
9 LEGAL ARGUMENTS
9 Immunity and third party liability
11 Paragraph 2a
12 1rst, 10th amendment, totalitarianism
12 Safety, Honesty
12 Pedophilia, Addiction
13 Terror
13 Defense Decisions
13 My Siblings Interest
13 Criminals
14 Sacrificial Design
14 Atheism a Mistake
14 Societal Context to Crime

Overview

I have always simply sought honesty and good faith in this matter of Vera’s estate and death. Being unable to achieve such, forced me to go to court; Denied such, and Discovery, in Lower Court, CASP conference, and/or pre-argument conference to review complex issues, may achieve what I seek.

Widespread conspiracy, corruption, requires reform. Suffering, and oppressing actors – who can desire such life? The Kingdom of God, both reassures us, and shows, why and how this tragedy exists.

Hiding behind the courts, and criminal nature, the defense, has not mediated at all, resisted my leadership and trust.

Mark’s psychological state, the guardian nature to my regaining family, safety, a reasonable future, were neither apprehended, nor concerns, of Defense Counsel, and Judges.

PROCEDURE

Since 2005 I made a full time commitment to the trade, of Organic Growing, through my small business, and other farms. Vera was a quadriplegic at the bottom of the stairs of her house in Princeton, the night of August 17th 2010, and discovered there Friday 4:15pm. It was disturbing that since Veronica had lived there with her family since that, June, only moving to Hoboken on Aug 15th, and Mark managed with her in Hoboken 5 properties, they did not call her nearby friends, concerned. I immediately came from working a farm in NY State; and was by her side, including nights, 40-80 hours a week until February. We were very close, and I had helped her for years and months with business, household, personal and travel matters. Now anxious and traumatized, I would calm her down at Kessler Institute for spinal research, as records would show. She passed March 22, 2011, in other suspicious circumstances, at Princeton Hospital, in the early morning when Veronica was visiting her.

May 15th and May 22nd, 2011, Mark showed me a trust document allegedly signed by Vera July 20th 2010, which I was unaware of, and a will, drafted in 1994, signed by her Oct 7 2012, with no lawyer signature, and the two witnesses, hospital administrators, not credible friends we know.

Both documents slanderously alleged I was mentally ill, which everyone knows is not true, or the way we related. I had no incidents, complaints, medications, or doctors, since 1993, and even then Dr. Lyndahl of St Vincent, explained to Vera, the issue was expressing hard ideas, not mental illness. I had jobs, like substitute teaching and bakery work, then worked full time for Vera from June 1999 to the fall of 2003, renovating and passing buildings by inspection, in Easton, and then, in her Hoboken office and Manhattan apartment. In 2003 and in 2004, I ran for local office on a popular platform of making local decisions with ayes and nays in peaceful assembly, and then filed a federal question asking in local officials violated the tenth amendments reservation of powers to the state or the people, and abridged peaceful assembly. 04-366 Judge Thompson. I also petitioned for a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court regarding a model for retaining rights by meeting certain requirements. https://vicfedorov.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/petition-for-writ-of-certiorari-from-supreme-court-studies-the-ninth-amendment-and-how-to-retain-rights/ Also a state case that publishing some police blotter, is cruel and unusual punishment. Then I made a very respectable six year commitment to organic agriculture, five of them in jersey..

This is the opposite of mentally ill. Vera respected the challenges I took on. We shared friends, households, 4 poodles, food, travel, to Greece, and winter stays at her house in Sanibel Florida. Then she loved I was a small businessman and was developing a wonderful trade, and the vegetables I would give her on my Thursday night deliveries to Manhattan restaurants. We shared workers. Mental illness wasn’t an issue. I was respected and looked up to for my hard work, popular management style, dignity, as she called it, and my hiking, biking travel and friends. I had funds from a trust my grandfather left me, since taken away or “consolidated”, worth 80,000, income and resources from agriculture, and from working for Vera.

Documents casting me as mentally ill, without a vote in the business, access to funds, or work in Hoboken, was an unexpected disturbing terror; Now I saw her injury was not an accident, and I think upon returning from the beach that Wednesday night, she drank something with a knockout drug in it, and people were hiding in the house and threw her down the stairs after hitting her on the head with a hammer, for which there was a mark on the top of her head. That Veronica and Mark could slander me, knowing me, my reputation, signaled a new tragic world.

I have been fought and stolen from in life before and the protagonists routinely apologized and made peace. But months passed, and no conscience rose, so in November I filed a letter to show cause. They probated in Hudson County violating R.4:80 and the principle of a county taking care of one’s own, lying Vera had an apartment pa and spent nights in Hoboken, that she was of sound mind, and not restrained, when on three strong medications and paralyzed from breast down, lying under oath to probate, with false documents. PA196 202-206 probate Up to the first hearing in January 2012, I repeatedly asked for some accounting to reassure me things were on the up and up, and repeatedly unpleasantly was rejected in that request. All I ever wanted was honesty, and to care about my family, as Vera did, and she did. Obviously now, there were criminals my siblings needed rescuing from. They are not that distinguished, couldn’t, wouldn’t do this on own.

Judge, Docket, would find whether things were right, or money stolen. But discovery accounted for 2.5 of the 8 million in mutual funds I know, and the monthly revenues and costs of five Hoboken properties never shared. Nor her tax returns or email correspondence; and her friends and co-workers don’t respond to me. Lower Court afforded no inquiry into suspicions. Lack of discovery generally precludes summary judgment. My action was not seen as guardian-like; Defense and Judge alliance against Mark and Veronica.

Fulfill my goal of honest discussion, negotiation, examination and consideration, of what truly to do, within this domain and range, for the class action quality of oppression through oppression of family by criminals hiding behind law enforcement and judiciary, are wide-ranging, prededential concerns. Let my spiritual way apply, through CASP or pre-argument conference to reduce simple issues or review of complex issues: In truth they have provided nothing to go on with them. CASP or pre-argument justifies a fundamental attendance.

I pleaded from the onset PA13-27 my siblings were blackmailed, extorted, coerced, corrupted and monitored, that their oppression had to have gone on decades, they need help, in devastating long term tragedy. Isolated, is this realistic? This oppression has spread or intensified to people who know, I could help, united. Judge Velazquez did not reflect any faith in my concern and care. Like mandatory pretrial federal rules, appellate conference, in judicial ageist, may regain my family, others, healing, recovering, and making peace and reforming conditions that generated this. If my siblings and others are held back by pedophilia, or secret gay conduct; if they are not honest, they cannot get a grip, and continue vulnerable to exploitation. Lying is a prerequisite to this totalitarian oppression.

With conference, we can proceed with honesty and clarity to examine options, feel the conscience, and decide what to do, in this dangerous, harmful culture. The interests of my brother and sister are clearly not in lying to me. 4) R.26 Statutes, They are not capable of managing these affairs, the scope and decisions, ignores my desire for peace, extenuating circumstance and other liable parties. Ron Fraoili acts in the interests, of Mr. Garvin, and criminals unknown, not my siblings, and merely hides behind the judiciary. Conference should consider the means and lies that oppress and exploit my family, as applied elsewhere as well, not the least upon The Judiciary. R-26-2a, (pb7), does condition upon Mark and Veronica constitute mental incapacitation?. R.P.C. 1.6 Lawyers can’t permit fraud. 3B1-2 Mental incapacitation is inability to manage one’s own affairs. Pb12

MATERIAL FACTS
.
1) CASP is to resolve simple issues, impeding resolution; and pre-argument conference to work on the harder and metaphysical issues.
2) The principle of honesty, good faith, civil resolution, in context of manifest corrupt culture, should unite family, and focus on the future. Dishonesty threatens Safety; Communication prevents further tragedy.
Honest Communication has been most needed, and denied. How?
3) Where was the principle, civil court allows honesty, without fear, in absence of government prosecution, to resolve conflict? Given the small point nature of government investigation, reducing crime through civil court is the point of due process, and Justice.
4) Lack of discovery infers, we should focus on recovering what was stolen through murder and exploitation of family. If I had any sense the money was in Mark’s hands and management, I would not pursue this litigation. I am trying to protect him.
5) How does Defense hide behind a crooked judiciary? What are the means? Admit you are exploiting my siblings and have my people, who, united, could reform causes of these conditions. You have to admit this to be civil in due process, settlement mitigates past destruction. A professional talks about their experience, not the out of control. This is the breach, civil due process heals.
6) Do my siblings, crooked in-laws, (friends, co-workers and family and oppressors) apprehend these issues? Where does the calm apprehension start? Where is the opportunity, to order Civil Resolution? To relieve the pressure and duress?
7) The merit of discussing how extensive and meant is the addressed culture, as condition for settlement, is undeniable. The Kingdom of God, is susceptible to the influence of impositions of Society.
8) Can my siblings decide if they want to help me recover the losses, and I need to hear an objection, or consider it consensus.
9) How does this break? How protected is the right to safety? To learn the score without threat? Was there neighborhood buggery? Did our local Princeton schools enable wider abuse? Is Veronica’s psychological state caused by Prostitution? Was Mark abused young? Does he suffer physical and mental effects therein, from coercive treatment for servicing the powerful? What are nature and treatments and gauge upon others?
10) Is Mr. Garvin a pimp, (our tax lawyer), protected by powerful people prone to pedophilia, because they can treat adults like children? If there is widespread, secret gay, pedophilia and prostitution traffic, how can they not tell me? What if marriages were ordered? Learning of this, towards the benefit of the people, would be a condition for settlement, because I don’t think anyone clearly thinking wants it, and is the manifestation of higher power through immoral form of society.
11) Do they, and you, understand lying about behavior occludes thinking, relation, morality; causes vulnerability, exploitation, dysfunction?
12) Where is their concern for Lena, Alex, Theasa, Serge, Jean, Ian, Stephen, Irinia, Connie, The Garcias, Alan, Ginadi, Valya, me? Is the lack of morality, the psychological oppressive effect of pedophilia and prostitution, without Remedy?
13) Is schizophrenia caused by amazing breaks from morality by Subjects? Because their culture elaborately deceives? Deception for Marriage, Crime for Enlightenment, double lives?
14) Settlement offers the unique condition for discussion of exactly how The Kingdom of Heaven does this? What psychological relief.
15) Without honesty, I can’t move, return to farming, be safe.
16) Can my family apprehend, whatever, conferencing will help other oppressed people too? Benefit Safety?
17) As does apprehending the kingdom of god, bodies being. This perspective of truth, in totalitarianism, with greater resonance and relevance from judiciary, than other forum, disputes free will, shows the Kingdom of Heaven, as exculpating operator.
18) The acceptance of their children being near, sexual abuse crime requires a therapeutic dialogue, in errant culture.
19) For Journalists, and society would have reformed these natures, were there free will. This relieves oppressors. Totalitarianism festers in Ignorance, Secrecy.
20) If so many cards, are truly controlled, why no civil negotiation? Because civil negotiation, apprehends immorality, objectively.
21) Can N.J.’s Constitution 2a, right of people to reform government, apply here to compel conference?
22) If pedophilia, sexual secrecy, causes silence, what remedies avail? Can anyone consciously want pedophilia? Is it a means? Address the causes of crime. Did these retarded morals cause Vera’s murder? People know, you know. The absence of treatment and exposure is a totalitarian context of higher power. Is great pain behind it? Purer foolishness? A mere story? Justice, reduces Crime, requires Truth.
23) Metaphysics, a complex issue, I’d like to conference with Defense, the sacrificial nature of totalitarian government, judiciary, exigent through Constitutional Structure Crime can hide behind: having replaced Community; and defects punishing.
24) This deprivation is under the color of law, making it pursuant to title 42 Section 1983 violation, and judicial conference participation.
Dialogue would come from its origination, the courts. The courts, not community, are the core of conflicts.
25) The dualistic nature I try to describe can be handled peacefully by the honest, but is destructive through liars. Pedophilia is grounded in fooling children and hurt from coercion related to unidentified dualism.
26) Per Safety, and Reform, Settlement, I need to know the interaction between the people behind Mark and Veronica, and Law Enforcement.
27) Is there a federal jurisdiction to these issues? U.S.C. 28 section 1367 may suggest so through the questioning the judicial constitutional structure. Or this may be considered a novel and complex issue of state law, per state constitution. There has been a wholesale class action denial of due process through state infrastructure. Judges, like Velazquez and Leo, the Surrogate Judge, should accede to the primacy of such admission. 1983 “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;” The Monroe Court determined acting under the color of law, is similar to bad law. The 14th amendment protects against state wrongs. Implied in “Jurisdiction” is particular government having a say.
28) Can history or metaphysics be reformed through this jurisdiction? Does 2a conduct remedy? Pursuant 2. a. All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people, and they have the right at all times to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it.

LEGAL ARGUMENTS

Immunity and Third Party Liability
Considering options in conference may involve discussion of Immunity and Third Party Liabilities.

“DeShaney” recognizes an affirmative, “duty to protect”, when government is custodial. There is likely an ongoing looting and plunder of the inheritance, while the matter was officially attended by courts. Rather than protecting the estate, the lower court, over the year, has most likely allowed its depletion to oppressors, conscious abetting of crime. And the harm includes the continued oppression and threat to my family and co-workers and friends of Vera. While “DeShaney” focuses on protecting inmates, it has been applied to due process claims arising in two contexts: Plaintiff in functional custody of state when harmed. The court, and government, failed to protect property, through Surrogate Judge Leo of Hudson County, who enabled probate fraud and false venue, and much more, Judge Velazquez of lower court, who succeeded Judge Olivieri.

The second context is if the state created or increased the danger to which plaintiff was exposed; and as I doubt this crime and others, could have been planned without the intention of hiding behind courts, danger has been created and increased through state behavior. This rises to class action. And its true cause, a constitutional structure concentrating judicial power in a few; means only a few need be controlled by organized crime. There are RICO qualities here, widespread conspiracy. So conference incurs discussion of state liabilities as well. Deprivation, crime, enabled by color of law, (officials empowered by law) Monroe, Supreme Court, are pursuant to U.S.C. section 1983, and resistant to dismissal.

Judge Souter wrote when a plaintiff challenges a “specific act of a governmental officer” rather than legislation, he must show it “shocks the conscience”. Now the matter here is criminal outright. Velazquez and Olivieri, and Leo, enabled, consciously, abetting looting a 14 million inheritance, and murder, and oppression, including prostitution, pedophilia, terror. This shocks the conscience: Vera, was paralyzed, then murdered, and it went through her two children she loved. Are these officials a liable third party, defense?. 07. County of Sacramento, 118 S. Ct. at 1717. Justices Kennedy and O’Connor in concurring opinion, suggest, “the reasons the Court gives in support of its judgment go far toward establishing that objective considerations, including history and precedent, are the controlling principle, regardless of whether the State’s action is legislative or executive in character.”

Objective Consideration, means Jurisdiction, recognizing interests, correcting wrong, guiding proper orders.

An accused official, implicates a system, showing Judicial Discretion, and Concentration of Power, enables what shocks the conscience. Law itself, construed as replacing frequent community meeting that resolved conflict in earlier times, may shock the conscience. So while I can blame a judge, the judge can blame the constitution, as a design whose structure lends a side to form and enable a culture of crime through franchising and isolating an exclusive, thus vulnerable, Judiciary and Law Enforcement. And the corporation of government, could theoretically, confer a third party liability upon the ignorance of the people and news media and education, which party could then blame the creation of The Kingdom of God, metaphysically. Judicial discussion of this metaphysic, being near the top of societal pyramid, and prestigious, will ramify benefits, not lower orders. This is an attack on totalitarianism through the Judiciary, in self-defense.

Does a Constitution emphasizing Law, not Community, originate this culture, where Criminals and Law and Officials merge with conspiracy? Judge Payne’s denial of my emergent motion for the assignment judge to hear the motion to change venue, when the point of probate fraud be to ensure worse judge by foreign county was not supervisory, nor was Judge Nugents denial of the interlocutory appeal to inquire into obvious probate fraud under oath.Pa416, 231, 240. Reform the concentrated nature of the judiciary and law enforcement, so Crime cannot rule, by controlling a few. Study Judicial Forms, from the Jersey Plan, to Tribunes, to Druids, to engaging lawyers.

If officials or criminals fear repercussions of past behavior, Buckley v. Fitzsimmons: “Absolute Immunity is necessary only when there is interference with….conduct closely related to the judicial process”. Reform, not punishment, is the divinity here. Recovery and peace, is helped by my working with Veronica and Mark. Justice.

Paragraph 2a
When the state, claims a sovereign immunity to challenges, it fails authority grounded in responding to challenges. My Citizenship is more fit for this challenge of reform, than the implicated state, and this status transferred through paragraph 2a of The New Jersey Constitution. I should have the means offered by government. The state’s participation in conference is implied by jurisdiction.. 2. a. All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people, and they have the right at all times to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it. Altering and reforming government through this matter, intentionally mandates compliance.

The First, Tenth Amendment, Totalitarianism
If we look to a secure, peaceful future, attack the causes not symptoms of crime, in this matter, the widespread conspiracy, would be fueled by local officials of Hudson County. Local officials are neither state nor people, so violate the tenth amendment’s reservations of power, and Peaceful Assembly, is abridged, when a few local elect make decisions, that per bill of rights, are intended for local peaceful assemblies. Thus the problem of municipal corruption, precipitates from unconstitutional structure. The rejection of this reformation that would help all, by Judge Thompson 04-366, district of N.J., is an example of totalitarianism.

Safety, Honesty, The Importance of Knowing the Score
This is about safety. Mark is not honest with me, or reasonable. I need honesty to ascertain safety, a Supreme Court Criteria. Can Defense, widely, not fear criminal prosecution? Is there a general widespread psychological impairment here, is Ignorance, at fault? Judges? Other victims of Pedophilia Culture, gain from Honesty as well. Victims of Hudson County, Hoboken, Judicial Oppression, too. Pimps may give in to Spirituality, but how high does this climb? Can I win on the facts without this vital communicative opportunity, and survive? If Safety was a concern, community would come together. Sandusky is in schizophrenic denial from terror of revealing the pedophilia culture.

Pedophilia May be Treated as Addiction
Stimulation from elaborate lies, and destruction, denial, pedestrian; pedophilia is a like addiction. It may be near the root of our problems, and caused by concentrating power, impairing the psychology of authority. This conference would benefit the people, and reform, wide-ranging, precedential.

Terror
If they don’t show me accounting and reassuring documents, it’s logical to assume my siblings are terrorized. The plausibility of threats and fear, upon their behavior make this difficult.

Defense decisions
Do they have a choice, if they want to work with me to reform conditions? Can lawyers be aware of criminal behavior in their firm, involving their clients? Is this due process? Seeing options requires Conference, Jurisdiction. R.P.C. Rules, pb13, (report crime, don’t lie)

My Siblings Interest
Mark and Veronica seem to have money stolen through them. They do not seem to manage this affair and incapacitated. If they worked with me, we could work together and make things better. But I think they are psychologically damaged good, who have been exploited by their lawyers this whole time. Can a conference gain them to me? Are we in danger? 4:26 ScopePA4. If there are children and others oppressed, corrupted, fearful, there is compunction to resolve that. Conference may explain this to Mark and Veronica. Their lawyer does not have their interest. They are blackmailed, extorted, scared, and used. Deprivation of Community compounds these lies. Their situation can reveal it is more common. This is compelling, redeeming, applicable all around.

There are criminals
There are criminals, and corrupted, and oppressed behind my siblings and the court; to reach and help reason, from out of control destructive behavior, to calm, security; through spirituality, Christian terminology; by talking with those affected by these matters and conditions. So far, no one who knows, works with me. With conference, closure. If you see the Kingdom of God, you see the Kingdom of Heaven controls everything. Those pimping, controlling, in said power, need to feel true relief. I hope the court assents to and guides this goal and mission of resolution. For now, structure maintains crime. Velazquez would know the more culpable behind him. Treat causes not symptoms of crime. Conference could involve the judicial perspective. Without the way of the judicial branch, this crime and others would not have been attempted. Thus a structure of local officials and the judiciary enable a vortex crime hides behind. Judicial interest, Justice is invested in this structural examination.

Sacrificial Design
This admittedly pagan explanation, says the follies of History and Society, insures a sacrifice enabled through the creation of The Kingdom of God. This is a metaphysic, judicious discussion may effect, real opportunity. Why sacrificial design, why covert through unsafe society and history? Can we change it? What would it involve? This is what attends Crime.

Atheism is a Mistake
I have shown enough how Atheism is not viable remedying society, indeed it enables sacrifice. Justice requires truth, Atheism is not truth, the still bodies of the kingdom of god can be shown to prove this liberation, and requires trust and respect. This must be seen to move forward. Atheism and Totalitarianism, Ignorance, go together. Justice requires Truth.

Societal Context to Crime
How have people not come forth or united? We can’t blame criminals for their particular will, when we don’t blame everyone for a common insensible will. The context for crime is not free society; but a regulated, limiting society, totalitarianism, as an effect of higher power, metaphysic.